Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
INTP
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Greetings, Cafe!


I am going to be excessively verbose as I think "keeping it short" might decrease typing accuracy since less data will be presented. More data doesn't always mean more accuracy, though, apologies if I didn't make it any easier in the end.

As indicated by the title, I feel ambiguity about my first two primary functions, as I either use two pairs/loadouts of them with even distribution of my preferences (which isn't how function stacks are supposed to work by given model? All of functions are used by any given individual to some degree, but there should be only one primary function stack that is used by said individual in normal healthy condition, while functions outside of it are used much more rarely/prefered less).
Or there is an error in my interpretation of my mental processes and/or the model in terms of which I am trying to describe them.

Hence I am not perfectly certain about my current functional stack/type, If I were to look on my most inferior/least preferable function, then I would probably say Se.


I am going to use pinned "Ultimate Questionnaire".

1.) Is there anything that may affect the way you answer the questions? For example, a stressful time, mental illness, medications, special life circumstances? Other useful information includes sex, age, and current state of mind.

Nothing at this moment. My mood is usually calm, stable with respect to stress.
During few panic attacks in the past my mode of operation didn't change much, focus just changed to observation/decomposition of my sensations/emotions and their causes, which usually stopped these rushes of panics after little while. Age is 25.

2.) What kind of person are you and why?

If I were to collect most recurring superficial traits of my behavior, then I would say that I am:
Introverted, moderately polite, independent, calm, detached, observant.
Sometimes I might feel that I have to take handle over situation right now and resolve all conflicts myself.
Sometimes I might be perceived as insensitive, even when I don't feel that way. Usually happens during discussions/debates, as I focus mostly on topic at hand and logical consistency of arguments or when I don't like the way things go.
I feel satisfaction from being efficient, from both reaching goals and from contemplating parts working in close concert and harmony.
I like explaining things to others, sometimes.
I can feel very annoyed if my time is being spent inefficiently or I am forced to do something unimportant.
My interests lie primarily in computer science, math and, to lesser degree, physics. It feels very stimulating exploring topics and concepts from those areas, although interests aren't limited much by them.
Most of my time I spend either working on my job, working on my own projects in free time or researching/learning something.
I need to be constantly stimulated intellectually, otherwise I may start feeling extremely bored, depressed, lifeless.

Some feedback from other people mostly matches with traits that I presented. With exception to occasional "arrogant" and "overconfident", which I don't think I am. Most of the times. And "sending impression as someone important, significant", as if room's mood changes once I appear in vicinity, not for worse or better specifically.
Can't definitively explain what exactly makes such impression as I didn't make it intentionally.


3.) What about your personality most distinguishes you from everyone else?

I haven't talked on deep enough level with enough people to confidently say what is so special about me.
Current approximation : it appears that I am more resilient to failures and stress, I tend to be much more thorough and careful in organization of my mental models/representations/frameworks, trying to find for arbitrary generic model corresponding special case of even more generic model and always striving for coherency and consistency in my arguments.
Sceptical, critical while considering probabilities, conjectures, arguments. Regardless of who presented them. Speed of processing and strictness over the input tend to scale with its size. For example, in heated and rapid discussion I will try to filter and influence harder it's content, make everyone focused on current topic and not distract on anything irrelevant until issue resolved. Dismiss inferior arguments more aggressively if I see that situation demands it.
Everything must logically compile before it can be accepted and passed further in pipeline.
I can switch to more "relaxed" mode of operation, where structures turn to more flexible ideas, implementation details become something that can be thought out later, get more focused on overall scheme, goals, patterns, induction instead of caring about proper definitions, rules and logical consistency.
Switch doesn't have to occur, these modes can co-exist in parallel.

Another thing is emotional detachment/asociality, I rarely talk outside of work context and mostly just because I have to. And when I want to talk and enjoy the process I still prefer to keep it impersonal, just exploring and discussing ideas or debating. I rarely if at all enjoy informal/small talks, sharing experience(impressions, not knowledge), mulling over mundane issues/events.

Also I am always concerned with how my time is being spent and what my future will be, what trend will I see if I use last several days as points and try to draw a line through them, which things such line will intersect. If I spend my day without doing anything to improve current trend, I may feel frustration with myself.

4.) Do you think there are any differences between how you described yourself and how people actually perceive you? How do you think others would describe you? If there are any discrepancies between these two that you are aware of; do you know why exactly that is?

Answered that for 2nd question.

5.) How do you react to new situations in your life? Can you describe an event in your life where you were in an unknown situation? How did you deal with it?

Depends on the pace in which events unfold and nature of situation.
I react best if this is something stressful, challenging, important, critical, life-threatening. Generally anything that can be considered as challenge.
In dire situations that I managed to experience I feel like some "superhuman" mode unlocks within me, I turn to unstoppable machine and simply do everything that is at all possible squeezing whatever resources are available to me.
Regardless of the pace i get quick rough overview of the goal and map around it based on the nature of problem and chart out paths and ways towards it, rough initial set of instructions.
Then, if pace allows it, I approach issue more carefully and prepare in the best way I can trying to guarantee desired outcome.

If, however, this new situation cannot be viewed by me at all as a challenge, then I probably won't care much. I may not react at all if it isn't necessary. I may attempt to find some joy from, look at it from better perspective.

6.) How do you judge new ideas? What tends to weigh on your decisions?

On one hand, I welcome new ideas and fresh perspectives but on the other, I can be seen as too harsh/skeptical, too strict, but being mind open doesn't mean eyes closed, vulnerabilities and weak parts must be considered.
I can't avoid any sort of analysis of new ideas and accept them just because they are new.
Efficiency, elegance, novelty, depth of thought that is behind it are roughly criterias that I value. Many other criterias can be relevant as well, but that depends on the domain.

7.) Describe your relationship to order and chaos. What do order and chaos mean to you? How do they manifest in your daily life?

"Order" is mental representation that reflects some arrangement of other mental representations that may or may not be directly linked to some specific physical concrete objects. Order of the items on the table, order in restaurant, order of machine instructions are all instances of that concept parametrized by domain and rule that allows us to compare objects within it.

"Chaos", therefore, can be described as absence of "Order", absence of any rule-description by which objects under consideration are arranged. A bit more relaxed definition can allow some "ordered" arrangements to be considered still as "Chaos" for practical reasons if rules are sufficiently inelegant, where intuition for elegancy can be imagined roughly as rate of change of rule complexity with growth of elements multiplied by initial complexity, where complexity is roughly defined as amount of symbols used to define it within used system, it implies though that some compositions can be viewed as "chaos" within some system but more "ordered" in another.

In some contexts I like schedule and structure. In others I may allow more flexibility.
My own activities and initiatives are usually planned, at the end of the day I have rough set of things that I want to achieve and projects that I want to work on.
The more important my goal is, the more thorough I will be in planning my path towards, over-preparing usually, trying to cover as much contingencies as possible.
I don't plan and structure things that i consider unimportant, I don't mind my desk being messy, although I prefer minimalistic and clean environments more.

8.) What activities energize you most? Describe what an enjoyable situation is for you.

Processing new information, optimizing self or external processes, automating, sex, solving problems, overcoming challenges, playing inspirational games to alter perspective/enrich emotional life, doing plans for my future, next projects and making sure that my life goes in the right direction.

9.) You are given a reasonable budget and must buy and prepare a Holiday (Thanksgiving, Christmas, etc.) dinner. What are you thinking? What do you buy? What do you do?

Do I really have to though? I buy gifts quite often for my family/inner circle and I don't need some special days to justify myself for doing so. But if I really have to and that is set in stone, either I will try to make it perfect brightest holiday possible, anticipate needs of each guest and their preferences and plan for them (because that is the most reasonable thing to do in my own view in current situation, I don't normally read and anticipate desires of others), buy warming gifts, organize fun thematic activities so that there will always be something to do (again, thinking very hard about they actually will feel about all of that), set beautiful decorations, prepare good topic for conversation and etc.
Or I will do very half-assed minimal preparation which is most likely will be the case since I can't imagine myself being bothered by that seriously and enjoy such duty.

10.) Someone talks to you about an intellectually complicated subject with which you are familiar. Are you more likely to crystallize and reduce the ideas, or would you want to take a tangential approach? If you have an example, feel free to give it.

Most of the time I either take the lead in such situations or participate very actively, I will
a) keep track of ideas, systematize and process them. reduce/purge irrelevant/inferior arguments to something that already there, but maybe take note of valuable differences. For each inferior/weak idea reason will be explicitly stated and alternative suggested if possible.
b) keep track of conversation itself, its quality, pace and structure so that we will have progress regardless of how exactly we want to take the subject. Lots of conversations observed by me are extremely inefficient, due to constant distraction on something that isn't important/relevant or inconsistent.
c) actively try to suggest solutions/ideas one by one if some problem/situation is being described to me.

Examples can be given if required, this post is already becoming quite long.

11.) Do you find yourself to be obsessive about topics? Do you continually divine value from something you already understand or do you move on once you feel you have a fair enough understanding?

Yes, I can be described and feel as obsessive, I reiterate known topics and go through untouched branches, review things with different perspectives and get something new each time. I strive to have "complete" knowledge about phenomena of interest on every level of it's manifestation, but can accept to have some "debts" for a time being when I am short on time, just making conjectures from known patterns.

12.) What do you like about traveling and what would you do if you could travel anywhere?

Nothing, I don't travel and don't like it generally. I can travel anywhere already, but I'm not interested in doing so.

13.) What is it that you desire in life? What do you strive to achieve? Why? Where do you think these drives and desires stem from or are inspired by?

Nothing specific, want to continue to experience it, process, observe, play. Immortality would be nice to have.
These drives and desires I think are inherent, they were right from the birth.

14.) What type do you think you are? Why this/these type(s)? Is there a type that appeals to you, to your self-perception, that you would like to be? Why?

INTJ, ENTJ and/or INTP.
Because their functional stacks most closely describe my processing style and preferences in my opinion. Specifically Ti/Ni is dominant and Te/Ne as auxiliary. I feel that Ti->Ne and Ni->Te pairs are both equally developed and equally used, which indicates contradiction or error in understanding.

I don't have types that appeal to me more than the others, each is inferior in some ways and superior in others and type limitations can be surpassed according to what I know at the moment about models that employ functional stacks at their cores.

I can provide more information if necessary.

That is all, thank you for taking time to read this.
If you are going to type me, and for doing so I will be very grateful, I would like to ask if possible to provide definitions or references to them of cognitive functions or other concepts that you used and found relevant, so that I can see chain of reasoning as accurate as possible to make most use of its results, as quite often people while using same symbols can significantly diverge in their meanings. Reasoning can quite often be more useful than conjecture itself.
 

·
Registered
INFP 6w5 629 sp/sx
Joined
·
1,642 Posts
Before I could get into my usual routine of typing someone, your word choice convinces me you are an NT. That much seems obvious, and you seem not to disagree either.

The process I attempt to use to type other people is by roughly following the checklist below, then by adding back in my own biases, and finally by considering the context. I've mostly skipped the last step since contextual information is not provided. Supposedly I'm to divide people by their relationship as focused on order/chaos and people, but in practice, the typed words of ExxJs do not lend themselves to differentiating them easily. So I skip to just separating people into IxxP, IxxJ, ExxP, and ExxJ.

Despite your self-description of being introverted, I think it is more descriptive and correct to think of you as an ExxJ. It's possible you simply overthought everything in the questionnaire or are too intelligent that you cover all your bases, but if I had to consider all this before making a judgment, I'd be here until next week. The below quotes illustrate a balance between control and chaos. They also suggest at how you kill yourself to help other people(or to live up to the tribe's validation reasons). ExxJs (and most everyone really) don't straight out talk about what they personally give up to help other people. That'd be "bragging". If I knew in what sorts and how often you default to the thinking you express in such quotes, I could more confidently link why you think such thoughts. Some boil Te to "logical efficiency" or something like that. I see the connection between Te and logical efficiency, as being logically efficient is a means to the end goal of working on the out-group's reasons. Anyway see below:

Can be very assertive and harsh, accidentally becoming a leader of sorts in perception of others (I feel satisfaction from being efficient, from both reaching goals and from contemplating parts being in close concert and harmony, which isn't exclusive at all to social contexts. I don't feel satisfaction from leading people or being rude to them).
Can be very talkative and intense when I debate, discuss, explain, investigate problems of others.
In some contexts I like schedule in structure. In others I prefer flexibility more.
Sometimes order isn't relevant, sometimes it describes life.
Everything must logically compile before it can be accepted and passed further in pipeline.
Yet I can switch to much more "relaxed" mode of operation, where structures turn to more flexible ideas, implementation details become something that can be thought out later, I get more focused on schemes, goals, patterns, induction instead of caring about proper definitions, models and logical consistency.
Switch doesn't have to occur, these modes can co-exist in parallel.
But if I really have to and that is set in stone, either I will try to make it perfect brightest holiday possible, anticipate needs of each guest and their preferences and plan for them, buy warming gifts, organize fun thematic activities so that there will always be something to do (again, thinking very hard about they actually will feel about all of that), set beautiful decorations, prepare good topic for conversation and etc.
Yes, I can be described as obsessive, I reiterate known topics and go through untouched branches, review things with different perspectives and get something new each time. I can consider myself "satisfied" for now with current understanding of given topic but I always keep possibility that there can be more to it.
Most of the time I either take the lead in such situations or will participate very actively and will
a) keep track of ideas, systematize and process them. reduce/purge if irrelevant/inferior to something that already there but maybe saving unique components. For each inferior/weak idea reason will be explicitly state and alternative suggested if possible.
b) keep track of conversation itself, its quality, pace and structure so that we will have progress regardless of how exactly we want to take the subject. Lots of conversations observed by me are extremely inefficient.
If you're trying to differentiate between Ne/Ni, a good question to consider is: "For what purpose do I gather new concepts?" You should know that all of the Ns will gather concepts, but some have a greater propensity towards organizing those concepts. ExxPs will "overgather", hoping that some of the information will one day be useful. IxxJs will "undergather" working with what they know is understandable.

I can't avoid any sort of analysis of new ideas and accept them just because they are new.
Processing new information, optimizing self or external processes, automating, sex, solving problems, overcoming challenges, playing inspirational games to alter perspective/enrich emotional life.
Gonna go ahead and skip explaining Te/Ti cause I'm tired of typing...

Finally, to cross-check, I examine your relationship with your inferior function. The inferior function is the crux of one's life, what they need to work on, but often takes years to come to better terms with it. For ENTJs it's Fi, INTJs it's Se, for INTPs it's Fe. The forum member, The Last, decided to remove the question about this, which I am a little sad about, but sometimes people would reveal themselves through it. I've included it below if you were curious what it was. Bolded was my suggested revision:

9.) What activities drain you most? Describe what a stressful situation is for you.
9.) What do you avoid doing? What weighs you down in life/on a day-to-day basis?
INTJs organize concepts (Ni) so they may avoid being blindsided by the unexpected realities of life, but they also know they need to be embracing the practice of gathering facts and things (Se). INTPs considers things that make sense to themselves despite all the value judgments others give out. I'm not an INTP, so perhaps they could better explain what it's like being an INTP. I only know about Ti/Fe as a concept.

True, there is little evidence for inferior Fi in your answers. Quoted what I could glean:
If I were to collect most recurring superficial traits of said personas, then I would say that I am:
introverted, moderately polite, generous, accommodating, patient, attentive, moderately respectful, proactive, cold/detached (not because I think that it is optimal in communicating with people, but because it is hard for me to attach emotionally to others and emulation of this feels like unnecessary overhead)
Can be very assertive and harsh, accidentally becoming a leader of sorts in perception of others (I feel satisfaction from being efficient, from both reaching goals and from contemplating parts being in close concert and harmony, which isn't exclusive at all to social contexts. I don't feel satisfaction from leading people or being rude to them).
Can be very talkative and intense when I debate, discuss, explain, investigate problems of others.
#I find it slightly humorous that you needed to modify polite and respectful.
I will try to find some joy from it if i can though, beauty and complexity can be discovered where you don't expect them at all sometimes, one just have to find the right enough perspective.
I can be seen as too harsh/skeptical
While I would have had stronger confidence in typing you had I been able to invite you for a meal and then was able to subsequently listen as you told me about the lowest point in your life and how you picked yourself up, I'm not going to be able to do that anytime soon, nor would I ask it of a relative stranger. You'll have to make do with my whimsy guess that you are ENTJ. Possibly I overcompensated reading into Fi (I didn't see much of a relationship to Se in comparison) and that would make you an INTJ.

Thanks for producing a well-written questionnaire. You didn't ask for it but I think you're likely more nice than you give yourself credit for.
 
872700
 

·
Registered
INTP
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Before I could get into my usual routine of typing someone, your word choice convinces me you are an NT. That much seems obvious, and you seem not to disagree either.

The process I attempt to use to type other people is by roughly following the checklist below, then by adding back in my own biases, and finally by considering the context. I've mostly skipped the last step since contextual information is not provided. Supposedly I'm to divide people by their relationship as focused on order/chaos and people, but in practice, the typed words of ExxJs do not lend themselves to differentiating them easily. So I skip to just separating people into IxxP, IxxJ, ExxP, and ExxJ.

Despite your self-description of being introverted, I think it is more descriptive and correct to think of you as an ExxJ. It's possible you simply overthought everything in the questionnaire or are too intelligent that you cover all your bases, but if I had to consider all this before making a judgment, I'd be here until next week. The below quotes illustrate a balance between control and chaos. They also suggest at how you kill yourself to help other people(or to live up to the tribe's validation reasons). ExxJs (and most everyone really) don't straight out talk about what they personally give up to help other people. That'd be "bragging". If I knew in what sorts and how often you default to the thinking you express in such quotes, I could more confidently link why you think such thoughts. Some boil Te to "logical efficiency" or something like that. I see the connection between Te and logical efficiency, as being logically efficient is a means to the end goal of working on the out-group's reasons. Anyway see below:













If you're trying to differentiate between Ne/Ni, a good question to consider is: "For what purpose do I gather new concepts?" You should know that all of the Ns will gather concepts, but some have a greater propensity towards organizing those concepts. ExxPs will "overgather", hoping that some of the information will one day be useful. IxxJs will "undergather" working with what they know is understandable.





Gonna go ahead and skip explaining Te/Ti cause I'm tired of typing...

Finally, to cross-check, I examine your relationship with your inferior function. The inferior function is the crux of one's life, what they need to work on, but often takes years to come to better terms with it. For ENTJs it's Fi, INTJs it's Se, for INTPs it's Fe. The forum member, The Last, decided to remove the question about this, which I am a little sad about, but sometimes people would reveal themselves through it. I've included it below if you were curious what it was. Bolded was my suggested revision:



INTJs organize concepts (Ni) so they may avoid being blindsided by the unexpected realities of life, but they also know they need to be embracing the practice of gathering facts and things (Se). INTPs considers things that make sense to themselves despite all the value judgments others give out. I'm not an INTP, so perhaps they could better explain what it's like being an INTP. I only know about Ti/Fe as a concept.

True, there is little evidence for inferior Fi in your answers. Quoted what I could glean:






While I would have had stronger confidence in typing you had I been able to invite you for a meal and then was able to subsequently listen as you told me about the lowest point in your life and how you picked yourself up, I'm not going to be able to do that anytime soon, nor would I ask it of a relative stranger. You'll have to make do with my whimsy guess that you are ENTJ. Possibly I overcompensated reading into Fi (I didn't see much of a relationship to Se in comparison) and that would make you an INTJ.

Thanks for producing a well-written questionnaire. You didn't ask for it but I think you're likely more nice than you give yourself credit for.

Thank you for such thoughtful answer, enjoyed reading it!


I would like to add some clarifications to possibly close some gaps for more accurate assessment.

They also suggest at how you kill yourself to help other people(or to live up to the tribe's validation reasons)
I don't mind helping other people, I might like it not only because their problems can be curious/stimulating a bit, but also just because it does feel good sometimes acknowledging that someones life is now better because of my actions and other's life now is used more efficiently.

But in no way it is a big enough focus for me to enable "killing" myself in any extent for others. "Problems of others" take up relatively small portion of my life and most of these problems are mostly considered "mechanically", with little to no emotion factor (unless emotions are part of the mechanics involved in said problem), it doesn't matter much if said problem involve people or not, it just needs to be stimulating enough by some of its properties none of which are exclusive to social context.

So, motivation in helping other is mostly curiosity/mental satisfaction, not desire to make others feel better emotions or to see myself as a better and nicer person in society and being liked. I don't feel need to be liked or validated. (By "I don't feel" I mean "relatively small" influence of said drives allowing for it to be of non-zero values, I don't think I or anyone else are completely devoid of them)

I didn't try to intentionally sound robotic right now if I did, I do feel emotions for others but just wanted to point out that, as a matter of fact, my social activity is very limited and was always like that mostly and with little to no regrets.
And I don't see evidence to suggest that it is a result of some kind of repression of my own parts which is why I don't see enough reason to suggest that i am extraverted. Unless I interpret "extraversion" differently from you.
Not that I don't like seeing myself as one, not that I have some attachment to the introvert stereotype or something, I just don't see this version as more accurate description of what is going on at this point, don't mind changing my view though.

I see more presence of Fi in me than Fe, with which you seem to agree as well and feel that Se is less developed than Fi.

I will answer missed question that you gave me as maybe it will provide more data, since it wasn't covered at all by my initial post.

What do you avoid doing? What weighs you down in life/on a day-to-day basis?
I avoid any sort of physical/house chores. Avoid thinking about what should be cooked for dinner, for example, what am I supposed to wear. Any decision about some mundane issues drains me extremely fast. I hate oversaturated with uncontrolled sounds and/or moving objects environments. For same reason I mostly don't like RTS games, for example, as I start to feel instantly very bored when I have to care about micromanagement and have to react to a lot of things happening all at once, so I mostly prefer turn-based games.
Mentioned issues are solved through living in quiet minimalistic but comfortable environment and delegation of cleaning/cooking tasks to other people, so I don't have to focus on that most of them time. My clothes are mostly simple/classy with very limited variety in colors/designs.

INTJs organize concepts (Ni) so they may avoid being blindsided by the unexpected realities of life, but they also know they need to be embracing the practice of gathering facts and things (Se).
Can relate with this. But felt possible ambiguity here as, according to my current understanding, Ti can be heavily employed in "organizing" concepts as well. Not in the same form, though. If for Ni concepts and conjectures are represented as fast but abstract vague ideas/essences and patterns derived by induction, for Ti they are more explicitly defined through logical rules and properties inferred by deduction, making them more precise, less flexible and requiring more compilation time.
INTPs considers things that make sense to themselves despite all the value judgments others give out.
But also with this, as, like I stated above, I don't ignore what others say and think, but in order to truly integrate something into my "database" I need to fully process data through my models/frameworks that I use to "make sense" for me and within which I think. I do have, it appears, my own observable internal value system which indicates Fi?

lowest point in your life
Not in the format that you suggested due to the reasons on which we both agree, but still I can try to somewhat cover that too.
I don't think I experienced life-breaking moments in my life, fortunately.
There was just this one period of time when I lost my big comfortable home and job due to firm bankruptcy and had to move into other city with my family when I was 18 or so due to some chain of events. (I am 25 at this moment, if that helps). We used to live very comfortably but lost pretty much everything.
But in a month or so of some self-teaching I got another job, then learned a bit more and switched to more high-paying job and then again and we recovered. I don't remember feeling sad/broken (although other members of my family did feel depressed), but, again, I am not sure if this can even qualify as lowest point in which one must suffer hard enough to require some sort of recovery, it was intriguing period of big changes in our lives for me that provided me with reasons for faster career growth.

You didn't ask for it but I think you're likely more nice than you give yourself credit for.
Maybe this might be important to clarify as well additionally. I value actions and intentions much more than being nice and considerate of others emotions. But yes, it isn't very reasonable to ignore emotions as it will hinder efficiency of said actions or might even create issue by itself. But, if required, I don't mind ruining someone's mood if it will be for his own good in long-term.

I was much, much more rude, inconsiderate, ungrateful and blind to other emotions when I was younger, so I had to learn to be nice and attentive, as it just reasonable thing to do in many settings, but it still has for me mostly utilitarian value, "upgrade" to my communication protocol to allow more efficient transmission of the payload, content that actually matters. (but again, there is still non-zero emotional reward from observing someone experiencing good emotions in right conditions, it's just very small as a factor)


Thank you again for answer, I think I improved understanding of myself with your help.
As for current best guess I lean towards me being as INTJ with, for some currently unclear reasons, having developed Ti as well on levels close to Ni or Te in the sense that it is just as natural and as preferable to use.
Maybe Ne as well, but not sure yet, I do very much expand and gather on possibilities and concepts consciously, to a lesser extent though, so, on the level of auxiliary at best?.. Feel more reluctant to use it compared to Ti/Te/Ni.
Question if such preference configurations are "legal" within cognitive functions models still remains unresolved for me, even though it is of secondary importance in relation to typing itself. It can be investigated further in more appropriate forum sections.
 

·
Registered
INFP 6w5 629 sp/sx
Joined
·
1,642 Posts
Thank you for such thoughtful answer, enjoyed reading it!

I would like to add some clarifications to possibly close some gaps for more accurate assessment.

I don't mind helping other people, I might like it not only because their problems can be curious/stimulating a bit, but also just because it does feel good sometimes acknowledging that someones life is now better because of my actions and other's life now is used more efficiently.

But in no way it is a big enough focus for me to enable "killing" myself in any extent for others. "Problems of others" take up relatively small portion of my life and most of these problems are mostly considered "mechanically", with little to no emotion factor (unless emotions are part of the mechanics involved in said problem), it doesn't matter much if said problem involve people or not, it just needs to be stimulating enough by some of its properties none of which are exclusive to social context.

So, motivation in helping other is mostly curiosity/mental satisfaction, not desire to make others feel better emotions or to see myself as a better and nicer person in society and being liked. I don't feel need to be liked or validated. (By "I don't feel" I mean "relatively small" influence of said drives allowing for it to be of non-zero values, I don't think I or anyone else are completely devoid of them)
I personally interpret "killing self to help others" not as literally as it says on the checklist (I got it from a user who got it from the Objective Personality Website). If we look at how Te and Fe are defined, an ExxJ would be about repressing their Fi/Ti for their Te/Fe. In other words, they repress their personal identity reasons/values for the tribe's validation values/reasons. So, you can have an ENTJ who has "no" idea of what they truly value but are plugging away at their job, since money (something that which has value simply because society has deemed it important) has been reasoned to be "good".

If I still have not managed to explain it... I guess.. don't worry about it too much? I don't exactly know a better way to explain it. It's probably confusing how I worded it.

I didn't try to intentionally sound robotic right now if I did, I do feel emotions for others but just wanted to point out that, as a matter of fact, my social activity is very limited and was always like that mostly and with little to no regrets.
And I don't see evidence to suggest that it is a result of some kind of repression of my own parts which is why I don't see enough reason to suggest that i am extraverted. Unless I interpret "extraversion" differently from you.
Not that I don't like seeing myself as one, not that I have some attachment to the introvert stereotype or something, I just don't see this version as more accurate description of what is going on at this point, don't mind changing my view though.
As many would point out, the definition of extraversion/extroversion is a weak point of MBTI typology. Apparently, the official institute simply tests for the eight letters, then assigns the functions in accordance to what a type is "supposed" to have. As you can imagine, those that are socially introverted but need an "E" to denote the correct corresponding function would be typed "incorrectly". Objective Personality is different in that it more closely follows just typing people off of their Grant stacking.

Hopefully, you could understand the process with which I used to type you off of. I chose E, not because you were socially extroverted, but because your balance with order and chaos seemed relatively balanced and also because I see you as a Te-Ni-Se-Fi person. You are entirely free to reject my analysis and this interpretation style. Besides, you would know yourself better than I do.

Alternatively, if you see E/I as a simple descriptor of sociability, you can just take a test from Big5 to find that out. Alternatively-alternatively, you can call yourself whatever type you want if you think that your function stack does not match it's supposed corresponding MBTI type. I know a couple people who simply left their MBTI type as [I/ENTJ] and [INTJ/P]. Whatever you decide on, just choose the one that makes sense and is meaningful.

I see more presence of Fi in me than Fe, with which you seem to agree as well and feel that Se is less developed than Fi.

I will answer missed question that you gave me as maybe it will provide more data, since it wasn't covered at all by my initial post.


I avoid any sort of physical/house chores. Avoid thinking about what should be cooked for dinner, for example, what am I supposed to wear. Any decision about some mundane issues drains me extremely fast. I hate oversaturated with uncontrolled sounds and/or moving objects environments. For same reason I mostly don't like RTS games, for example, as I start to feel instantly very bored when I have to care about micromanagement and have to react to a lot of things happening all at once, so I mostly prefer turn-based games.
Mentioned issues are solved through living in quiet minimalistic but comfortable environment and delegation of cleaning/cooking tasks to other people, so I don't have to focus on that most of them time. My clothes are mostly simple/classy with very limited variety in colors/designs.
It appears that I will have to find a new way to reword that question. Couldn't quite get anything that would help me type you from that answer.

Can relate with this. But felt possible ambiguity here as, according to my current understanding, Ti can be heavily employed in "organizing" concepts as well. Not in the same form, though. If for Ni concepts and conjectures are represented as fast but abstract vague ideas/essences and patterns derived by induction, for Ti they are more explicitly defined through logical rules and properties inferred by deduction, making them more precise, less flexible and requiring more compilation time.

But also with this, as, like I stated above, I don't ignore what others say and think, but in order to truly integrate something into my "database" I need to fully process data through my models/frameworks that I use to "make sense" for me and within which I think. I do have, it appears, my own observable internal value system which indicates Fi?
I find that using those definitions to type people with is too difficult, nor can I truly apply those definitions to predict other people's behavior. In practice, I have noticed that INTJs are inclined to organize concepts and that INTPs have reason-thoughts gained with much contemplation.

An internal value system is something that everyone has, which is why I find it much more useful to define Fi as personal identity values. For all Fi-doms I have met, they've always shown themselves to be a bit of a "rebel" even if they aren't rebellious. For instance, you'll notice that I'm an INFP. I'm not rebellious, I often comply with authorities; however, I defy social conventions. I value things like intimacy and honesty over social values such as face and the rules about what should be said in a conversation. I'll ask people soul-seraching questions seemingly out-of-the-blue because waiting for the right time to get closer to someone seems like a waste of time. I'll also answer the mundane question, "How are you?" very very seriously if I feel like it, often to the amazement of the supermarket clerk.

If you want to know more about Fi, I do recommend reading some threads on the forum.

Not in the format that you suggested due to the reasons on which we both agree, but still I can try to somewhat cover that too.
I don't think I experienced life-breaking moments in my life, fortunately.
There was just this one period of time when I lost my big comfortable home and job due to firm bankruptcy and had to move into other city with my family when I was 18 or so due to some chain of events. (I am 25 at this moment, if that helps). We used to live very comfortably but lost pretty much everything.
But in a month or so of some self-teaching I got another job, then learned a bit more and switched to more high-paying job and then again and we recovered. I don't remember feeling sad/broken (although other members of my family did feel depressed), but, again, I am not sure if this can even qualify as lowest point in which one must suffer hard enough to require some sort of recovery, it was intriguing period of big changes in our lives for me that provided me with reasons for faster career growth.
Coincidentally, not only are we of the same age, but our backstory has similarities. I can and am willing to tell that story to you in more depth, but I don't think it would help with typing you. Unfortunately, due to said reasons, this story has not gone deep enough. With me as an example, right after I was forced to move at 18, I fell into the thought that I "deserved a break". Even though I knew I should be productive, I struggled with passivity for the next couple of years. I knew what I needed to do to progress my life, but I lacked the belief and drive to do so. From this bit you learned about me, you can see how that relates to inferior Te?

The goal of having you talk about your low point in life and picking yourself up (had it been an acceptable question to ask) was to discern your inferior function being Fe, Se, or Fi. While you may not be comfortable giving such a story over the internet, you could benefit from asking yourself that question and analyzing it.

Maybe this might be important to clarify as well additionally. I value actions and intentions much more than being nice and considerate of others emotions. But yes, it isn't very reasonable to ignore emotions as it will hinder efficiency of said actions or might even create issue by itself. But, if required, I don't mind ruining someone's mood if it will be for his own good in long-term.

I was much, much more rude, inconsiderate, ungrateful and blind to other emotions when I was younger, so I had to learn to be nice and attentive, as it just reasonable thing to do in many settings, but it still has for me mostly utilitarian value, "upgrade" to my communication protocol to allow more efficient transmission of the payload, content that actually matters. (but again, there is still non-zero emotional reward from observing someone experiencing good emotions in right conditions, it's just very small as a factor)
I highly doubt that you said "thank you" to me multiple times only with ulterior motives. You can just take the compliment lol.

Also, paragraphs like the ones you wrote here simply reinforce that you are I/ENTJ in my mind.
Thank you again for answer, I think I improved understanding of myself with your help.
As for current best guess I lean towards me being as INTJ with, for some currently unclear reasons, having developed Ti as well on levels close to Ni or Te in the sense that it is just as natural and as preferable to use.
Maybe Ne as well, but not sure yet, I do very much expand and gather on possibilities and concepts consciously, to a lesser extent though, so, on the level of auxiliary at best?.. Feel more reluctant to use it compared to Ti/Te/Ni.
Question if such preference configurations are "legal" within cognitive functions models still remains unresolved for me, even though it is of secondary importance in relation to typing itself. It can be investigated further in more appropriate forum sections.
You're welcome, and welcome to the forum. We've met two posts ago, so if you think I was reading too much into things, I won't be offended. Closest guess INTJ it is. Since there is no one here qualified to officiate typing conventions, you can type yourself whatever you want. We're all here on a "journey of self-discovery".
 

·
Registered
INTP
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I personally interpret "killing self to help others" not as literally as it says on the checklist (I got it from a user who got it from the Objective Personality Website). If we look at how Te and Fe are defined, an ExxJ would be about repressing their Fi/Ti for their Te/Fe. In other words, they repress their personal identity reasons/values for the tribe's validation values/reasons. So, you can have an ENTJ who has "no" idea of what they truly value but are plugging away at their job, since money (something that which has value simply because society has deemed it important) has been reasoned to be "good".

If I still have not managed to explain it... I guess.. don't worry about it too much? I don't exactly know a better way to explain it. It's probably confusing how I worded it.


As many would point out, the definition of extraversion/extroversion is a weak point of MBTI typology. Apparently, the official institute simply tests for the eight letters, then assigns the functions in accordance to what a type is "supposed" to have. As you can imagine, those that are socially introverted but need an "E" to denote the correct corresponding function would be typed "incorrectly". Objective Personality is different in that it more closely follows just typing people off of their Grant stacking.

Hopefully, you could understand the process with which I used to type you off of. I chose E, not because you were socially extroverted, but because your balance with order and chaos seemed relatively balanced and also because I see you as a Te-Ni-Se-Fi person. You are entirely free to reject my analysis and this interpretation style. Besides, you would know yourself better than I do.

Alternatively, if you see E/I as a simple descriptor of sociability, you can just take a test from Big5 to find that out. Alternatively-alternatively, you can call yourself whatever type you want if you think that your function stack does not match it's supposed corresponding MBTI type. I know a couple people who simply left their MBTI type as [I/ENTJ] and [INTJ/P]. Whatever you decide on, just choose the one that makes sense and is meaningful.


It appears that I will have to find a new way to reword that question. Couldn't quite get anything that would help me type you from that answer.


I find that using those definitions to type people with is too difficult, nor can I truly apply those definitions to predict other people's behavior. In practice, I have noticed that INTJs are inclined to organize concepts and that INTPs have reason-thoughts gained with much contemplation.

An internal value system is something that everyone has, which is why I find it much more useful to define Fi as personal identity values. For all Fi-doms I have met, they've always shown themselves to be a bit of a "rebel" even if they aren't rebellious. For instance, you'll notice that I'm an INFP. I'm not rebellious, I often comply with authorities; however, I defy social conventions. I value things like intimacy and honesty over social values such as face and the rules about what should be said in a conversation. I'll ask people soul-seraching questions seemingly out-of-the-blue because waiting for the right time to get closer to someone seems like a waste of time. I'll also answer the mundane question, "How are you?" very very seriously if I feel like it, often to the amazement of the supermarket clerk.

If you want to know more about Fi, I do recommend reading some threads on the forum.


Coincidentally, not only are we of the same age, but our backstory has similarities. I can and am willing to tell that story to you in more depth, but I don't think it would help with typing you. Unfortunately, due to said reasons, this story has not gone deep enough. With me as an example, right after I was forced to move at 18, I fell into the thought that I "deserved a break". Even though I knew I should be productive, I struggled with passivity for the next couple of years. I knew what I needed to do to progress my life, but I lacked the belief and drive to do so. From this bit you learned about me, you can see how that relates to inferior Te?

The goal of having you talk about your low point in life and picking yourself up (had it been an acceptable question to ask) was to discern your inferior function being Fe, Se, or Fi. While you may not be comfortable giving such a story over the internet, you could benefit from asking yourself that question and analyzing it.


I highly doubt that you said "thank you" to me multiple times only with ulterior motives. You can just take the compliment lol.

Also, paragraphs like the ones you wrote here simply reinforce that you are I/ENTJ in my mind.

You're welcome, and welcome to the forum. We've met two posts ago, so if you think I was reading too much into things, I won't be offended. Closest guess INTJ it is. Since there is no one here qualified to officiate typing conventions, you can type yourself whatever you want. We're all here on a "journey of self-discovery".
If I still have not managed to explain it
I think idea is clear enough. I don't see myself significantly and systematically "repressing" any core parts of what apperats to be my personality, the ways I process things or what I personally find meaningful in favor of whatever cultural environment I curently occupy, quite often I was and still am at odds with others for all kinds reasons.

But regardless, I don't find it very useful (yet) to define Tx/Fx partially or fully in terms of tribe values or reasons. "tribe" influence looks like just a special case of many other possible kinds of influences over one's thought processes. And either specializations of such functions reflect very small portion of people, or tribe deeply influences almost all cognitive functions of humans, rendering such tribe/non-tribe distinctions practically useless in both cases.
It's highly probable there are errors in my "tribe" interpretation, I will try to look into models that used such concept.

Objective Personality is different in that it more closely follows just typing people off of their Grant stacking.
Yes, that may very well be its advantage.
On second thought, there seems to be a bit too many models at the moment. And the huge problem here is that they use same letters/functions, but use their own semantics, some of them even use their own definitions to prove how wrong other models are, since statements made withing these models contradict with definitions of theirs.. Who would've thought. Yet, unfortunately, this ends up buying trust of some people like a new, fresh, more shiny religion. Or simply confuses and makes it more difficult to use symbols to describe personalities, since ways to interpret them equals amount of those models. And on top of that, due to vague, imprecise form in which these models are presented often inflate degree ambiguosity even more.

Which is why its imperative to have precise definitions (or be convinced enough in own deductions of them) behind used symbols in arbitrary personality discussion.

As many would point out, the definition of introversion/extroversion is a weak point of MBTI typology.
Yes, I think subjectivity/objectivty would've been better terms, at least they would remove semantic overload of extra/intra-versions and not make any claims about how social one is supposed to be.

You are entirely free to reject my analysis and this interpretation style. Besides, you would know yourself better than I do.
I think your analysis and input is quite valuable regardless of whether or not we will agree in what letters are most accurate, since, like I said, if reasoning process and inference rules are sufficiently transparent, input in it's more pure form can be extracted and reframed in whatever model is most preferable at the time by me.

Alternatively, if you see E/I as a simple descriptor of sociability
I personally look at functions and use fourletter type just as a shorter form compared to listing functional stack. I just might've wrongly associated direction of dominant function with sociability. Although some correlations still might exist, not sure how statistically significant they are.

Couldn't quite get anything that would help me type you from that answer.
I thought that could potentially indicate place of Se in my stack / level of its development or something like that, but yeah, it might be wrong/unreliable method or inapplicable within your style.

An internal value system is something that everyone has, which is why I find it much more useful to define Fi as personal identity values.
Makes sense.
For instance, you'll notice that I'm an INFP. I'm not rebellious, I often comply with authorities; however, I defy social conventions.
I can relate to that, it doesn't matter much which social rituals/conventions are used if they are bearable enough so I might be more accepting here, but I feel often reluctant in my compliance to authorities. Not because I feel the need to be "in charge" or can't stand being "managed", I think, but I feel the need to personally agree with whatever decision is imposed on me.

I value things like intimacy and honesty over social values such as face and the rules about what should be said in a conversation.
Same.

I'll also answer the mundane question, "How are you?" very very seriously if I feel like it, often to the amazement of the supermarket clerk.
This question, or, rather, the way it is misused is rather annoying as very few expect honest serious reply to it or, conversely, interested in getting answer. Inefficient.

I can and am willing to tell that story to you in more depth, but I don't think it would help with typing you.
That still can be useful input for Ni (or any other relevant functions in the lenses of model used by reader), since helps in seeing which behaviors/reactions correlate with what functions, which can then be, for example, used to narrow probabilities in self-typing..

Even though I knew I should be productive, I struggled with passivity for the next couple of years. I knew what I needed to do to progress my life, but I lacked the belief and drive to do so. From this bit you learned about me, you can see how that relates to inferior Te?
Yes, it matches for me as well. And from differences it seems that I, coversely, am supposed to have dominant or auxiliary Te.

The goal of having you talk about your low point in life and picking yourself up (had it been an acceptable question to ask) was to discern your inferior function being Fe, Se, or Fi. While you may not be comfortable giving such a story over the internet, you could benefit from asking yourself that question and analyzing it.
I understand, i do find it useful to answer and don't see it as uncomfortable/unacceptable, but I fail to identify my lowest point in life, if what I described doesn't qialify as one. I feel that it doesn't, just some temporary external circumstances.
Wording suggests exceptionally challenging conditions for ones mental fortitude, but best that I can remember is just being stressed/annoyed/overwhelmed by sensory stimuli or emotions of others, lack of control over processes around me. I just become more openly assertive/bossy or seclude myself in better environment, which for me seems like inferior Se.

I highly doubt that you said "thank you" to me multiple times only with ulterior motives. You can just take the compliment lol.
I don't mind and appreciate compliments generally, I just wanted to, as I warned from the start, provide more data for typing by being maybe a bit too verbose than I usually am..

Also, paragraphs like the ones you wrote here simply reinforce that you are I/ENTJ in my mind.
Agree with this.

We've met two posts ago, so if you think I was reading too much into things
I myself can read too much into things to allow possibility that someone had to read too much into other things to conclude those initial things which have been overread by me in first place.., so, I won't discard rudely anything until sufficient evidence is collected. I want to repeat that I apprecate your input regardless of what model/style/tools are used and how results match with what I personally expect to see, as it's all can be used for improve understanding and accuracy.

You're welcome, and welcome to the forum.
Thank you!
 

·
Registered
INTP
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Second opinion(excluding mine that is) would be greatly appreciated as well. Slightly updated initial post.
 

·
Registered
INTJ
Joined
·
378 Posts
The problem with trying to type you is your non-committal nature. There is no such thing as someone who is Ni+Te+Ti. They are conflicting in nature. It's because you don't talk to anyone and have no sense of other people that you have a problem with identifying yourself. That's really why I suspect you are Ti (INTP) and not Te.

It's like everything you say is "I am X except when I am Y" giving yourself both X and Y. If you compare yourself to people you know, then you begin to understand your relationship with people. In that intersubjectivity you can understand your personality. If you go online and say you are the mastermind super planner and everyone knows you as a guy who doesn't think past tomorrow, then there is a conflict. If you consider yourself an erratic mess and everyone around you knows you as the hyper planner, then there is a conflict. But we understand our standards for things with other people. What I'm saying your problem is is this:

3.) What about your personality most distinguishes you from everyone else?

I haven't talked on deep enough level with enough people to confidently say what is so special about me.
That is how I gather you are an Introverted Thinker. The concept that other people exist is a far off concept to you. It's like there isn't a world outside of your own head and especially there are no people outside of your head.

If you are an INTJ who has Te, you want objective measurements. Te is like the most committed type. Everything comes down to a formula with a right or wrong answer. Go back and look at how you answered the questionnaire and tell me that's someone who operates on a Yes/No, Black/White way of thinking.
 

·
Registered
INTP
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
The problem with trying to type you is your non-committal nature. There is no such thing as someone who is Ni+Te+Ti. They are conflicting in nature. It's because you don't talk to anyone and have no sense of other people that you have a problem with identifying yourself. That's really why I suspect you are Ti (INTP) and not Te.

It's like everything you say is "I am X except when I am Y" giving yourself both X and Y. If you compare yourself to people you know, then you begin to understand your relationship with people. In that intersubjectivity you can understand your personality. If you go online and say you are the mastermind super planner and everyone knows you as a guy who doesn't think past tomorrow, then there is a conflict. If you consider yourself an erratic mess and everyone around you knows you as the hyper planner, then there is a conflict. But we understand our standards for things with other people. What I'm saying your problem is is this:



That is how I gather you are an Introverted Thinker. The concept that other people exist is a far off concept to you. It's like there isn't a world outside of your own head and especially there are no people outside of your head.

If you are an INTJ who has Te, you want objective measurements. Te is like the most committed type. Everything comes down to a formula with a right or wrong answer. Go back and look at how you answered the questionnaire and tell me that's someone who operates on a Yes/No, Black/White way of thinking.

By this :
I haven't talked on deep enough level with enough people to confidently say what is so special about me.
I meant that I don't have large enough dataset to confidently claim that this or that trait of me is very rare statistically speaking.
Not that I have no experience of talking with people whatsoever and no idea of how they operate. All that I wrote doesn't conflict with what i got from some few of my close friends, family, collegues.
I am detached, but not totally oblivious of what is going around me and do have data/evidence to back up each claim that I made about myself. what would be the point of typing someone using their fantasies that don't reflect reality at all otherwise.

There is no such thing as someone who is Ni+Te+Ti.
Yes, I am aware of that.
Ot's like there isn't a world outside of your own head and especially there are no people outside of your head.
Is there any reason to claim that this trait is somehow exclusive to Ti+Ne?

If you are an INTJ who has Te, you want objective measurements.
That's correct.
Everything comes down to a formula with a right or wrong answer.
Same claim can be as plausibly made about Ti, I think. One has objective emperical way of testing some binary value of property, while the other can just as easily within his own toolbox of known subjective inference rules and formulas make binary deductions. Each of them potentially missing unconcidered probabilities intentionally or by accident.
The way I see it, it has more to do with how function is used, what is the nature of the problem, especially when solution isn't known yet and data is incomplete, and how other functions, especially intution, are integrated into the process.

Thank you for your input and for new opinion.
 

·
Registered
INTP, 953
Joined
·
83 Posts
Also I am always concerned with how my time is being spent and what my future will be, what trend will I see if I use last several days as points and try to draw a line through them, which things such line will intersect. If I spend my day without doing anything to improve current trend, I may feel frustration with myself.
You seem to be more goal orientated than INTPs. Ti and Ne seek to explore possibilities, the goal for them is strengthening the frame of knowledge by exploring possibilities, manifesting it into reality is secondary. For NTJs goals come more naturally as they focus more on visions of the surrounding world given by Ni with Te and Se.

In some contexts I like schedule and structure. In others I may allow more flexibility.
My own activities and initiatives are usually planned, at the end of the day I have rough set of things that I want to achieve and projects that I want to work on.
The more important my goal is, the more thorough I will be in planning my path towards, over-preparing usually, trying to cover as much contingencies as possible.
I don't plan and structure things that i consider unimportant, I don't mind my desk being messy, although I prefer minimalistic and clean environments more.
Te + Ni + Se in NTJs finds it easy to maintain order as the functions do not interfere with the sensing of the world. INTPs will find order hard to upkeep as Ti is actively pulling them away from the environment to create an impersonal view of the possibilities that Ne gives. You give off the impression that maintaining order is easy for you.

Between I/ENTJ I am less sure, but I would be more inclined towards INTJ as you mention observing and detachedness and a lot in your answers, ENTJs would have more direct approach to accomplish their goals and would focus less on the aspect of theory as their Te and Se are more prioritized.
 

·
Registered
INTJ
Joined
·
378 Posts
By this :

I meant that I don't have large enough dataset to confidently claim that this or that trait of me is very rare statistically speaking.
Not that I have no experience of talking with people whatsoever and no idea of how they operate. All that I wrote doesn't conflict with what i got from some few of my close friends, family, collegues.
I am detached, but not totally oblivious of what is going around me and do have data/evidence to back up each claim that I made about myself. what would be the point of typing someone using their fantasies that don't reflect reality at all otherwise.
I can tell it from the way you write that you are 'a certain way except when you are not'. Your inability to measure yourself shows me you have a very crazy subjective factor in your judging.


Is there any reason to claim that this trait is somehow exclusive to Ti+Ne?
Yes. That's kind of the point of it. At least, as far as being an introverted judging function, which I am talking about.

Being "in your own head" is the meaning of introversion, as opposed to becoming the things outside of your head, which would be extraversion. Now, what I'm saying is your judgement, not your perception, is where your head trip subjective factor lies. The quality of your statements all fall along a grey area. I know that you aren't an introverted feeler, so that's out of the question, since you don't believe that to be the case either.

Here is the decision I'm making and why a little bit more laid out.

Te:
Does this person try to fit everything into a yes/no type of answer?
Does this person make strongly committed answers?

The concept of formulating life into right or wrong answers is a big part of Extraverted Thinking. There is usually a problem getting an understanding of "objective data" even when there isn't a language barrier, so you have to look at all the qualities of Te.


Ti:
Is this person overly or unnecessarily nuanced in how they judge things?
Does this person try make uncommitted answers?
Does this person avoid being yes or no?

That is more the quality of Introverted Thinking. When an introverted thinker is stuck in their head, it is in the judging part. When an Introverted Intuitive is stuck in his own head it is only related to the perception. The actual judgement they come to will be a strong one.

But there is another notable quality that goes along with this in that you are never a reductionist. This goes into Ni vs Ne. It isn't that anyone has the monopoly on being simple or verbose, but the quality of it. You don't seem to cut any information out.

Introverted, moderately polite, independent, calm, detached, observant, intense.
Can be seen as assertive and harsh if I don't like the way things go.
Sometimes I might feel that I have to take handle over situation right now and resolve all conflicts myself.
Sometimes I might be perceived as insensitive, even when I don't feel that way. Usually happens during discussions/debates, as I focus mostly on topic at hand and logical consistency of arguments.
I feel satisfaction from being efficient, from both reaching goals and from contemplating parts working in close concert and harmony.
Can be very talkative and intense when I debate, discuss.
I like explaining things to others, sometimes.
I can feel very annoyed if my time is being spent inefficiently or I am forced to do something unimportant.
My interests lie primarily in computer science, math and, to lesser degree, physics. It feels very stimulating exploring topics and concepts from those areas, although interests aren't limited much by them.
Most of my time I spend either working on my job, working on my own projects in free time or researching/learning something.
I need to be constantly stimulated intellectually, otherwise I may start feeling extremely bored, depressed, lifeless.

Some feedback from other people mostly matches with traits that I presented. With exception to occasional "arrogant" and "overconfident", which I don't think I am. Most of the times. And "sending impression as someone important, significant", as if room's mood changes once I appear in vicinity, not for worse or better specifically.
Can't definitively explain what exactly makes such impression as I didn't make it intentionally.
I mean look at that. You described yourself the same way over and over like there was something different about it. That's within 1 question.

"Order" is mental representation that reflects some arrangement of other mental representations that may or may not be directly linked to some specific physical concrete objects. Order of the items on the table, order in restaurant, order of machine instructions are all instances of that concept parametrized by domain and rule that allows us to compare objects within it.

"Chaos", therefore, can be described as absence of "Order", absence of any rule-description by which objects under consideration are arranged. A bit more relaxed definition can allow some "ordered" arrangements to be considered still as "Chaos" for practical reasons if rules are sufficiently inelegant, where intuition for elegancy can be imagined roughly as rate of change of rule complexity with growth of elements multiplied by initial complexity, where complexity is roughly defined as amount of symbols used to define it within used system, it implies though that some compositions can be viewed as "chaos" within some system but more "ordered" in another.

In some contexts I like schedule and structure. In others I may allow more flexibility.
My own activities and initiatives are usually planned, at the end of the day I have rough set of things that I want to achieve and projects that I want to work on.
The more important my goal is, the more thorough I will be in planning my path towards, over-preparing usually, trying to cover as much contingencies as possible.
I don't plan and structure things that i consider unimportant, I don't mind my desk being messy, although I prefer minimalistic and clean environments more.
This is the longest answer I think I have seen to this question. Look at that and tell me you are someone who condenses information.

For the sake of comparison, here is my answer to this question:

I like order and hate chaos. Order is when you can predict how things will go. Chaos is unpredictability. Order manifests as something with clear intent. Chaos manifests as every stupid person and every stupid idea they have that fucks up the world.
You can see a pretty dramatic difference, right?

13.) What is it that you desire in life? What do you strive to achieve? Why? Where do you think these drives and desires stem from or are inspired by?

Nothing specific, want to continue to experience it, process, observe, play. Immortality would be nice to have.
These drives and desires I think are inherent, they were right from the birth.
That's not really the answer I expect from an Ni dominant type either.
 

·
Registered
INTP
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
You seem to be more goal orientated than INTPs. Ti and Ne seek to explore possibilities, the goal for them is strengthening the frame of knowledge by exploring possibilities, manifesting it into reality is secondary. For NTJs goals come more naturally as they focus more on visions of the surrounding world given by Ni with Te and Se.



Te + Ni + Se in NTJs finds it easy to maintain order as the functions do not interfere with the sensing of the world. INTPs will find order hard to upkeep as Ti is actively pulling them away from the environment to create an impersonal view of the possibilities that Ne gives. You give off the impression that maintaining order is easy for you.

Between I/ENTJ I am less sure, but I would be more inclined towards INTJ as you mention observing and detachedness and a lot in your answers, ENTJs would have more direct approach to accomplish their goals and would focus less on the aspect of theory as their Te and Se are more prioritized.
Thank you, that sounds reasonable.


I can tell it from the way you write that you are 'a certain way except when you are not'. Your inability to measure yourself shows me you have a very crazy subjective factor in your judging.




Yes. That's kind of the point of it. At least, as far as being an introverted judging function, which I am talking about.

Being "in your own head" is the meaning of introversion, as opposed to becoming the things outside of your head, which would be extraversion. Now, what I'm saying is your judgement, not your perception, is where your head trip subjective factor lies. The quality of your statements all fall along a grey area. I know that you aren't an introverted feeler, so that's out of the question, since you don't believe that to be the case either.

Here is the decision I'm making and why a little bit more laid out.

Te:
Does this person try to fit everything into a yes/no type of answer?
Does this person make strongly committed answers?

The concept of formulating life into right or wrong answers is a big part of Extraverted Thinking. There is usually a problem getting an understanding of "objective data" even when there isn't a language barrier, so you have to look at all the qualities of Te.


Ti:
Is this person overly or unnecessarily nuanced in how they judge things?
Does this person try make uncommitted answers?
Does this person avoid being yes or no?

That is more the quality of Introverted Thinking. When an introverted thinker is stuck in their head, it is in the judging part. When an Introverted Intuitive is stuck in his own head it is only related to the perception. The actual judgement they come to will be a strong one.

But there is another notable quality that goes along with this in that you are never a reductionist. This goes into Ni vs Ne. It isn't that anyone has the monopoly on being simple or verbose, but the quality of it. You don't seem to cut any information out.



I mean look at that. You described yourself the same way over and over like there was something different about it. That's within 1 question.



This is the longest answer I think I have seen to this question. Look at that and tell me you are someone who condenses information.

For the sake of comparison, here is my answer to this question:



You can see a pretty dramatic difference, right?



That's not really the answer I expect from an Ni dominant type either.

I can tell it from the way you write that you are 'a certain way except when you are not'. Your inability to measure yourself shows me you have a very crazy subjective factor in your judging.
Measurements that I get aren't fully exhausted by single "legal" configuration given my understanding, there are just very close matches.
That isn't how it is supposed to work, yet I don't see why it has to necessarily mean that I can't measure myself and have something crazy going on with my tools.

Yes. That's kind of the point of it. At least, as far as being an introverted judging function, which I am talking about
Dominant introverted function doesn't have to be judging to enable detachment from external world.
Introverted intuitive function is inevitably subjective, meaning that the quality of conjectures produced with it's influence aren't fundamentally less subjective by default.

Rendering Ti+Ne pair non-exclusive as descriptor.

Here is the decision I'm making and why a little bit more laid out.
I see. If we will judge according to these definitions and how I answered, then yes, i definitely can't have Te close to the top. And that is how claim can be made that I must have introverted judging function.


You described yourself the same way over and over like there was something different about it. That's within 1 question.
Now that wasn't my intention, overlooked this part during my edits..

But there is another notable quality that goes along with this in that you are never a reductionist.
Look at that and tell me you are someone who condenses information.
Fair observation, I am aware that a large part of this answer and the others can potentially be cutted away.
But I left it intentionally due to the way I set at the start.
On average I prefer to reduce, but I don't imagine this claim sounding convincing to you at this point, nor it should be.
 

·
Registered
INTP
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
After some pondering I came to conclusion that the primary way in which I operate is most likely to be Ni.
It is observational and abstract in nature, focused on distilling ideas from large chunks of sensory data and connections between them semi-automatically with little effort.

Second function is Te, the one on which I rely consciously in order to express/enforce my internal reality by transforming external reality. In comparsion, this function isn't running all the time and has to be invoked consciously.

Now, if I were to continue this INTJ trend, I would start mentioning Fi role, but I don't find this to be the most practically useful representation of how I operate.
Third most used function that I see is Ti, I pretty often find myself consulting with it, as I find it rational to do so in the context of my activities.
I use it heavily to evaluate logical validity and precision of conjectures, to criticize and re-check myself, making me more independent and self-sufficient in my thinking.
It is not as preferable and natural as Te, perhaps, it involves more conscious effort, but I don't find it stressful to use.

Fi for me, at the moment, is a sense of what is right, what is meaningful, independence from empathy and perceived external feelings, greater control of my own identity and values, sense of groundedness.
That is what I personally experience, to a lesser degree though in comparison with those who have it as dom/aux function.

And, lastly, Se, function with which I struggle the most, the one that opposes, irritates but deeply influences me.

So, to summarize, my stack would be :
Ni -> Te -> (Ti=Fi) -> Se.
 

·
Registered
INTP
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
According to my current understanding of Jung, dominant function is supposed to be most differentiated (It has either introverted or extraverted attitude, but not both) while auxiliary function is usually less differentiated and can bend to demands of dominant function by switching attitude/direction.
The only requirement there is for auxiliary function is that it has to have opposing nature, if dominant function is rational(F or T), then auxiliary must be irrational(N or S).

So, what I stated about usage of Ti doesn't contradict with theory if it was correctly understood.
There is introverted intuitive(Ni-dom) type which then either prefers F or T as his auxiliary function with varying differentiation (somewhere between Te and Ti).
And Ni-dom with thinking function that is usually extraverted (but not necessarily always) will translate to what is labeled as INTJ in MBTI.
 

·
Registered
ENTJ 7w8 sx/so
Joined
·
8,006 Posts
Greetings, Cafe!


I am going to be excessively verbose as I think "keeping it short" might decrease typing accuracy since less data will be presented. More data doesn't always mean more accuracy, though, apologies if I didn't make it any easier in the end.

As indicated by the title, I feel ambiguity about my first two primary functions, as I either use two pairs/loadouts of them with even distribution of my preferences (which isn't how function stacks are supposed to work by given model? All of functions are used by any given individual to some degree, but there should be only one primary function stack that is used by said individual in normal healthy condition, while functions outside of it are used much more rarely/prefered less).
Or there is an error in my interpretation of my mental processes and/or the model in terms of which I am trying to describe them.

Hence I am not perfectly certain about my current functional stack/type, If I were to look on my most inferior/least preferable function, then I would probably say Se.


I am going to use pinned "Ultimate Questionnaire".

1.) Is there anything that may affect the way you answer the questions? For example, a stressful time, mental illness, medications, special life circumstances? Other useful information includes sex, age, and current state of mind.

Nothing at this moment. My mood is usually calm, stable with respect to stress.
During few panic attacks in the past my mode of operation didn't change much, focus just changed to observation/decomposition of my sensations/emotions and their causes, which usually stopped these rushes of panics after little while. Age is 25.

2.) What kind of person are you and why?

If I were to collect most recurring superficial traits of my behavior, then I would say that I am:
Introverted, moderately polite, independent, calm, detached, observant.
Sometimes I might feel that I have to take handle over situation right now and resolve all conflicts myself.
Sometimes I might be perceived as insensitive, even when I don't feel that way. Usually happens during discussions/debates, as I focus mostly on topic at hand and logical consistency of arguments or when I don't like the way things go.
I feel satisfaction from being efficient, from both reaching goals and from contemplating parts working in close concert and harmony.
I like explaining things to others, sometimes.
I can feel very annoyed if my time is being spent inefficiently or I am forced to do something unimportant.
My interests lie primarily in computer science, math and, to lesser degree, physics. It feels very stimulating exploring topics and concepts from those areas, although interests aren't limited much by them.
Most of my time I spend either working on my job, working on my own projects in free time or researching/learning something.
I need to be constantly stimulated intellectually, otherwise I may start feeling extremely bored, depressed, lifeless.

Some feedback from other people mostly matches with traits that I presented. With exception to occasional "arrogant" and "overconfident", which I don't think I am. Most of the times. And "sending impression as someone important, significant", as if room's mood changes once I appear in vicinity, not for worse or better specifically.
Can't definitively explain what exactly makes such impression as I didn't make it intentionally.


3.) What about your personality most distinguishes you from everyone else?

I haven't talked on deep enough level with enough people to confidently say what is so special about me.
Current approximation : it appears that I am more resilient to failures and stress, I tend to be much more thorough and careful in organization of my mental models/representations/frameworks, trying to find for arbitrary generic model corresponding special case of even more generic model and always striving for coherency and consistency in my arguments.
Sceptical, critical while considering probabilities, conjectures, arguments. Regardless of who presented them. Speed of processing and strictness over the input tend to scale with its size. For example, in heated and rapid discussion I will try to filter and influence harder it's content, make everyone focused on current topic and not distract on anything irrelevant until issue resolved. Dismiss inferior arguments more aggressively if I see that situation demands it.
Everything must logically compile before it can be accepted and passed further in pipeline.
I can switch to more "relaxed" mode of operation, where structures turn to more flexible ideas, implementation details become something that can be thought out later, get more focused on overall scheme, goals, patterns, induction instead of caring about proper definitions, rules and logical consistency.
Switch doesn't have to occur, these modes can co-exist in parallel.

Another thing is emotional detachment/asociality, I rarely talk outside of work context and mostly just because I have to. And when I want to talk and enjoy the process I still prefer to keep it impersonal, just exploring and discussing ideas or debating. I rarely if at all enjoy informal/small talks, sharing experience(impressions, not knowledge), mulling over mundane issues/events.

Also I am always concerned with how my time is being spent and what my future will be, what trend will I see if I use last several days as points and try to draw a line through them, which things such line will intersect. If I spend my day without doing anything to improve current trend, I may feel frustration with myself.

4.) Do you think there are any differences between how you described yourself and how people actually perceive you? How do you think others would describe you? If there are any discrepancies between these two that you are aware of; do you know why exactly that is?

Answered that for 2nd question.

5.) How do you react to new situations in your life? Can you describe an event in your life where you were in an unknown situation? How did you deal with it?

Depends on the pace in which events unfold and nature of situation.
I react best if this is something stressful, challenging, important, critical, life-threatening. Generally anything that can be considered as challenge.
In dire situations that I managed to experience I feel like some "superhuman" mode unlocks within me, I turn to unstoppable machine and simply do everything that is at all possible squeezing whatever resources are available to me.
Regardless of the pace i get quick rough overview of the goal and map around it based on the nature of problem and chart out paths and ways towards it, rough initial set of instructions.
Then, if pace allows it, I approach issue more carefully and prepare in the best way I can trying to guarantee desired outcome.

If, however, this new situation cannot be viewed by me at all as a challenge, then I probably won't care much. I may not react at all if it isn't necessary. I may attempt to find some joy from, look at it from better perspective.

6.) How do you judge new ideas? What tends to weigh on your decisions?

On one hand, I welcome new ideas and fresh perspectives but on the other, I can be seen as too harsh/skeptical, too strict, but being mind open doesn't mean eyes closed, vulnerabilities and weak parts must be considered.
I can't avoid any sort of analysis of new ideas and accept them just because they are new.
Efficiency, elegance, novelty, depth of thought that is behind it are roughly criterias that I value. Many other criterias can be relevant as well, but that depends on the domain.

7.) Describe your relationship to order and chaos. What do order and chaos mean to you? How do they manifest in your daily life?

"Order" is mental representation that reflects some arrangement of other mental representations that may or may not be directly linked to some specific physical concrete objects. Order of the items on the table, order in restaurant, order of machine instructions are all instances of that concept parametrized by domain and rule that allows us to compare objects within it.

"Chaos", therefore, can be described as absence of "Order", absence of any rule-description by which objects under consideration are arranged. A bit more relaxed definition can allow some "ordered" arrangements to be considered still as "Chaos" for practical reasons if rules are sufficiently inelegant, where intuition for elegancy can be imagined roughly as rate of change of rule complexity with growth of elements multiplied by initial complexity, where complexity is roughly defined as amount of symbols used to define it within used system, it implies though that some compositions can be viewed as "chaos" within some system but more "ordered" in another.

In some contexts I like schedule and structure. In others I may allow more flexibility.
My own activities and initiatives are usually planned, at the end of the day I have rough set of things that I want to achieve and projects that I want to work on.
The more important my goal is, the more thorough I will be in planning my path towards, over-preparing usually, trying to cover as much contingencies as possible.
I don't plan and structure things that i consider unimportant, I don't mind my desk being messy, although I prefer minimalistic and clean environments more.

8.) What activities energize you most? Describe what an enjoyable situation is for you.

Processing new information, optimizing self or external processes, automating, sex, solving problems, overcoming challenges, playing inspirational games to alter perspective/enrich emotional life, doing plans for my future, next projects and making sure that my life goes in the right direction.

9.) You are given a reasonable budget and must buy and prepare a Holiday (Thanksgiving, Christmas, etc.) dinner. What are you thinking? What do you buy? What do you do?

Do I really have to though? I buy gifts quite often for my family/inner circle and I don't need some special days to justify myself for doing so. But if I really have to and that is set in stone, either I will try to make it perfect brightest holiday possible, anticipate needs of each guest and their preferences and plan for them (because that is the most reasonable thing to do in my own view in current situation, I don't normally read and anticipate desires of others), buy warming gifts, organize fun thematic activities so that there will always be something to do (again, thinking very hard about they actually will feel about all of that), set beautiful decorations, prepare good topic for conversation and etc.
Or I will do very half-assed minimal preparation which is most likely will be the case since I can't imagine myself being bothered by that seriously and enjoy such duty.

10.) Someone talks to you about an intellectually complicated subject with which you are familiar. Are you more likely to crystallize and reduce the ideas, or would you want to take a tangential approach? If you have an example, feel free to give it.

Most of the time I either take the lead in such situations or participate very actively, I will
a) keep track of ideas, systematize and process them. reduce/purge irrelevant/inferior arguments to something that already there, but maybe take note of valuable differences. For each inferior/weak idea reason will be explicitly stated and alternative suggested if possible.
b) keep track of conversation itself, its quality, pace and structure so that we will have progress regardless of how exactly we want to take the subject. Lots of conversations observed by me are extremely inefficient, due to constant distraction on something that isn't important/relevant or inconsistent.
c) actively try to suggest solutions/ideas one by one if some problem/situation is being described to me.

Examples can be given if required, this post is already becoming quite long.

11.) Do you find yourself to be obsessive about topics? Do you continually divine value from something you already understand or do you move on once you feel you have a fair enough understanding?

Yes, I can be described and feel as obsessive, I reiterate known topics and go through untouched branches, review things with different perspectives and get something new each time. I strive to have "complete" knowledge about phenomena of interest on every level of it's manifestation, but can accept to have some "debts" for a time being when I am short on time, just making conjectures from known patterns.

12.) What do you like about traveling and what would you do if you could travel anywhere?

Nothing, I don't travel and don't like it generally. I can travel anywhere already, but I'm not interested in doing so.

13.) What is it that you desire in life? What do you strive to achieve? Why? Where do you think these drives and desires stem from or are inspired by?

Nothing specific, want to continue to experience it, process, observe, play. Immortality would be nice to have.
These drives and desires I think are inherent, they were right from the birth.

14.) What type do you think you are? Why this/these type(s)? Is there a type that appeals to you, to your self-perception, that you would like to be? Why?

INTJ, ENTJ and/or INTP.
Because their functional stacks most closely describe my processing style and preferences in my opinion. Specifically Ti/Ni is dominant and Te/Ne as auxiliary. I feel that Ti->Ne and Ni->Te pairs are both equally developed and equally used, which indicates contradiction or error in understanding.

I don't have types that appeal to me more than the others, each is inferior in some ways and superior in others and type limitations can be surpassed according to what I know at the moment about models that employ functional stacks at their cores.

I can provide more information if necessary.

That is all, thank you for taking time to read this.
If you are going to type me, and for doing so I will be very grateful, I would like to ask if possible to provide definitions or references to them of cognitive functions or other concepts that you used and found relevant, so that I can see chain of reasoning as accurate as possible to make most use of its results, as quite often people while using same symbols can significantly diverge in their meanings. Reasoning can quite often be more useful than conjecture itself.
Ugh, I didn't read all of that but you can be whatever MBTI you want. INTJ seems fine but maybe INFJ or ISTP would be more accurate. MBTI typing over the internet isn't all that serious, in all honesty.
 

·
Registered
INTP
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Even if it did contradict with theory, it's still a theory. They're not facts of life. Jung didn't make a perfect theory.
I didn't mean that Jung theory is how things exactly are. I was mostly referring to the statement that this "doesn't work" assuming Jung theory was used to judge my statements. Whether or not it is wrong is of secondary importance in that context.

Ugh, I didn't read all of that but you can be whatever MBTI you want. INTJ seems fine but maybe INFJ or ISTP would be more accurate. MBTI typing over the internet isn't all that serious, in all honesty.
Being this or that type isn't my intention.
It may or may not be serious, that is in hands of the one who types.
It appears this thread outlived it's average lifespan?
 

·
Registered
ENTJ 7w8 sx/so
Joined
·
8,006 Posts
Being this or that type isn't my intention.
It may or may not be serious, that is in hands of the one who types.
It appears this thread outlived it's average lifespan?
No, it's fine. I assumed you wanted to discuss your MBTI, not Jung. MBTI is mostly based on Jung's book on 'Psychological Types'. The MBTI systematized Jung's work in that book and what you're saying seems a bit strange considering what Jung has said on the types, which is we have a dominant "function" as he said, for lack of a better word, I'd say perhaps a, 'cognitive preference' toward thinking, feeling, sensing or intuition. The first two and the latter two being opposite in orientation and how a person views and perceives the world, respectively. That is, Thinking is the opposite of Feeling orientation, and Intuition is the opposite of sensing in orientation. And that your secondary "function" is in an opposing direction. So if one is an introverted thinker, then their second "function" will be extroverted in nature. Pretty easy stuff, right? You only have to figure out one or the other, then you can deduce what the one you can't figure out through deduction. Simple.

If I were to guess, based on how you seem to behave, I would say you're likely a Ji, so I__P with MBTI lettering.
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
Top