# What's my type? I'm starting over from scratch....



## NK94 (Dec 10, 2011)

So I saw someone else had done this, and it seemed like a pretty smart idea to me. I posted another thread a little bit ago, but I think that I gave everyone a bias into thinking I was in a certain type. 

I know it's long, but please help me with this! I can't stop thinking about it... 

1) What aspect of your personality made you unsure of your type?

I constantly feel like I'm switching types depending on my mood, and that on quizzes I'm answering questions based on how I wish I was, not on how I actually am, so I think an external opinion is needed. 

2) What do you yearn for in life? Why?

I want to be successful. I want people to look up to me, and think "how can I become like that?". I do want to have a lot of money, but not for myself (well, I mean partly for myself, I like nice things, but that's not the main reason)-- one of my dreams is to be able to build my parents their dream house. I also really want to be able to make big donations to charities, and build schools in Africa, and I guess just make a dent in the world. I'm scared to death of being forgotten....

3) Think about a time where you felt like you were at your finest. Tell us what made you feel that way.

I mean... it's hard to think of a particular moment. Some days, if I'm just feeling really confident with myself, I'm like a new person. I'll approach everyone I see, I don't get annoyed with hardly anyone, and (okay, this is going to sound REALLY sappy) but sometimes everything just seems so beautiful to me that I want to cry. I can't believe I just said that....but yes, that's when I feel my best.

4) What makes you feel inferior?

Being called stupid, being proved wrong... I think the worst is when I'll share something really special with someone, like a thought that I've been obsessing over and that I have never told anyone before, and they just blow me off. That just really hurts me. 

5) What tends to weigh on your decisions? (Do you think about people, pro-cons, how you feel about it, etc.)

A little bit of everything. I'm not really concerned about what is considered "cool" at the moment, but I try to be as accommodating to people as I can without going out of my way. But I think overall, I tend to go with how I feel about it.

6) When working on a project what is normally your emphasis? Do you like to have control of the outcome?

I like to execute, and be more of the overseer. I tend to get bored easily, so I kind of hop from one part to the next, moving things around and fixing little details someone else missed. I'm really awful at coming up with the main idea. I tend to become the leader of groups, and I like to know what everyone's doing. 

7) Describe us a time where you had a lot of fun. How is your memory of it? 

I have the most fun with my family. I have a few really close friends, but honestly, if my family announced we were moving across the country, I wouldn't be devastated to leave them. I'd be more scared of finding new friends. Don't get me wrong, I really like my friends a lot, and I'd do anything for them, but I'm just...not that attached to them. 

8) When you want to learn something new, what feels more natural for you? (Are you more prone to be hands on, to theorize, to memorize, etc)

HANDS ON, hands on, hands on.... completely. If that's not an option, I like to systematically organize things. Like with math, I make study sheets before tests, and organize them by having a topic, and then a list of how I should solve it in numerical order, such as: 1. Multiply, 2. Solve for X.... you get the picture. Listening is one of my biggest problems. I just can't take in what someone is saying unless I can read the words (just see them) at the same time. For definitions, I tend to make pneumonic devices, and create stories for them. 

9) How organized do you to think of yourself as?

Eh....with some things. My papers at school are a complete mess. I tend to just stick them wherever convenient, although I've never had a problem finding any of them. My room, on the other hand, is so neat it's slightly OCD. 

10) How do you judge new ideas? You try to understand the principles behind it to see if they make sense or do you look for information that supports it?

I try to understand the principles behind it. I wonder WHY it's needed, and if it works. Not if it's wrong. 

11) You find harmony by making sure everyone is doing fine and belonging to a given group or by making sure that you follow what you believe and being yourself?

A bit of both, I suppose. I have a habit of making friends with people I feel bad for, even if they drive me crazy. 

12) Are you the kind that thinks before speaking or do you speak before thinking? Do you prefer one-on-one communication or group discussions?

Think before speaking to the point that I can't say it anymore because it's too late. But around my close friends and family, I tend to speak before thinking. It's never got me in too much trouble though. I definitely prefer one-on-one, although if it's an interesting topic I can do group discussions as well. If it's not, I'm absolutely miserable. 

13) Do you jump into action right away or do you like to know where are you jumping before leaping? Does action speaks more than words?

Definitely like knowing where I'm jumping, although I wish I didn't. Hah, it's so bad that one time I decided to be spontaneous and bought plane tickets to Jazz Fest in New Orleans for the next day, and after I booked them I just broke down in tears because I just HAVE to be able to plan everything out systematically in my head for weeks in advance. Ended up being fun though...Hate surprise parties. 

14) It's Saturday. You're at home, and your favorite show is about to start. Your friends call you for a night out. What will you do?

I'd like to say I'd go with my friend....but I wouldn't. Well, no, that's not entirely true: if I had a long day, I'm for sure not going. But if it's a close friend, and I feel like I've had an unproductive day, I'll go. 

15) How do you act when you're stressed out?

When I'm stressed, I get really impatient. I suddenly become very, very productive, and have no tolerance for inefficiency or laziness. I actually get a lot done when I'm stressed, but everyone around me hates me a little I think. 

16) What makes you dislike the personalities of some people?

People who only care about popularity, and will do anything to anyone to get there; People who won't break ANY rules, even if it makes sense to and it isn't hurting anyone else (okay, I'm definitely not a rule-breaker, but some people will follow everything to a T, even if it's unnecessary); People who knowingly take advantage of other people; People who won't even consider that they're wrong sometimes. I constantly am getting in fights with this one girl, and you can tell when she figures out I'm right: she just says "Whatever" very sassily, instead of owning up and acknowledging I'm right. I have the tendency to think I'M always right, but when I'm not, I'll give it to the other person and let them know that I understand they're right now; People who enjoy intimidating others; People who are greedy; People who are narrow-minded (racists, sexists, etc.); People who preach religion with obnoxious signs on the streets (do you HONESTLY think that works?! Like I'm going to see their sign and say, "You know what? Maybe I will try this whole 'religion' thing. Guy on the corner says it works...."); People who are fake; People who couldn't survive on their own, because they rely so heavily on others to do things for them

17) Is there anything you really like talking about with other people?

Decisions I'm having a tough time making, and basically anything I'm interested in. I really HATE small talk, it drives me crazy. 

18) What kind of things do pay the least attention to in your life

I don't know why, but I'm having a tough time answering this. I suppose my school work.... although I do strive to get As, but only for the sole reason of getting into a good college. I do the least work I can possibly do to get at least a B. I'm that kid who does all their homework the period before it's due. 

19) How do your friends perceive you? What is wrong about their perception? What would your friends never say about your personality ?

1. They know I'm guarded from other people, and that it takes me a painfully long time to warm up to people; Logical, hate inefficiency, a little crazy; and they call me a "Jeckel and Hyde" because they say when I'm in a good mood, I'm really nice, and when I'm in a bad mood, I can be really snappy and mean. There's no in between, according to them. And they say I get bored easily.
2. I don't think I'm quite as logical as they think I am. Jeckel and Hyde thing is completely true though.
3.Unstable, unreliable...

20) You got a whole day to do whatever you like. What kind of activities do you feel like doing?

Wake up early, run a few miles, eat breakfast at a local place, do a little shopping (I never really buy anything, I just like to look around cool stores. It just gives me ideas about things and I feel like I get some creativity from it), go to the beach/boating, and then a family dinner.

Alright, that's it! Sorry again that it's so long, thanks so much for reading it, I really appreciate it. Please type me, I'm so confused about all of this!


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

My guess is either ISFP (maybe ESFP with really strong Te). 

I think the reason most of us didn't catch Te in your earlier postings is because if its in the inferior like in IFPs you might not own up to when just casually describing yourself, but here it comes through almost like you can't control having to organize and be categorical. Also becoming more productive when you get stressed is usually a sign of inferior Te too. 

http://personalitycafe.com/isfp-articles/76773-recognizing-inferior-function-isfps.html

If you really do identify with Si, you're probably an ISTJ, but because of your sensitivity to people who seem harsh, or illogical, or uncaring of the more humane sides of life it makes me believe you have thinking in the inferior positions. At first I wanted to say ENFJ, but the more I read it, the less you sound like a Fe-dom and more like a very sure of yourself ISFP. I also don't seem to get any intuition from you, everything seems to happen in real-time when you describe yourself. 

Si-types like ISxJs are often past oriented and point to experiences they've had and how the felt in the moment. As opposed to just saying "I hate it when" its more like "well this one time x happened and it made me feel like y." You seem to be more present and future oriented.

@fourtines is an ISFP who might be able to help a little further.


----------



## NK94 (Dec 10, 2011)

LiquidLight said:


> My guess is either ISFP (maybe ESFP with really strong Te).
> 
> I think the reason most of us didn't catch Te in your earlier postings is because if its in the inferior like in IFPs you might not own up to when just casually describing yourself, but here it comes through almost like you can't control having to organize and be categorical. Also becoming more productive when you get stressed is usually a sign of inferior Te too.
> 
> ...


Alright, this is going to sound really stupid, but I still haven't exactly picked up on what yall mean by saying Te... Does that mean my F and T are pretty equal? Could you just explain the "maybe ESFP with a really strong Te"?

And thanks so much for answering me, you've really helped out a lot.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

NK94 said:


> Alright, this is going to sound really stupid, but I still haven't exactly picked up on what yall mean by saying Te... Does that mean my F and T are pretty equal? Could you just explain the "maybe ESFP with a really strong Te"?
> 
> And thanks so much for answering me, you've really helped out a lot.


Not stupid at all. Here is a definition of Extraverted Thinking (which is written as Te)



> Te, or extroverted Thinking, is dominant for ExTJ, secondary for IxTJ, tertiary for ExFP and inferior for IxFP.
> 
> It's an attitude that encourages an external, objective standard when dealing with logic, impersonal facts and ideas. Te, when arguing, will tend to cite appeals to authority and other widely accepted, externally focused evidence; i.e., citing books or prominent authors/studies, or any widely accepted consensus among the external world of people who study the topic in question. "The experts all agree that this is the case" is a very Te-oriented argument, because it relies on external standards and context for its evaluation of logical decisions.
> 
> ...


In the link I provided it talks about how Te manifests itself in ISFP and INFPs. (ISFJ does not have Te, but ISTJ does).


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

NK94 said:


> So I saw someone else had done this, and it seemed like a pretty smart idea to me. I posted another thread a little bit ago, but I think that I gave everyone a bias into thinking I was in a certain type.
> 
> I know it's long, but please help me with this! I can't stop thinking about it...
> 
> ...


Heh, you sound like an FP already.



> 2) What do you yearn for in life? Why?
> 
> I want to be successful. I want people to look up to me, and think "how can I become like that?". I do want to have a lot of money, but not for myself (well, I mean partly for myself, I like nice things, but that's not the main reason)-- one of my dreams is to be able to build my parents their dream house. I also really want to be able to make big donations to charities, and build schools in Africa, and I guess just make a dent in the world. I'm scared to death of being forgotten....


Sounds like an Fe or Fi motivation to obtain wealth.



> 3) Think about a time where you felt like you were at your finest. Tell us what made you feel that way.
> 
> I mean... it's hard to think of a particular moment. Some days, if I'm just feeling really confident with myself, I'm like a new person. I'll approach everyone I see, I don't get annoyed with hardly anyone, and (okay, this is going to sound REALLY sappy) but sometimes everything just seems so beautiful to me that I want to cry. I can't believe I just said that....but yes, that's when I feel my best.


Again you sound like an FP to me. 



> 4) What makes you feel inferior?
> 
> Being called stupid, being proved wrong... I think the worst is when I'll share something really special with someone, like a thought that I've been obsessing over and that I have never told anyone before, and they just blow me off. That just really hurts me.


Probably inferior (or tertiary) Te. I really hate being bullied about how stupid some types think I might be, and often it's NTJs who make me feel this way, because I know I'm not stupid at all, but fairly well educated and constantly learning. FPs can be really touchy about their Te, because Te wants to be "correct" and especially in an inferior position it can make you feel like you're never good enough in that area. But also in the tertiary it's your "childlike" function, so you may still feel like more "adult" users of Te are making you feel like a child when you use Te around them, which can make you upset as an Fi dom/aux.

So I'm voting pretty strong for some FP type at this juncture.



> 5) What tends to weigh on your decisions? (Do you think about people, pro-cons, how you feel about it, etc.)
> 
> A little bit of everything. I'm not really concerned about what is considered "cool" at the moment, but I try to be as accommodating to people as I can without going out of my way. But I think overall, I tend to go with how I feel about it.


Hello, Fi.



> 6) When working on a project what is normally your emphasis? Do you like to have control of the outcome?
> 
> I like to execute, and be more of the overseer. I tend to get bored easily, so I kind of hop from one part to the next, moving things around and fixing little details someone else missed. I'm really awful at coming up with the main idea. I tend to become the leader of groups, and I like to know what everyone's doing.


Hmm. Maybe ESFP. You don't come up with the initial idea (I used to feel this way about my ENFJ bff that she came up with these ideas, then I took them and helped build them or fill in the blanks and used my own gifts to collaborate with her) but you fill in the "details" (Se) and want to oversee (Te). 

I was kind of like this when we had to work in groups in college, especially on projects I was interested in or cared about. I would be the "spokesperson" for the group, giving the oral presentation, or once everyone else had done their part, I would "tie it together." 



> 7) Describe us a time where you had a lot of fun. How is your memory of it?
> 
> I have the most fun with my family. I have a few really close friends, but honestly, if my family announced we were moving across the country, I wouldn't be devastated to leave them. I'd be more scared of finding new friends. Don't get me wrong, I really like my friends a lot, and I'd do anything for them, but I'm just...not that attached to them.


Hmmm. Okay. Not sure if this is type related. This does sound more ISTJ-ish, but at this point you seem to be using more Fi with a Pe function.



> 8) When you want to learn something new, what feels more natural for you? (Are you more prone to be hands on, to theorize, to memorize, etc)
> 
> HANDS ON, hands on, hands on.... completely. If that's not an option, I like to systematically organize things. Like with math, I make study sheets before tests, and organize them by having a topic, and then a list of how I should solve it in numerical order, such as: 1. Multiply, 2. Solve for X.... you get the picture. Listening is one of my biggest problems. I just can't take in what someone is saying unless I can read the words (just see them) at the same time. For definitions, I tend to make pneumonic devices, and create stories for them.


You may be an ESFP. You seem to enjoy using Se/Te a bunch.



> 9) How organized do you to think of yourself as?
> 
> Eh....with some things. My papers at school are a complete mess. I tend to just stick them wherever convenient, although I've never had a problem finding any of them. My room, on the other hand, is so neat it's slightly OCD.


Yeah, this sounds like "optional" Te which would be in the tert/inf, not one of the top two functions.



> 10) How do you judge new ideas? You try to understand the principles behind it to see if they make sense or do you look for information that supports it?
> 
> I try to understand the principles behind it. I wonder WHY it's needed, and if it works. Not if it's wrong.


Sounds like Ni supporting. I'm really going with xSFP for you at this juncture.



> 11) You find harmony by making sure everyone is doing fine and belonging to a given group or by making sure that you follow what you believe and being yourself?
> 
> A bit of both, I suppose. I have a habit of making friends with people I feel bad for, even if they drive me crazy.


lol okay...ha ha Fi again, I suppose



> 12) Are you the kind that thinks before speaking or do you speak before thinking? Do you prefer one-on-one communication or group discussions?
> 
> Think before speaking to the point that I can't say it anymore because it's too late. But around my close friends and family, I tend to speak before thinking. It's never got me in too much trouble though. I definitely prefer one-on-one, although if it's an interesting topic I can do group discussions as well. If it's not, I'm absolutely miserable.



Hmmm...ISFP maybe. I do this ...IRL I talk a lot less than I type on-line (I am a writer, so I guess this is how I express myself and learn new concepts) and I think before speaking in many situations.

But when I feel comfortable, like there are fewer consequences - such as with close friends/family, or on teh Internet - I can be totally "open mouth, insert foot" and just say whatever is on my mind.





> 13) Do you jump into action right away or do you like to know where are you jumping before leaping? Does action speaks more than words?
> 
> Definitely like knowing where I'm jumping, although I wish I didn't. Hah, it's so bad that one time I decided to be spontaneous and bought plane tickets to Jazz Fest in New Orleans for the next day, and after I booked them I just broke down in tears because I just HAVE to be able to plan everything out systematically in my head for weeks in advance. Ended up being fun though...Hate surprise parties.


Okay, weird this sounds a lot like Te. I hate for things to be overly scheduled, and I strongly balk against it, and enjoy things being "open" as long as I personally can control it and I'm not just being "dragged along" by others.

I'm back to ESFP with a ton of Te for you now.



> 14) It's Saturday. You're at home, and your favorite show is about to start. Your friends call you for a night out. What will you do?
> 
> I'd like to say I'd go with my friend....but I wouldn't. Well, no, that's not entirely true: if I had a long day, I'm for sure not going. But if it's a close friend, and I feel like I've had an unproductive day, I'll go.


I'm really having a hard time deliberating between ESFP and ISFP for you...



> 15) How do you act when you're stressed out?
> 
> When I'm stressed, I get really impatient. I suddenly become very, very productive, and have no tolerance for inefficiency or laziness. I actually get a lot done when I'm stressed, but everyone around me hates me a little I think.


SFP using Te under stress, which may point to the inferior.



> 16) What makes you dislike the personalities of some people?
> 
> People who only care about popularity, and will do anything to anyone to get there; People who won't break ANY rules, even if it makes sense to and it isn't hurting anyone else (okay, I'm definitely not a rule-breaker, but some people will follow everything to a T, even if it's unnecessary); People who knowingly take advantage of other people; People who won't even consider that they're wrong sometimes. I constantly am getting in fights with this one girl, and you can tell when she figures out I'm right: she just says "Whatever" very sassily, instead of owning up and acknowledging I'm right. I have the tendency to think I'M always right, but when I'm not, I'll give it to the other person and let them know that I understand they're right now; People who enjoy intimidating others; People who are greedy; People who are narrow-minded (racists, sexists, etc.); People who preach religion with obnoxious signs on the streets (do you HONESTLY think that works?! Like I'm going to see their sign and say, "You know what? Maybe I will try this whole 'religion' thing. Guy on the corner says it works...."); People who are fake; People who couldn't survive on their own, because they rely so heavily on others to do things for them


SFP



> 17) Is there anything you really like talking about with other people?
> 
> Decisions I'm having a tough time making, and basically anything I'm interested in. I really HATE small talk, it drives me crazy.


ISFP I guess



> 18) What kind of things do pay the least attention to in your life
> 
> I don't know why, but I'm having a tough time answering this. I suppose my school work.... although I do strive to get As, but only for the sole reason of getting into a good college. I do the least work I can possibly do to get at least a B. I'm that kid who does all their homework the period before it's due.


Hmm, dunno.



> 19) How do your friends perceive you? What is wrong about their perception? What would your friends never say about your personality ?
> 
> 1. They know I'm guarded from other people, and that it takes me a painfully long time to warm up to people; Logical, hate inefficiency, a little crazy; and they call me a "Jeckel and Hyde" because they say when I'm in a good mood, I'm really nice, and when I'm in a bad mood, I can be really snappy and mean. There's no in between, according to them. And they say I get bored easily.


I think ISFP now, but maybe you have OCD which makes you seem more Te like in some regards, when in truth it may just be OCD



> 2. I don't think I'm quite as logical as they think I am. Jeckel and Hyde thing is completely true though.
> 3.Unstable, unreliable...


lol SFP



> 20) You got a whole day to do whatever you like. What kind of activities do you feel like doing?
> 
> Wake up early, run a few miles, eat breakfast at a local place, do a little shopping (I never really buy anything, I just like to look around cool stores. It just gives me ideas about things and I feel like I get some creativity from it), go to the beach/boating, and then a family dinner.
> 
> Alright, that's it! Sorry again that it's so long, thanks so much for reading it, I really appreciate it. Please type me, I'm so confused about all of this!


I totally think you are SFP, I'm somewhat indecisive about E or I because you appear to use a ridiculous amount of Te, more than I do, I would feel suffocated by the amount of your structure...which makes me lean ESFP...but your comments about looking before you leap and hating small talk sound more like ISFP...


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

lol @fourtines. You totally just verbalized my whole thought-process when I was reading her.


----------



## NK94 (Dec 10, 2011)

fourtines said:


> Heh, you sound like an FP already.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Oh my gosh, you're awesome.... thanks for the long response! 

And I don't know if it helps for the questionable I or E function, but I always used to think I would be fine just being completely alone, but that's really not true at all. If I'm by myself for more than a few hours, I literally go crazy. 

Actually having OCD is an interesting thought. It doesn't overpower my life though (if I have it), I just NEED structure, or at least some sort of plan. But see, I don't really know if I do, because honestly I could care less about my grades, the ONLY reason I even attempt to get good ones is because I want a scholarship (I'm pretty tight with money, if that influences anything....). It's not so much as I don't like school, I just don't like how they teach you things that I'm fairly positive will never have any practical use at all.


----------



## NK94 (Dec 10, 2011)

Oh and side note--does that website Personality Page work any? I just looked up ESFP on it and that isn't me at all.... Like I couldn't find one thing on there that seemed like me.

ISFP seemed more like a sappier version of me. With less structure.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

NK94 said:


> Oh and side note--does that website Personality Page work any? I just looked up ESFP on it and that isn't me at all.... Like I couldn't find one thing on there that seemed like me.
> 
> ISFP seemed more like a sappier version of me. With less structure.


Personality Page is horrible. I relate to the "cut and run" descriptions of the ISFP that I've seen on typelogic ISFP Profile...but honest the BEST ISFP description I ever found that sounds totally like me is PTypes - Exuberant Personality Type

A lot of IxFP descriptions annoy me, and when I very very first got into personality theory and kept typing as an Fi dom, I was like...these can't be me! I'm not this meek and/or magical!

Over time, though, I realized that IxFPs are stereotyped a lot as being Enneagram 9, I think. Seriously.

I also like Best Fit, and I relate a bit to both ESFP and ISFP (I've had trouble determining my I/E because I come out as ambiverted on tests usually, but the PTypes ISFP/Exuberant is described as being inherently ambiverted).

Best-Fit Type : Exploring the Multiple Models of Personality Type

I mean, you might discover something completely different about yourself but you can read Jung if you can get through it, I have pasted the sections for ESxP, ISxJ, and IxFP...note that ESxP and IxFP kinda support one another descriptively in SFPs.

P.S. I've been studying personality theory for 2 1/2 years now, so I wouldn't recommend trying to take this all in NOW...I know this is a ton of information and it took me a while to be able to grasp Jung at all.

Look into the Keirsey temperaments as well in _Please Understand Me II. _See if you relate more the SJ group or the SP group. 

Classics in the History of Psychology -- Jung (1921/1923) Chapter 10


ESxP:



> *7. The Extraverted Sensation Type
> *No other human type can equal the extraverted sensation-type in realism. His sense for objective facts is extraordinarily developed. His life is an accumulation of actual experience with concrete objects, and the more pronounced he is, the less use does he make of his experience. In certain cases the events of his life hardly deserve [p. 458] the name 'experience'. He knows no better use for this sensed 'experience' than to make it serve as a guide to fresh sensations; anything in the least 'new' that comes within his circle of interest is forthwith turned to a sensational account and is made to serve this end. In so far as one is disposed to regard a highly developed sense for sheer actuality as very reasonable, will such men be esteemed rational. In reality, however, this is by no means the case, since they are equally subject to the sensation of irrational, chance happenings, as they are to rational behaviour.
> Such a type -- the majority arc men apparently -- does not, of course, believe himself to be 'subject' to sensation. He would be much more inclined to ridicule this view as altogether inconclusive, since, from his standpoint, sensation is the concrete manifestation of life -- it is simply the fulness [sic] of actual living. His aim is concrete enjoyment, and his morality is similarly orientated. For true enjoyment has its own special morality, its own moderation and lawfulness, its own unselfishness and devotedness. It by no means follows that he is just sensual or gross, for he may differentiate his sensation to the finest pitch of æsthetic purity without being the least unfaithful, even in his most abstract sensations, to his principle of objective sensation. Wulfen's _Cicerone des r¨cksichtlosen Lebensgenusses _is the unvarnished confession of a type of this sort. From this point of view the book seems to me worth reading.
> Upon the lower levels this is the man of tangible reality, with little tendency either for reflection or commanding purpose. To sense the object, to have and if possible to enjoy sensations, is his constant motive. He is by no means unlovable; on the contrary, he frequently has a charming and lively capacity for enjoyment; he is sometimes a jolly fellow, and often a refined æsthete. [p. 459]
> ...



ISxJ




> *7. The Introverted Sensation Type
> *
> The priority of introverted sensation produces a definite type, which is characterized by certain peculiarities. It is an irrational type, inasmuch as its selection among occurrences is not primarily rational, but is guided rather [p. 501] by what just happens. Whereas, the extraverted sensation-type is determined by the intensity of the objective influence, the introverted type is orientated by the intensity of the subjective sensation-constituent released by the objective stimulus. Obviously, therefore, no sort of proportional relation exists between object and sensation, but something that is apparently quite irregular and arbitrary judging from without, therefore, it is practically impossible to foretell what will make an impression and what will not. If there were present a capacity and readiness for expression in any way commensurate with the strength of sensation, the irrationality of this type would be extremely evident. This is the case, for instance, when the individual is a creative artist. But, since this is the exception, it usually happens that the characteristic introverted difficulty of expression also conceals his irrationality. On the contrary, he may actually stand out by the very calmness and passivity of his demeanour, or by his rational self-control. This peculiarity, which often leads the superficial judgment astray, is really due to his unrelatedness to objects. Normally the object is not consciously depreciated in the least, but its stimulus is removed from it, because it is immediately replaced by a subjective reaction, which is no longer related to the reality of the object. This, of course, has the same effect as a depreciation of the object. Such a type can easily make one question why one should exist at all; or why objects in general should have any right to existence, since everything essential happens without the object. This doubt may be justified in extreme cases, though not in the normal, since the objective stimulus is indispensable to his sensation, only it produces something different from what was to be surmised from the external state of affairs. Considered from without, it looks as though the effect of the object [p. 502] did not obtrude itself upon the subject. This impression is so far correct inasmuch as a subjective content does, in fact, intervene from the unconscious, thus snatching away the effect of the object. This intervention may be so abrupt that the individual appears to shield himself directly from any possible influence of the object. In any aggravated or well-marked case, such a protective guard is also actually present. Even with only a slight reinforcement of the unconscious, the subjective constituent of sensation becomes so alive that it almost completely obscures the objective influence. The results of this are, on the one hand, a feeling of complete depreciation on the part of the object, and, on the other, an illusory conception of reality on the part of the subject, which in morbid cases may even reach the point of a complete inability to discriminate between the real object and the subjective perception. Although so vital a distinction vanishes completely only in a practically psychotic state, yet long before that point is reached subjective perception may influence thought, feeling, and action to an extreme degree, in spite of the fact that the object is clearly seen in its fullest reality. Whenever the objective influence does succeed in forcing its way into the subject -- as the result of particular circumstances of special intensity, or because of a more perfect analogy with the unconscious image -- even the normal example of this type is induced to _act _in accordance with his unconscious model. Such action has an illusory quality in relation to objective reality, and therefore has a very odd and strange character. It instantly reveals the anti-real subjectivity of the type, But, where the influence of the object does not entirely succeed, it encounters a benevolent neutrality, disclosing little sympathy, yet constantly striving to reassure and adjust. The too-low is raised a little, the too-high is made a little lower; the enthusiastic is damped, the [p. 503] extravagant restrained; and the unusual brought within the 'correct' formula: all this in order to keep the influence of the object within the necessary bounds. Thus, this type becomes an affliction to his circle, just in so far as his entire harmlessness is no longer above suspicion. But, if the latter should be the case, the individual readily becomes a victim to the aggressiveness and ambitions of others. Such men allow themselves to be abused, for which they usually take vengeance at the most unsuitable occasions with redoubled stubbornness and resistance. When there exists no capacity for artistic expression, all impressions sink into the inner depths, whence they hold consciousness under a spell, removing any possibility it might have had of mastering the fascinating impression by means of conscious expression. Relatively speaking, this type has only archaic possibilities of expression for the disposal of his impressions; thought and feeling are relatively unconscious, and, in so far as they have a certain consciousness, they only serve in the necessary, banal, every-day expressions. Hence as conscious functions, they are wholly unfitted to give any adequate rendering of the subjective perceptions. This type, therefore, is uncommonly inaccessible to an objective understanding and he fares no better in the understanding of himself.
> Above all, his development estranges him from the reality of the object, handing him over to his subjective perceptions, which orientate his consciousness in accordance with an archaic reality, although his deficiency in comparative judgment keeps him wholly unaware of this fact. Actually he moves in a mythological world, where men animals, railways, houses, rivers, and mountains appear partly as benevolent deities and partly as malevolent demons. That thus they, appear to him never enters his mind, although their effect upon his judgments and acts can bear no other interpretation. He judges and acts as [p. 504] though he had such powers to deal with; but this begins to strike him only when he discovers that his sensations are totally different from reality. If his tendency is to reason objectively, he will sense this difference as morbid; but if, on the other hand, he remains faithful to his irrationality, and is prepared to grant his sensation reality value, the objective world will appear a mere make-belief and a comedy. Only in extreme cases, however, is this dilemma reached. As a rule, the individual acquiesces in his isolation and in the banality of the reality, which, however, he unconsciously treats archaically.
> His unconscious is distinguished chiefly by the repression of intuition, which thereby acquires an extraverted and archaic character. Whereas true extraverted intuition has a characteristic resourcefulness, and a 'good nose' for every possibility in objective reality, this archaic, extraverted intuition has an amazing flair for every ambiguous, gloomy, dirty, and dangerous possibility in the background of reality. In the presence of this intuition the real and conscious intention of the object has no significance; it will peer behind every possible archaic antecedent of such an intention. It possesses, therefore, something dangerous, something actually undermining, which often stands in most vivid contrast to the gentle benevolence of consciousness. So long as the individual is not too aloof from the object, the unconscious intuition effects a wholesome compensation to the rather fantastic and over credulous attitude of consciousness. But as soon as the unconscious becomes antagonistic to consciousness, such intuitions come to the surface and expand their nefarious influence: they force themselves compellingly upon the individual, releasing compulsive ideas about objects of the most perverse kind. The neurosis arising from this sequence of events is usually a compulsion neurosis, in which the hysterical characters recede and are obscured by symptoms of exhaustion. [p. 505]



IxFP:




> *4. The Introverted Feeling Type
> *
> It is principally among women that I have found the priority of introverted feeling. The proverb 'Still waters run deep' is very true of such women. They are mostly silent, inaccessible, and hard to understand; often they hide behind a childish or banal mask, and not infrequently their temperament is melancholic. They neither shine nor reveal themselves. Since they submit the control of their lives to their subjectively orientated feeling, their true motives generally remain concealed. Their outward demeanour is harmonious and inconspicuous; they reveal a delightful repose, a sympathetic parallelism, which has no desire to affect others, either to impress, influence, or change them in any way. Should this outer side be somewhat emphasized, a suspicion of neglectfulness and coldness may easily obtrude itself, which not seldom increases to a real indifference for the comfort and well-being of others. One distinctly feels the movement of feeling away from the object. With the normal type, however, such an event only occurs when the object has in some way too strong an effect. The harmonious feeling atmosphere rules only so long as the object moves upon its own way with a moderate feeling intensity, and makes no attempt to cross the other's path. There is little effort to accompany the real emotions of the object, which tend to be damped and rebuffed, or to put it more aptly, are 'cooled off' by a negative feeling-judgment. Although one may find a constant readiness for a peaceful and harmonious companionship, the unfamiliar object is shown no touch of amiability, no gleam of responding warmth, but is met by a manner of apparent indifference or repelling coldness. [p. 493]
> One may even be made to feel the superfluousness of one's own existence. In the presence of something that might carry one away or arouse enthusiasm, this type observes a benevolent neutrality, tempered with an occasional trace of superiority and criticism that soon takes the wind out of the sails of a sensitive object. But a stormy emotion will be brusquely rejected with murderous coldness, unless it happens to catch the subject from the side of the unconscious, _i.e._ unless, through the animation of some primordial image, feeling is, as it were, taken captive. In which event such a woman simply feels a momentary laming, invariably producing, in due course, a still more violent resistance, which reaches the object in his most vulnerable spot. The relation to the object is, as far as possible, kept in a secure and tranquil middle state of feeling, where passion and its intemperateness are resolutely proscribed. Expression of feeling, therefore, remains niggardly and, when once aware of it at all, the object has a permanent sense of his undervaluation. Such, however, is not always the case, since very often the deficit remains unconscious; whereupon the unconscious feeling-claims gradually produce symptoms which compel a more serious attention.
> ...


----------



## myexplodingcat (Feb 6, 2011)

I'd say ISFP.



fourtines said:


> I am actually friends with Solitary Walker and sometimes even his emails confuse me. If the OP is as SFP as I think he might be, he will run away screaming from Solitary Walker's INTP academic language.


So am I difficult to decipher?


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

myexplodingcat said:


> I'd say ISFP.
> 
> 
> 
> So am I difficult to decipher?


Ha ha no. Not all INTPs are this way, but I have encountered this problem sometimes with INTPs (and even with INTJs, I'm not saying I always understand them either) ...or that I do understand, but feel that what they are talking about is too pedantic or too speculative or not in tune with what I perceive as being reality.

It depends on the individual, but I was actually chatting with Solitary Walker about this the other day, how some minds (stereotypically the INTP mind, then the INTJ next, possibly then best understood by INFJs outside of the NT realm) are really in tune with "academic" talking and thinking. 

I am not. It looks like a bunch of dry blah blah blah to me sometimes, and sometimes I even get annoyed I think it is absurd and useless.

Probably Demonic Ti. Then a rejection of concepts if they become so intuitive that I can't relate them back to my sensing, though I do think I use a fair amount of intuiting myself, I probably reject it after a certain point - in fact, I know I do.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

myexplodingcat said:


> I'd say ISFP.
> 
> 
> 
> So am I difficult to decipher?


It's also probably worth pointing out that I majored in English and that I like for people to say what they mean and mean what they say, and a lot of times I totally understand what someone is saying, but believe they are making their speech or writing pretentiously complicated by using unnecessary words.

I know of an INTJ who does this - who posits ridiculously simple ideas in very opaque, pretentious language...and it annoyed me to no end that he was saying such simple, building-block things, but some people actually seemed ...dazzled...that he was using all of these big words. Except he wasn't actually saying anything that complex, he was just fooling people who don't have especially developed vocabularies.

Pet peeve of mine.


----------



## electricky (Feb 18, 2011)

I was thinking ISFP by the end of the questionnaire but the comment about going crazy after a few hours alone has me leaning ESFP again. I'm not sure though.... could this happen for some introverts? I know this is straying from the srs bzns Jungian function stuff but I still think it may be a relevant I/E difference


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

ElectricSparkle said:


> I was thinking ISFP by the end of the questionnaire but the comment about going crazy after a few hours alone has me leaning ESFP again. I'm not sure though.... could this happen for some introverts? I know this is straying from the srs bzns Jungian function stuff but I still think it may be a relevant I/E difference


Yea I agree. I mean the only introverts this would really probably be common with is ISFJ and INFJ because of aux-Fe. (ISFP and ISTP might have periodic moments of this - probably more ISFP than ISTP though).


----------



## NK94 (Dec 10, 2011)

fourtines said:


> I am actually friends with Solitary Walker and sometimes even his emails confuse me. If the OP is as SFP as I think he might be, he will run away screaming from Solitary Walker's INTP academic language.


Hah, that's exactly what happened! It's a little scary how well you're nailing me after just one questionnaire... 

By the way, sorry if I'm slow to responding to anyone's speculations, I just honestly have no idea what yall are saying so I have to look everything up. Still haven't wrapped my head around it all...


----------



## NK94 (Dec 10, 2011)

ElectricSparkle said:


> I was thinking ISFP by the end of the questionnaire but the comment about going crazy after a few hours alone has me leaning ESFP again. I'm not sure though.... could this happen for some introverts? I know this is straying from the srs bzns Jungian function stuff but I still think it may be a relevant I/E difference


I'm starting to think I might be both...is that possible? Because I definitely need time to 'recharge' everyday, just an hour or two by myself, but once I pass the three hour mark I get really antsy and bored. And (correct me if I'm wrong) I've heard that introverts tend to hate loud noises, and that's definitely true for me. When I go driving with my friends, they blast the music to full volume, and I just get so overwhelmed and unfocused, I can't even hear myself think.


----------



## myexplodingcat (Feb 6, 2011)

fourtines said:


> It's also probably worth pointing out that I majored in English and that I like for people to say what they mean and mean what they say, and a lot of times I totally understand what someone is saying, but believe they are making their speech or writing pretentiously complicated by using unnecessary words.
> 
> I know of an INTJ who does this - who posits ridiculously simple ideas in very opaque, pretentious language...and it annoyed me to no end that he was saying such simple, building-block things, but some people actually seemed ...dazzled...that he was using all of these big words. Except he wasn't actually saying anything that complex, he was just fooling people who don't have especially developed vocabularies.
> 
> Pet peeve of mine.


I hate when people do that. I had an INxJ critique partner (we both wrote novels) who I think was probably INTJ. She just couldn't let go of her adjectives! I mean, she wasn't bad--her story lines were great--but she could take a good-sized paragraph to describe something. And you'd never know how many adjectives you can cram into a paragraph until you'd seen her writing. 

In my own novels, I use very little description... sometimes to the point where when I reread, I'm not entirely sure where the characters are. I'm getting over this syndrome, though. I think it was the result of having Ne focus on what people are doing and knowing in my own mind where they are but not putting it on the page, and Se not being there to "look around." I tend to use less-known but more precise words (or odd but accurate metaphors) to describe things, instead of swinging my language around in a giant paragraph like an inaccurate bludger trying to hit a Quidditch player. ...See? There I go again.


> All I know is that Mark didn’t wake me up for a third shift—he just stayed awake. That wasn’t to say that I didn’t drift in and out of sleep a lot during the trip, but I never really gained full consciousness until nine in the morning. Mark said we were landing for food. I think we were back in America by then, or on the edge of Nova Scotia—still not sure. Didn't matter.
> In any case, I started flying Currey again, following Xavier as he flew Silvester. The sky was clear enough to see, but the wind still whipped us around visibly, and my heavy backpack wasn’t helping. I couldn’t imagine how cold the pegasi must have been. Still, Currey snuffled cheerfully as I scratched him behind the ears, showing no sign of fatigue.


Anyway. Anyone else notice we're no longer discussing this person's type?


----------



## myexplodingcat (Feb 6, 2011)

NK94 said:


> I'm starting to think I might be both...is that possible? Because I definitely need time to 'recharge' everyday, just an hour or two by myself, but once I pass the three hour mark I get really antsy and bored. And (correct me if I'm wrong) I've heard that introverts tend to hate loud noises, and that's definitely true for me. When I go driving with my friends, they blast the music to full volume, and I just get so overwhelmed and unfocused, I can't even hear myself think.


You know, I think you just have really strong Se (which is a good thing!). Se users like to do things, and there's not much for the function to do if it's sitting around alone.

Se is more extroverted than Ne. ENPs are the most introverted of the extroverts, and INPs are extremely introverted introverts. ESPs are really extroverted extroverts, and ISPs are the most extroverted introverts. 

That probably didn't make much sense, but let's just say that ISPs don't need to be very introverted to "count" as Introverts. But someone who's figured out that they're NTP and can't figure out whether they're an Introvert or an Extrovert by which functions they identify with... well, they're probably an Extrovert.

It really is about the functions, and each function plays a specific role. They're not just in order of strength. Like, the inferior represents "I want to do this, but I'm not sure if I can" and shows up in places where it's not welcome, to the point where the person will be against it and all it stands for.


----------



## NK94 (Dec 10, 2011)

myexplodingcat said:


> You know, I think you just have really strong Se (which is a good thing!). Se users like to do things, and there's not much for the function to do if it's sitting around alone.
> 
> Se is more extroverted than Ne. ENPs are the most introverted of the extroverts, and INPs are extremely introverted introverts. ESPs are really extroverted extroverts, and ISPs are the most extroverted introverts.
> 
> ...


Oh, that makes sense! Alright, so I'm ISFP... although I think I'm slightly more organized and controlled, is that a result of the strong Se? 

And can you just briefly explain to me the roles of tertiary, inferior, etc. in just one sentence wrap-ups? All I can find are these huge wordy paragraphs on them, and I think I just need to have the very basics of it before I go into detail.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

Dominant (Fi for you) is the captain of the ship. It's the thing your entire personality (ego) is built around and the primary mindset you default to (basically you consider everything through your sense of values - what is right/wrong, good/bad, moral/immoral, ugly/beautiful, etc. to you. That's the dominant perspective.)

Auxiliary Se is the function you use most when interacting with the world. Sensing is your primary way of expression (extraversion) either by making things, crafting things, interacting with the world, being physically expressive, design, etc. These things all relate to the physical world as it is. People with aux-Se and dominant Fi (ISFP) want to back up their sense of value with something tangible. For instance someone who has a strong sense of what they like in textiles or color might become a fashion designer or interior designer as a way of tangibly manifesting their tastes (values). 

Tertiary Ni is your sense of intuition. It gives you a sense what the significance of something is (different than Fi which gives you a sense of what the importance or value of something is). Your Ni might only make sense to you, but you may fall back on it to provide a sense of underlying meaning.

Inferior Te is your least favored preference. Te (extraverted Thinking) is the state of mind most commonly associated with being a judger. It's being categorical, organization, methodology, etc. Te represents the polar opposite perspective of dominant Fi (which provides a sense of balance for your personality, but often creates a tug-of-war between you wanting to only live by those things that are important to you, vs Te which focuses on that which is concrete, externally validated and accomplishable). Te is the perspective you generally try to use the least, as using it a lot will start to stress you out, because you're not used to it (when you get super mad you might explode in a Te-like rage). Te represents many of the things you don't wish to see yourself as.


----------



## NK94 (Dec 10, 2011)

LiquidLight said:


> Dominant (Fi for you) is the captain of the ship. It's the thing your entire personality (ego) is built around and the primary mindset you default to (basically you consider everything through your sense of values - what is right/wrong, good/bad, moral/immoral, ugly/beautiful, etc. to you. That's the dominant perspective.)
> 
> Auxiliary Se is the function you use most when interacting with the world. Sensing is your primary way of expression (extraversion) either by making things, crafting things, interacting with the world, being physically expressive, design, etc. These things all relate to the physical world as it is. People with aux-Se and dominant Fi (ISFP) want to back up their sense of value with something tangible. For instance someone who has a strong sense of what they like in textiles or color might become a fashion designer or interior designer as a way of tangibly manifesting their tastes (values).
> 
> ...


I just don't know if I'm as centered around feeling as you're describing... You're right about how when I'm mad, I explode in a Te-like rage, but I don't see all my flaws or ways I don't want to be when I'm using Te. I usually just don't tend to feel all that bad after an argument with someone, because in my eyes, I feel like they deserved it since it take a lot to get me going that way. I just think that my Fi dominance is not all that dominant over Te.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

> I feel like they deserved it since it take a lot to get me going that way.


Haha this is a very dom-Fi thing to say. The other thing is you are probably more aware of Te (if you are in fact ISFP) because a lot of times people may not see their dominant function because they use it so much they don't even notice it. It's on autopilot half the time unless someone comes along to offend them.

Actually ESFP's come off as more touchy about their values because they are in the aux position. ESFP's often have no idea about their Se, they just think they like to party, or blow stuff up or whatever ESFPs do lol, but when you ask them to describe themselves they say "I do what I want" which is an acknowledgment of Fi not Se. The real giveaway of ESFP over ISFP is 1) Te is more pronounced in ESFP (I think of Michael Bay, the director who often serves also a s foreman on his action movie scenes, build all kinds of contraptions to blow up and planning and organizing the whole thing). The other giveaway is ISFP's have noticeably better intuition skills than ESFP who, if they even use any intuition, its terrible. Like they always predict the worst possible outcome, where ISFP's are usually better at figuring out the greater perspective or the underlying significance with greater accuracy.

Funny thread about this here: http://personalitycafe.com/istp-forum-mechanics/77860-istps-si-sensory-component.html
(the thread didn't start about inferior-Ni but got derailed with some pretty funny stories of ESxPs using inferior-Ni and all ridiculous notions they can sometimes have).


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

LiquidLight said:


> Haha this is a very dom-Fi thing to say. The other thing is you are probably more aware of Te (if you are in fact ISFP) because a lot of times people may not see their dominant function because they use it so much they don't even notice it. It's on autopilot half the time unless someone comes along to offend them.
> 
> Actually ESFP's come off as more touchy about their values because they are in the aux position. ESFP's often have no idea about their Se, they just think they like to party, or blow stuff up or whatever ESFPs do lol, but when you ask them to describe themselves they say "I do what I want" which is an acknowledgment of Fi not Se. The real giveaway of ESFP over ISFP is 1) Te is more pronounced in ESFP (I think of Michael Bay, the director who often serves also a s foreman on his action movie scenes, build all kinds of contraptions to blow up and planning and organizing the whole thing). The other giveaway is ISFP's have noticeably better intuition skills than ESFP who, if they even use any intuition, its terrible. Like they always predict the worst possible outcome, where ISFP's are usually better at figuring out the greater perspective or the underlying significance with greater accuracy.
> 
> ...


It's funny you say this. I am touchy about my values and when I was a younger person one of my favorite mantras was "I do what I want." LOL. It was pretty arrogant and immature, because you know, life experience teaches you that you can't always do what you want, that it's either not practical, edifying, or considerate of others. I still have an underlying current of that, though.

With some people it's very obvious they are either ESFP or ISFP, but for example with myself, I have questioned it. It may be a similar scenario with the OP. I dunno.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

LOL no i can barely get through Solitary Walker too its like reading an 18th century encyclopedia (and as INFJ I hate reading anyway lol - inferior Se). 

But yea I get your point about the whole ESFP/iSFP thing. The inferior-Ni thing though sometimes is the big giveaway (my ESFP friends have absolutely horrendous intuition).


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

myexplodingcat said:


> I hate when people do that. I had an INxJ critique partner (we both wrote novels) who I think was probably INTJ. She just couldn't let go of her adjectives! I mean, she wasn't bad--her story lines were great--but she could take a good-sized paragraph to describe something. And you'd never know how many adjectives you can cram into a paragraph until you'd seen her writing.
> 
> In my own novels, I use very little description... sometimes to the point where when I reread, I'm not entirely sure where the characters are. I'm getting over this syndrome, though. I think it was the result of having Ne focus on what people are doing and knowing in my own mind where they are but not putting it on the page, and Se not being there to "look around." I tend to use less-known but more precise words (or odd but accurate metaphors) to describe things, instead of swinging my language around in a giant paragraph like an inaccurate bludger trying to hit a Quidditch player. ...See? There I go again.
> 
> ...


Yeah this is off-topic, but I have an opposite problem...I am sooo good with descriptions of setting or scenery. I can write wonderful "we are there" descriptions of houses, yards, long drives, and such, but begin to wonder what my fucking point is. I'm also pretty good with character development (probably Fi, like "what is going on inside this individual's head?") but especially when I was in my early 20's I was all like "great! I have beautiful, descriptive scenes and quirky characters doing quirky things...wtf is my point? What is the plot? Is this a horror story, mystery, drama?" I'm not joking.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

fourtines said:


> Yeah this is off-topic, but I have an opposite problem...I am sooo good with descriptions of setting or scenery. I can write wonderful "we are there" descriptions of houses, yards, long drives, and such, but begin to wonder what my fucking point is. I'm also pretty good with character development (probably Fi, like "what is going on inside this individual's head?") but especially when I was in my early 20's I was all like "great! I have beautiful, descriptive scenes and quirky characters doing quirky things...wtf is my point? What is the plot? Is this a horror story, mystery, drama?" I'm not joking.


Yea. Honestly because I work around so many Se-doms in Hollywood, this doesn't sound very Se-dom like. It's like so many Se-doms just don't care about that stuff, they just make pretty pictures lol. 

When I work on a movie, we do all these focus groups with producer and development types, and the Se-doms are always really easy to spot because of the stuff they pay attention to. Like no interest whatsoever in the greater implications of the story. If it looks cool then it is cool. (I think this is how movies like Transformers or GI Joe or Rush Hour get greenlit). I worked on a Super Bowl spot for a major company last year that my intuition told me they weren't going to like, but all the Se-doms who were driving the project were like "oh this is the next coolest thing" and to their credit visually it was freakin awesome, but completely off the mark tonally for the brand and sure enough the company was not impressed (and of course the Se-dom producers only way of fixing the problem were cosmetic. Change the music, or re-edit it, or change the visuals. Not recognize that the thing was tonally wrong).

I find that the some of the best directors are often ISxPs (like Scorcese or Fincher) because they are sensory oriented enough to make a pretty movie, but have enough intuition not to fuck it up LOL.


----------



## NK94 (Dec 10, 2011)

fourtines said:


> Yeah this is off-topic, but I have an opposite problem...I am sooo good with descriptions of setting or scenery. I can write wonderful "we are there" descriptions of houses, yards, long drives, and such, but begin to wonder what my fucking point is. I'm also pretty good with character development (probably Fi, like "what is going on inside this individual's head?") but especially when I was in my early 20's I was all like "great! I have beautiful, descriptive scenes and quirky characters doing quirky things...wtf is my point? What is the plot? Is this a horror story, mystery, drama?" I'm not joking.


That's me too! I don't write much on my own, I'm a little paranoid that someone I know will find it on my computer and....well I don't know, but I just don't want anyone else reading it. But anyways, I've had to write short stories in a few English classes, and literally on every one, the teacher would praise my wonderful imagery and character development, but I'd lose MAJOR points for no real plot. Or I'd build up this huge scenario, and then just cut it off real quick and easy. 

Okay, I've decided I must just be what you are, because everything you say I'm agreeing with.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

Yay. This site soo needs more Se people!


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

LiquidLight said:


> I find that the some of the best directors are often ISxPs (like Scorcese or Fincher) because they are sensory oriented enough to make a pretty movie, but have enough intuition not to fuck it up LOL.


Sophia Coppola is one of my favorites!!!

*stops rudely dragging thread off-topic*


----------



## myexplodingcat (Feb 6, 2011)

fourtines said:


> Yeah this is off-topic, but I have an opposite problem...I am sooo good with descriptions of setting or scenery. I can write wonderful "we are there" descriptions of houses, yards, long drives, and such, but begin to wonder what my fucking point is. I'm also pretty good with character development (probably Fi, like "what is going on inside this individual's head?") but especially when I was in my early 20's I was all like "great! I have beautiful, descriptive scenes and quirky characters doing quirky things...wtf is my point? What is the plot? Is this a horror story, mystery, drama?" I'm not joking.


I write fantasy (if you couldn't tell) so my characters are usually doing cool stuff, like riding pegasi and escaping from dragons and exploring deserted magical-creature bases. I had them working for Cirque du Soleil for a while 

So I guess if you need to focus on your plot more, having an interesting one probably helps. :tongue:


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

myexplodingcat said:


> I write fantasy (if you couldn't tell) so my characters are usually doing cool stuff, like riding pegasi and escaping from dragons and exploring deserted magical-creature bases. I had them working for Cirque du Soleil for a while
> 
> So I guess if you need to focus on your plot more, having an interesting one probably helps. :tongue:


I can't stand fantasy or sci-fi, so if I am ever to write a novel rather than a short story...I'm a fan of American Modern lit, Russian Realism, English and German Romanticism, horror, and mystery.

It's just deciding what is meaningful to me, and what I want to communicate. I have no problem doing this on forums or in blogs, but when I write creatively it's difficult for me to discern if I have a "message" or if I just want to create and capture a moment in time. I think I'm pretty heavily influenced by Henry Miller, but I have my own ...way.

I think the mistake I may be making is even trying to conform to a genre, but genre literature tends to sell.

Anyway, I waste a lot of my time right now doing work that involves dreadfully boring academic or technical sorts of writing assignments for money, and hanging out on forums discussing things with people.

I don't think the forums are a mistake, though. I think this is the "salon" of the 21st century and I learn things from my discussions and arguments with people and it inspires me to do research, et al.


----------

