[xxWanderer]

Hey so I'm a ISTP I've done so much research i'm really suprised how much my personality is like this. Sometimes I get INFP in some test results but usually its this
I heard girls are a bit tomboyish they like more hands on jobs.

I'm a girl I wouldn't class myself as girly but I can dress kinda like that at times I have more of a laid back look. I prefer hands on jobs actually thinking of going to uni to do computers.

What about you guys? How are you like as a ISTP??

 

[j3321]

Where did you read the description? There was an earlier post where ISTP's were all complaining Keirsey didn't describe them well at all. It wasn't that was it? (Sorry I know I'm wrecking your post I'm so curious though ISTP's are the mystery type to me.

 

[xxWanderer]

I only joined it recently what post was it? I can see myself as both ISTP and INFP i get that sometimes

 

[j3321]

It's the "Artisan" description from Please Understand Me II. I'm not saying your post is redundant I'm just saying it was suprising that you are talking about how an ISTP description described you so well because there was a just a thread (I'll try to find it) where ISTP's were talking about not finding descriptions that matched them very well.

 

[j3321]

This post. I think it's towards the middle.

http://personalitycafe.com/myers-briggs-forum/30469-why-types-grouped-sj-sp-nt-nf.html

 

[madhatter]

Yeah, that was me. Keirsey really dropped the ball.

There are other profiles that have some merit, but a lot of them are filled with stereotypes (many which I think are perpetuated by Keirsey's theory). I like Berens' profile, and Lenore Thomson's description of ISTPs and Ti in general is very good. The Type Talk description is not bad, even though Otto Krueger and Janet Thuesen combine the Keirsey theory to Myers Briggs; their profile does have the high risk, thrill seeking stereotype.

But mizzcasual, I see you identify with ISFP now. What made you decide that? It does make sense, since you said you tested as both ISTP and INFP.