Personality Cafe banner
21 - 40 of 54 Posts
In the actual MBTI Form Q Test, you fall into each Step II facet category on a sliding scale, so you might be really strong on one facet and that balances out being strong on a facet in the opposite direction, etc. For example, in the Judging-Perceiving facets, you might fall strongly into Pressure-Prompted, but overall you have more "points" falling into systematic, planful, and methodical, making you a J with some P facets, but still a J.

Basically, that is the purpose of the Step II MBTI tests. They explain why there are often strong variations within many people of the same type. I myself also fall into the pressure-prompted facet, as I tend to procrastinate things and then blow through them all at once. The pressure of having to get things done before it's too late pushes me to get more done than I otherwise would if I just pecked away at things in a timely fashion. My end product is hurried, but even better than what I produce when I pace myself. If I pace myself, then I tend to lose interest or my mind drifts and I just can't stay focused, for example.
Does it give any focus to functions? I suppose not...?
 
Discussion starter · #23 ·
Does it give any focus to functions? I suppose not...?
It talks about the functions a bit in the MBTI Manual 6th Edition, but the Step II Manual just focuses on the facets.

So far, other than Psychological Types by Carl Jung, I've found Lenore Thomson's "Personality Type" to be the best resource for learning about the cognitive functions. She gives an entire chapter to each function, and it's written to be more accessible to a general audience, whereas, Jung can get rather mystical sometimes and he has a writing style that sometimes requires you to go back over it again and again because there's just so many nuances to what he is saying that are very subtle and hard to pick up on unless you are in the right frame of mind. Lenore Thomson is a lot easier to digest, but I can't say that she's more reliable as a source. Obviously Jung is the best, since it's his theory, but Lenore definitely does it justice.

I haven't found many other useful resources on the cognitive functions relevant to MBTI. It might be useful to read the function descriptions given on the socionics wiki (just google "wikisocion"), but bare in mind that those descriptions are for socionics and not for MBTI, so you can't use them with MBTI. You'd have to type yourself within that system as a totally separate system from square one. I also can't say it's a better system than MBTI either, but I've found it useful to some extent. Personally, I used to think it was full of shit until recently since I've done a bit of digging into it. Now, I would say, there's aspects of it that I still think are nonsense, and others that I think are even more accurate than MBTI. Unfortunately, I still think the majority of it is nonsense, but like I said, some of it is quite accurate as far as I can tell, and when I have a hard time with one system I find it to be a good backup. They're similar, but very different, and together they somewhat compliment each other, but only indirectly since they are not directly compatible at all.
 
In the actual MBTI Form Q Test, you fall into each Step II facet category on a sliding scale, so you might be really strong on one facet and that balances out being strong on a facet in the opposite direction, etc. For example, in the Judging-Perceiving facets, you might fall strongly into Pressure-Prompted, but overall you have more "points" falling into systematic, planful, and methodical, making you a J with some P facets, but still a J.

Basically, that is the purpose of the Step II MBTI tests. They explain why there are often strong variations within many people of the same type. I myself also fall into the pressure-prompted facet, as I tend to procrastinate things and then blow through them all at once. The pressure of having to get things done before it's too late pushes me to get more done than I otherwise would if I just pecked away at things in a timely fashion. My end product is hurried, but even better than what I produce when I pace myself. If I pace myself, then I tend to lose interest or my mind drifts and I just can't stay focused, for example.

That makes me feel better. I suddenly started checking to see if I was INTP instead of INTJ
 
Abraxas nice effort. Although I'd have to say in the future you could just scan the book and then use something like OneNote recognize the text. Then all you'd really have to do is format text and proof-read.

Too late now I know lol, but it'll save you a lot of typing ;)
 
Holy shit, if this is accurate I'm totally an INTP.
*Name change* lol

I like a game plan to follow but I hate having to do everything by the book it's so freaking monotonous and boring. I definitely procrastinate and do my best work under pressure as well. Definitely recognized more of myself in the perceiving.

Hot, I'm like Einstein now.
 
Discussion starter · #27 ·
I like a game plan to follow but I hate having to do everything by the book it's so freaking monotonous and boring.
Don't jump the gun too quickly.

Think about it a bit and then decide later. Jumping to conclusions is actually more of a judging thing, and an intuitive thing. You want closure, so you just accept your hunch and go with it. Perceptive types tend to leave decisions open longer, and don't want to finalize things until they really have to. Things are left undecided, on the assumption that something might turn up that they don't want to miss.

I went through this phase myself. I thought I was an INTP, an ENTP, an ENTJ, and even an INFJ for awhile.

And there's a difference between doing everything by the book and writing the book yourself. The point is that you develop a methodology. Si-Te types might look for a set of instructions and just follow it to the letter. Ni-Te types would probably start with a set of instructions, but then modify the instructions to suit their own theories and intuitions - in effect, "improving" the method. This is the subjective side of themselves, their introverted intuition, influencing their extraverted thinking.

A true perceptive type would probably not even bother to look anything up. They'd start with their own theory from scratch and "make it work". Instead of trying to improve, change, alter, or modify existing material and methods, they will come at something from their own angle completely, and they usually don't bother developing a long-term method or a strategy. They "take things as they come", and shoot from the hip. INTP's see possibilities in the external world, so something has to exist there outside of them for them to work with objectively. But the idea forming and the planning happens subjectively, so they abhor input or "help" from outside. They're very independent - a characteristic easily confused with INTJs, who are also very independent. In fact, I'd say that both INTPs and INTJs are probably the two most independent of all the types, as they baulk social convention and conventional thought.

Both INTPs and INTJs are intuitive types, so do remember that both types dislike conventional ways of doing things. The approach is simply from different angles. INTPs will start from scratch and make things up as they go along. INTJs will begin with what is already there, and fix it if it is broken, or make it work better if it already works. In the end, you'll get something new and original both ways - they are just different approaches.

Also, thanks for the advice, but unfortunately I don't own a scanner.
 
Don't jump the gun too quickly.

Think about it a bit and then decide later. Jumping to conclusions is actually more of a judging thing, and an intuitive thing. You want closure, so you just accept your hunch and go with it. Perceptive types tend to leave decisions open longer, and don't want to finalize things until they really have to. Things are left undecided, on the assumption that something might turn up that they don't want to miss.

I went through this phase myself. I thought I was an INTP, an ENTP, an ENTJ, and even an INFJ for awhile.

And there's a difference between doing everything by the book and writing the book yourself. The point is that you develop a methodology. Si-Te types might look for a set of instructions and just follow it to the letter. Ni-Te types would probably start with a set of instructions, but then modify the instructions to suit their own theories and intuitions - in effect, "improving" the method. This is the subjective side of themselves, their introverted intuition, influencing their extraverted thinking.

A true perceptive type would probably not even bother to look anything up. They'd start with their own theory from scratch and "make it work". Instead of trying to improve, change, alter, or modify existing material and methods, they will come at something from their own angle completely, and they usually don't bother developing a long-term method or a strategy. They "take things as they come", and shoot from the hip. INTP's see possibilities in the external world, so something has to exist there outside of them for them to work with objectively. But the idea forming and the planning happens subjectively, so they abhor input or "help" from outside. They're very independent - a characteristic easily confused with INTJs, who are also very independent. In fact, I'd say that both INTPs and INTJs are probably the two most independent of all the types, as they baulk social convention and conventional thought.

Both INTPs and INTJs are intuitive types, so do remember that both types dislike conventional ways of doing things. The approach is simply from different angles. INTPs will start from scratch and make things up as they go along. INTJs will begin with what is already there, and fix it if it is broken, or make it work better if it already works. In the end, you'll get something new and original both ways - they are just different approaches.

Also, thanks for the advice, but unfortunately I don't own a scanner.
I'm torn lol.

I would like a conclusion for sure. I thought I had one already but I guess it's not as strong as I thought.
I'd definitely choose trying to modify a system over trying to create a new one from scratch... unless I felt like I already had a good foundation of different systems...but then I guess that's not really new is it? lol

Long term method/strategy... I can't say I always have one. I have an idea that I'll want to achieve but it doesn't always have this step by step plan. Like I said before I'll put things off a lot of times and that has a lot to do with not always having a specific plan unless there is external pressure, like someone else sets a deadline for me. I don't usually like setting my own deadlines on things. When I do I abide by them for the most part but many times I'll set it and let the date pass lol.

I have a coach and I've found that since he doesn't give me hard deadlines I tend not to do anything because I deem it unimportant if he didn't put a deadline on it. And I think the fact that I have a coach shows that I seek outside help. But then again it's about learning a system, ultimately I'd like to tweek it and make it better but first thing is first.

But the whole thing about going to work and feeling like routine is something I can't stand, that I like anticipating surprises... that's true. That's why I chose a field where I worked with people, you never know what you're going to get. There is a loose system of analysis that is dependent on complaint and the care for people is not a step by step sort of deal.

The biggest thing is I thought Ni had to do with drawing conclusions and narrowing down possibilities. I do that all the time, but now I am not so sure that's a strong generalization.
 
Discussion starter · #29 ·
I'm torn lol.

I would like a conclusion for sure. I thought I had one already but I guess it's not as strong as I thought.
I'd definitely choose trying to modify a system over trying to create a new one from scratch... unless I felt like I already had a good foundation of different systems...but then I guess that's not really new is it? lol

Long term method/strategy... I can't say I always have one. I have an idea that I'll want to achieve but it doesn't always have this step by step plan. Like I said before I'll put things off a lot of times and that has a lot to do with not always having a specific plan unless there is external pressure, like someone else sets a deadline for me. I don't usually like setting my own deadlines on things. When I do I abide by them for the most part but many times I'll set it and let the date pass lol.

I have a coach and I've found that since he doesn't give me hard deadlines I tend not to do anything because I deem it unimportant if he didn't put a deadline on it. And I think the fact that I have a coach shows that I seek outside help. But then again it's about learning a system, ultimately I'd like to tweek it and make it better but first thing is first.

But the whole thing about going to work and feeling like routine is something I can't stand, that I like anticipating surprises... that's true. That's why I chose a field where I worked with people, you never know what you're going to get. There is a loose system of analysis that is dependent on complaint and the care for people is not a step by step sort of deal.

The biggest thing is I thought Ni had to do with drawing conclusions and narrowing down possibilities. I do that all the time, but now I am not so sure that's a strong generalization.
The dislike of routine comes from intuition, mainly. Intuitive types abhor repetition and seek out the new and inspirational. With subjective intuition, inspiration comes from within, from your inner world of fantasies and images. With objective intuition, it comes from the world around you, from the objects in your environment, their properties, and so forth.

It is really very obvious when a person is inspired by the things around them, or when they derive their inspiration from what goes on inside them.

Ni doesn't draw conclusions because it is not a judging function. It simply alters the way that your extraverted thinking draws conclusions. Functions always operate in pairs. Jung taught that a perceiving function always pairs with a judging function - so this would imply that you are conscious of them in tandem, simultaneously. They combine for form the 16 MBTI types. Further study was done later to give legitimacy to the tertiary and inferior functions - but the original work by Myers Briggs herself only focused on the dominant and auxiliary functions, and a set of 16 types can be derived from just that much, which Jung himself was very clear about - while on the other hand, he was not very clear about the arrangement of the tertiary and inferior functions.

But we don't need to even consider the tertiary and inferior functions when trying to figure out which type we are. In fact, one should not be paying attention to them until they have their type figured out already, because the dominant and auxiliary functions are so obvious and easy to spot.

With Ni-Te, even though your perception is oriented inward at what is happening inside your subconscious, you are always thinking objectively about what you are seeing, and your decisions about it are oriented by the objective factor. That is to say, what you come to believe about whatever you are perceiving inside of you is based upon a decision that rests completely upon the state of the external world you exist within; it is empirical, and can be validated via methods like falsification and experimentation. Objectivity simply means the external world of physical reality, the world of objects and things. When your thinking is extraverted, it is oriented predominantly by the objective factor. This does not mean, however, that one never engages in subjective thinking even though they are an extraverted thinker. The fact that one uses Ni-Te predominantly is only meant to imply that in their thinking the objective factor is preferred, but the preference exists in degree and is not black and white - it is not a matter of being purely one or the other. One might be closer to balanced, or more extreme, in various degrees. The overall pattern in which the thinking manifests itself depends on more than what Jung and MBTI alone have the capacity to explain. One might be an extraverted thinker, but at certain times and in certain conditions engage in introverted thinking, but overall they remain an extraverted thinker by preference, for example.

These are very important points to consider that are so easily overlooked. MBTI is really not so black-and-white, but shades-of-grey. The boundaries between types begins to break down once you start to study this stuff deeply and really understand how it all works. The concept of J versus P is a false dichotomy. The distinction is a sweeping generalization. In the same way that black and white do not really exist, neither does introversion and extraversion. These concepts are more like abstract directions or abstract limits meant merely to give one a sense of distinction between one and the other, without meaning to imply that one is purely one or the other. Even if, for example, one tended towards extreme introversion most of the time, one might act very extraverted in certain contexts, and in different degrees under different conditions. This is very well beyond the realm of MBTI, as I've said already.

The whole purpose of this system, is not to give you a clear-cut self-image and an understanding of yourself that is cut out of stone. It is merely a signpost pointing the direction to a destination that you can never actually reach. Self-discovery is an endless journey. I'm interjecting my own opinion here now, but I don't think anyone ever really completes that journey and fully discovers themselves. It is like saying one can attain immortality or count to infinity. The "self" is finite, but we exist in a state of transition from one absurdity to the next, from one purpose to the next, from one meaning to the next, from one truth to the next. Sometimes it is cyclic, and sometimes there are moments without precedent. The self and the world is a fractal that goes on forever.
 
The dislike of routine comes from intuition, mainly. Intuitive types abhor repetition and seek out the new and inspirational. With subjective intuition, inspiration comes from within, from your inner world of fantasies and images. With objective intuition, it comes from the world around you, from the objects in your environment, their properties, and so forth.

It is really very obvious when a person is inspired by the things around them, or when they derive their inspiration from what goes on inside them.

Ni doesn't draw conclusions because it is not a judging function. It simply alters the way that your extraverted thinking draws conclusions. Functions always operate in pairs. Jung taught that a perceiving function always pairs with a judging function - so this would imply that you are conscious of them in tandem, simultaneously. They combine for form the 16 MBTI types. Further study was done later to give legitimacy to the tertiary and inferior functions - but the original work by Myers Briggs herself only focused on the dominant and auxiliary functions, and a set of 16 types can be derived from just that much, which Jung himself was very clear about - while on the other hand, he was not very clear about the arrangement of the tertiary and inferior functions.

But we don't need to even consider the tertiary and inferior functions when trying to figure out which type we are. In fact, one should not be paying attention to them until they have their type figured out already, because the dominant and auxiliary functions are so obvious and easy to spot.

With Ni-Te, even though your perception is oriented inward at what is happening inside your subconscious, you are always thinking objectively about what you are seeing, and your decisions about it are oriented by the objective factor. That is to say, what you come to believe about whatever you are perceiving inside of you is based upon a decision that rests completely upon the state of the external world you exist within; it is empirical, and can be validated via methods like falsification and experimentation. Objectivity simply means the external world of physical reality, the world of objects and things. When your thinking is extraverted, it is oriented predominantly by the objective factor. This does not mean, however, that one never engages in subjective thinking even though they are an extraverted thinker. The fact that one uses Ni-Te predominantly is only meant to imply that in their thinking the objective factor is preferred, but the preference exists in degree and is not black and white - it is not a matter of being purely one or the other. One might be closer to balanced, or more extreme, in various degrees. The overall pattern in which the thinking manifests itself depends on more than what Jung and MBTI alone have the capacity to explain. One might be an extraverted thinker, but at certain times and in certain conditions engage in introverted thinking, but overall they remain an extraverted thinker by preference, for example.

These are very important points to consider that are so easily overlooked. MBTI is really not so black-and-white, but shades-of-grey. The boundaries between types begins to break down once you start to study this stuff deeply and really understand how it all works. The concept of J versus P is a false dichotomy. The distinction is a sweeping generalization. In the same way that black and white do not really exist, neither does introversion and extraversion. These concepts are more like abstract directions or abstract limits meant merely to give one a sense of distinction between one and the other, without meaning to imply that one is purely one or the other. Even if, for example, one tended towards extreme introversion most of the time, one might act very extraverted in certain contexts, and in different degrees under different conditions. This is very well beyond the realm of MBTI, as I've said already.

The whole purpose of this system, is not to give you a clear-cut self-image and an understanding of yourself that is cut out of stone. It is merely a signpost pointing the direction to a destination that you can never actually reach. Self-discovery is an endless journey. I'm interjecting my own opinion here now, but I don't think anyone ever really completes that journey and fully discovers themselves. It is like saying one can attain immortality or count to infinity. The "self" is finite, but we exist in a state of transition from one absurdity to the next, from one purpose to the next, from one meaning to the next, from one truth to the next. Sometimes it is cyclic, and sometimes there are moments without precedent. The self and the world is a fractal that goes on forever.
Well here's what I think about each of the things mentioned.

1) Systemic/Casual - I appreciate systems however I don't really like to schedule my tasks. I like systems with flexibility. I don't feel like I really use my time efficiently. When I get stressed I usually focus more. I kind of like "wasting time" before I do something. It kind of gives me time to prep... or motivate myself to do something, let the anxiety build, etc. I don't like too much order because it makes me feel constrained. I like surprises here and there but that doesn't mean I like chaos either. I can't say I like when people drop a ton of work on me with short deadlines at all. I like new challenges but I like ample time to prep myself and then get it done (probably at the last minute haha) but I do like someone to give me a deadline. I do like to postpone important decisions to consider all the angles. And this is very true of me: "They are able to make a decision before they are ready if circumstances require this, but they may change it if new information becomes available later. On the other hand, when they have reached a decision after thoroughly weighing the issues involved, they may be quite reluctant to change it later. This is because they have invested so much effort in making the decision the first time." It's pretty close for me on this one because I like systems but it's usually my own system that makes sense to me and my thought process but then again the system can change a lot based on new information.

2) Planful/Open Ended - This one is clearly on the open ended side. I do like to know about events in advance but I don't commit to them unless I think they are really important or fun and there is likely nothing that can top it. If it's something that doesn't really seem like it'd be super great I will pretty much say "we'll see what happens" lol. I almost never don't attend something because I had planned something else before and was told too late, if the new thing seemed more fun I'll simply change plans. Also don't feel like I have long range plans. I have long range ideas but not a step by step process of what it takes to get there. Also what I feel like doing largely depends on my mood. If I feel like I need to get out then I might cancel on someone who just wants to hang out and vice versa if I feel like I need to relax and someone wants me to go out. Yet another reason I don't like firm plans. But I do appreciate when people tell me their plans ahead of time to gauge what might be more fun.

3) Starting Early/Pressure Prompted - I am pressure prompted so much it's not even funny, I do it to myself all the time. I recognize that starting early would be the best approach for all the reasons mentioned. If I messed up last time and didn't do a good job on a similar task then I'll start earlier, just early enough to get it done just in time. And I do prefer to know my assignments with plenty of time. I also do care if I miss deadlines that others gave me, if it came from myself I usually don't care as much. It's about the external pressure. I do like having time to spare after completing a task, it's a nice feeling. Like I said these are all great when they happen lol. But I do focus better when time is of the essence. If I don't have a deadline someone else gave me I'll likely do something else that seems more interesting. I hate the stress but I like it? I do "work inside my head" before I tackle a task, which is why I do like being informed of a task a head of time... and I do feel like I am acquiring the energy needed to do the task. If I am stressed about something I fixate on it more and better ideas come out. I don't get mad if I finished a task too early though, I feel glad that it was easier then I anticipated. However sometimes if I am doing a task and it seems like it's easy as I am doing it. I'll just stop doing it and do something else because it's not a big deal and I don't need to stress about it lol. Then I might start back on it just in time to get it finished.

4) Scheduled/Spontaneous - I do like daily schedules but it's not down the the minute. For instance I'll say I want to go workout today I should go during the day. And I will go from 1-5 usually. Also sometimes I say that and I go meh I'll go tomorrow instead so I'll change the entire day which could affect how I work out the entire week. I can't say I like when I have something planned and I get interrupted by something else I have to do unless it's fun...then I don't care and I am glad I get to do something new. I don't really have much of a daily ritual. I wake at different times, go to sleep at different times, shower at different times, make food at different times. But I do have a bit of a schedule.. eat 5 times a day for example. However my schedule always changes... today I want to go and eat 4 times a week for example, I get bored of routine easy. I always change little things here and there. Unless it's forced upon me, like i have wake at 7:10 every morning to go the school on time. But having a ritual seems boring after a while. I like trying new rituals out. I like freedom to get something that interests me out of the way first, even if it isn't very productive lol. I love my annual celebrations though, so that's not true of me at all... ex: thanksgiving, Christmas.

5) Methodical/Emergent - When I am highly stressed about a task I do find myself organizing things to get ready to really really "work" I have found during this organization I am talking to myself about what I need to get done and sort of stressing myself out more because I know I need to cut the shit and get it done, sometimes I am mad at myself for letting it get so late before I started doing it. Basically I am prepping myself to work hard. When I am super stressed I might make lists of what I need to do systemically. Usually I make lists of things to do and I'll do then in no order what so ever. If it's something very important I can say that I get pretty methodical. However the rest of the time I am more emergent. My approach right after I finished my chiro degree has been much more of a emergent process. I am kind of letting things happen as they happen. I don't have this pressure or system right now. I am letting things come to me. I don't have a lot of structure at all right now. So for this one it's close I can say I use both a lot.

Overall I say 2 of these traits are pretty close but the other 3 are a lot more on the INTP side.
 
Discussion starter · #31 ·
@INTJ the DC, well if you feel strongly about those facets, then you could definitely be an INTP.

The only other thing I'd say you really ought to look into is the cognitive functions.

You should read Jung's description of introverted thinking, and then read his description of the introverted thinking type, and see if that seems like a good fit. If it sounds more like yourself than his description of the introverted intuitive type, then you're probably an INTP.

To be honest, I could be an INTP myself. I'm right on the borderline with J/P, sometimes I can be really organized, but most of the time I'm not, and I can see myself in both the introverted thinking type and the introverted intuitive type - so I know how you feel.

Here's a link to Jung's description of introverted thinking:

Psychological Types - Wikisocion


And you might want to check the thread I made with the videos of Jung being interviewed. He gives a description of an introverted intuitive type person and explains the difference between introverted intuition and extraverted intuition.

http://personalitycafe.com/intj-forum-scientists/106596-videos-carl-g-jung.html

Just watch the second video "Jung On Film" starting at 48 minutes in.
 
@INTJ the DC, well if you feel strongly about those facets, then you could definitely be an INTP.

The only other thing I'd say you really ought to look into is the cognitive functions.

You should read Jung's description of introverted thinking, and then read his description of the introverted thinking type, and see if that seems like a good fit. If it sounds more like yourself than his description of the introverted intuitive type, then you're probably an INTP.

To be honest, I could be an INTP myself. I'm right on the borderline with J/P, sometimes I can be really organized, but most of the time I'm not, and I can see myself in both the introverted thinking type and the introverted intuitive type - so I know how you feel.

Here's a link to Jung's description of introverted thinking:

Psychological Types - Wikisocion


And you might want to check the thread I made with the videos of Jung being interviewed. He gives a description of an introverted intuitive type person and explains the difference between introverted intuition and extraverted intuition.

http://personalitycafe.com/intj-forum-scientists/106596-videos-carl-g-jung.html

Just watch the second video "Jung On Film" starting at 48 minutes in.
Personality Junkie | INTP

It really did fit me to a T, I am pretty confident that I am an INTP now.
I always felt like I had a poor grasp of J vs P so your post helped clarify it a lot, thanks.
There is just a element of uncertainty, openness, and lack of focus that is not consistent with an INTJ.
Ironic name is ironic ;)
 
Discussion starter · #33 ·
Personality Junkie | INTP

It really did fit me to a T, I am pretty confident that I am an INTP now.
I always felt like I had a poor grasp of J vs P so your post helped clarify it a lot, thanks.
There is just a element of uncertainty, openness, and lack of focus that is not consistent with an INTJ.
Ironic name is ironic ;)
I wish you luck on your quest.

If you should decide that you were wrong and that you are actually an INTJ after-all, you wouldn't be the first or the last to do so.

I've been there and done that.
 
I wish you luck on your quest.

If you should decide that you were wrong and that you are actually an INTJ after-all, you wouldn't be the first or the last to do so.

I've been there and done that.
Thanks. The INTJ seems like the type that I would aspire to be like maybe that's why I tested like that.

As much as I'd like to think of myself as systematic and able to focus on getting tasks done, the truth is far from that.
I think I recognize that having that approach would be most productive however my natural state is one of a lot more indecision and hypothesizing about various things that could happen while negating to put action into place.

But frankly the NI was always a bit of a mystery to me and I always kind of thought my main function was thinking internally, but I just never tested as a "P" so I figured I must of thought wrong.

I accepted a pretty simple explanation of the more confusing cognitive functions (like intuition) but I can't say they made immediate sense. Some things that I did understand always bothered me like when I'd hear INTJs had no sense of their what was going on with their own bodies...that never made sense to me and now it's kind of explained lol. Even things like thinking externally I was like how do you do that? And the explanation I understood was: you think to solve problems to apply logic to the real world, I was like ok I do that lol.

The personalityjunkie website did a pretty good job explaining the differences IMO and now I have a better base of knowledge to form a better opinion then I did before.

Time will tell, but for now... it feels right, haha.
 
First off, this is a great resource. I really respect that you took the time to type all this up. Secondly, I think I have quite a few facets that deviate from the INTJ norm. Bolded for ease of reading. Quite a few of the J-P facets are closer to the median than to either extreme. I'm not convinced that suddenly alters my type but it makes me wonder if this J-P thing is a bit of a made up thing for the career testing demographic.


Receiving
Expressive
Intimate
Reflective
Quiet
Abstract
Imaginative
Conceptual
Theoretical
Original
Logical
Reasonable
Questioning
Critical
Tough
Systematic
Open-Ended (barely)
Pressure-Prompted
Scheduled (Of my own devising)
Methodical (My methods)
 
First off, this is a great resource. I really respect that you took the time to type all this up. Secondly, I think I have quite a few facets that deviate from the INTJ norm. Bolded for ease of reading. Quite a few of the J-P facets are closer to the median than to either extreme. I'm not convinced that suddenly alters my type but it makes me wonder if this J-P thing is a bit of a made up thing for the career testing demographic.


Receiving
Expressive
Intimate
Reflective
Quiet
Abstract
Imaginative
Conceptual
Theoretical
Original
Logical
Reasonable
Questioning
Critical
Tough
Systematic
Open-Ended (barely)
Pressure-Prompted
Scheduled (Of my own devising)
Methodical (My methods)
Check out the link I posted to personalityjunkie.
I honestly think there are a couple INTJs on here who are INTPs.
There are a couple INTJs on here that made me question my INTJ-ness but since I had other "INTJs" who reminded me of myself I thought we were just a different subtype or something. But now I am thinking we are just mistyped.

The interesting thing the link I posted is that INTP's testing as a type 3 ennegram is sort of expected lol.
 
Of course there are mistypes on here. Particularly along the S/N divide and also J/P. That's expected with personality sorting systems. Doesn't mean it's you or them. (Sidenote: Let's not regress to that kind of mentality on here).

Personally, I can't see the sense in following someone else's schedule unless it makes sense and I have no better option. That where I usually dig in my heels. I also prefer free time to be free, strange huh?

Check out the link I posted to personalityjunkie.
I checked it out and boy do I disagree on a lot of those points.
Namely:

  • INTPs tend to conceal some of their most dominant personality features, namely, their highly cerebral, rational side.
  • Others may only encounter INTPs’ inner world through encounters with their work, such as by reading something they have written. This may explain why many INTPs are attracted to writing, which provides a forum for expressing themselves more fully and precisely. (I use writing far more often to vent emotions safely and creatively)
  • They often avoid eye contact, as though the looming gaze of their interlocutor may somehow harm them or render them incapable of communicating.
  • INTPs experience enough difficulty in putting words to the contents of their extremely complex minds.
 
Of course there are mistypes on here. Particularly along the S/N divide and also J/P. That's expected with personality sorting systems. Doesn't mean it's you or them. (Sidenote: Let's not regress to that kind of mentality on here).

Personally, I can't see the sense in following someone else's schedule unless it makes sense and I have no better option. That where I usually dig in my heels. I also prefer free time to be free, strange huh?



I checked it out and boy do I disagree on a lot of those points.
Namely:

  • INTPs tend to conceal some of their most dominant personality features, namely, their highly cerebral, rational side.
  • Others may only encounter INTPs’ inner world through encounters with their work, such as by reading something they have written. This may explain why many INTPs are attracted to writing, which provides a forum for expressing themselves more fully and precisely. (I use writing far more often to vent emotions safely and creatively)
  • They often avoid eye contact, as though the looming gaze of their interlocutor may somehow harm them or render them incapable of communicating.
  • INTPs experience enough difficulty in putting words to the contents of their extremely complex minds.
Cool that you checked it out. I noticed your quotes were all from the first page. FYI there are three, not sure if you noticed.
 
21 - 40 of 54 Posts