# Help! I have data!



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Check out this screenshot of a recent cognitive functions test and fill me in on your opinion. Ask me any questions or whatever as they arise. Also, feel free to use other pertinent data in coming to a verdict. On this particular test I felt the Te result was artificially low but that's all right because I'm probably not an INTJ anyway. I'm basically debating between INTP and INFJ...this will make sense once you see the results. :crazy: 

The image is blurry but the results are: 

Ni - 95% 
Ne - 70% 
Ti - 90% 
Te- 25% 
Se- 65% 
Si- 60% 
Fe- 40% 
Fi - 65% 

This gizmo said my likely personality was INFJ? Agree? Disagree? Thanks y'all. roud:


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

unctuousbutler said:


> Check out this screenshot of a recent cognitive functions test and fill me in on your opinion. Ask me any questions or whatever as they arise. Also, feel free to use other pertinent data in coming to a verdict. On this particular test I felt the Te result was artificially low but that's all right because I'm probably not an INTJ anyway. I'm basically debating between INTP and INFJ...this will make sense once you see the results. :crazy:
> 
> The image is blurry but the results are:
> 
> ...


There's a LARGE difference between them and a cognitive function test won't determine which of them you are.
Simply, INTPs got problems with interpersonal/group things.
They got a hard time with following the crowd and going with the flow.


----------



## A Little Bit of Cheeze (Apr 21, 2012)

Lol. Acer is right. There is quite a big difference in the types.

Usually, you tell people not to go description wise and to figure out their cognitive functions, but you do need to keep in mind it's not _all _stereotype- some of the descriptions can give you ideas you can use to differentiate. 

INFJs are going to be empathetic and harmonizing, for example, and INTPs would be in their heads breaking down something into oblivion to find out how it works. 

And. I don't trust cognitive tests either- you'll need to learn about the separate functions and see which apply.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> There's a LARGE difference between them and a cognitive function test won't determine which of them you are.
> Simply, INTPs got problems with interpersonal/group things.
> They got a hard time with following the crowd and going with the flow.


Is there really a big difference between an Ni-Ti heavy INFJ and a balanced (so to speak) INTP. I'm not sure.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

A Little Bit of Cheeze said:


> Lol. Acer is right. There is quite a big difference in the types.
> 
> Usually, you tell people not to go description wise and to figure out their cognitive functions, but you do need to keep in mind it's not _all _stereotype- some of the descriptions can give you ideas you can use to differentiate.
> 
> ...


Well, reading through each function's description, I'm more aligned with Ni, Ti, Ne, and somewhat Fi. In other people, Te usually irritates me (I'm not keen on this ensnarling skein of rules and red tape, thanks). Fe I have a love hate relationship with. How can someone definitively determine whether they use Si in the tertiary slot or Se in the inferior slot. Thanks again. 

Look, I basically feel more kinship with INTP folk but I'm an intellectual and I'm unclear of how this muddies things. I'm pretty good socially but I see basically all of society as silly so that doesn't get me far. Do I still do favors for people? Yeah I do. Anyway, let's suppose I say INFJ - then the Fe is somewhat low and the Ti is super high; the Se is also in the ballpark. With INTP, well there's not really a problem, except for this gargantuan, dangling, bloated, puissant Ni. What's a fellow to do? :tongue:

Edit: You know what? INTP might be fine with me, in spite of the glaringly present Ni. When I really look at my days I see a good amount of Perceiving and freewheeling spontaneity countervailed by Si for daily routines and such. Maybe I was mistaking Si for Judging or something, who knows?


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

unctuousbutler said:


> Is there really a big difference between an Ni-Ti heavy INFJ and a balanced (so to speak) INTP. I'm not sure.


Simply put?
It's a really great difference.

INFJs - Inferior Se
INxJ's might feel inferior with current tangible experience.
INxJ's Cling to dominant perspective. Criticize SP's as reckless

INTPs - Inferior Fe
IxTP's might feel inferior in humane (personal) matters (including one's standing in social groups).
IxTP's Appear insensitive or unfeeling and openly complain about FJ types.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

unctuousbutler said:


> Well, reading through each function's description, I'm more aligned with Ni, Ti, Ne, and somewhat Fi. In other people, Te usually irritates me (I'm not keen on this ensnarling skein of rules and red tape, thanks). Fe I have a love hate relationship with. How can someone definitively determine whether they use Si in the tertiary slot or Se in the inferior slot. Thanks again.
> 
> Look, I basically feel more kinship with INTP folk but I'm an intellectual and I'm unclear of how this muddies things. I'm pretty good socially but I see basically all of society as silly so that doesn't get me far. Do I still do favors for people? Yeah I do. Anyway, let's suppose I say INFJ - then the Fe is somewhat low and the Ti is super high; the Se is also in the ballpark. With INTP, well there's not really a problem, except for this gargantuan, dangling, bloated, puissant Ni. What's a fellow to do? :tongue:
> 
> Edit: You know what? INTP might be fine with me, in spite of the glaringly present Ni. When I really look at my days I see a good amount of Perceiving and freewheeling spontaneity countervailed by Si for daily routines and such. Maybe I was mistaking Si for Judging or something, who knows?


you can't be aligned with both Ni and Ne...
If you are INFJ and your Ti is stronger than Fe, you're not INFJ.
You seem to be stereotyping quite a bit tbh :tongue:
I liked having spontaneous speeches in school, but it was because I was lazy.
I don't have anything against routines because they keep me alive (yes, I referred to my enneagram there because it has more to do with enneagrams).


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Simply put?
> It's a really great difference.
> 
> INFJs - Inferior Se
> ...


I'm still on the fence about the differences being a priori or innately massive between INFJ and INTP but I suppose I carp more over FJ than SP types. With the FJ types I typically home in on the inane rules and general frivolity. I see INTJ criticizing organized religion and the same things, though, so I'm not sure about that working theory. It seems like all four NT types have problems with unanalyzed action and maybe society in general. Both an INTJ and INTP, in other words, would find irrational people and rules tedious. Anyway, what becomes of my high utilization of Ni then?


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> you can't be aligned with both Ni and Ne...
> *If you are INFJ and your Ti is stronger than Fe, you're not INFJ.
> *You seem to be stereotyping quite a bit tbh :tongue:
> I liked having spontaneous speeches in school, but it was because I was lazy.
> I don't have anything against routines because they keep me alive (yes, I referred to my enneagram there because it has more to do with enneagrams).


This is where the dispute may arise from. Now _that _sounds categorical. I'm not sure everyone here would agree with that assessment, you know?


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> you can't be aligned with both Ni and Ne...
> If you are INFJ and your Ti is stronger than Fe, you're not INFJ.
> You seem to be stereotyping quite a bit tbh :tongue:
> I liked having spontaneous speeches in school, but it was because I was lazy.
> I don't have anything against routines because they keep me alive (yes, I referred to my enneagram there because it has more to do with enneagrams).


Folks like Arthur Schopenhauer and Noam Chomsky were/are putatively INFJ and their Ti was/is pretty robust. So if Arthur's Ti was slightly larger than his Fe then he would be an INTP or some other type? That seems improbable...


----------



## A Little Bit of Cheeze (Apr 21, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> Well, reading through each function's description, I'm more aligned with Ni, Ti, Ne, and somewhat Fi. In other people, Te usually irritates me (I'm not keen on this ensnarling skein of rules and red tape, thanks). Fe I have a love hate relationship with. How can someone definitively determine whether they use Si in the tertiary slot or Se in the inferior slot. Thanks again.
> 
> Look, I basically feel more kinship with INTP folk but I'm an intellectual and I'm unclear of how this muddies things. I'm pretty good socially but I see basically all of society as silly so that doesn't get me far. Do I still do favors for people? Yeah I do. Anyway, let's suppose I say INFJ - then the Fe is somewhat low and the Ti is super high; the Se is also in the ballpark. With INTP, well there's not really a problem, except for this gargantuan, dangling, bloated, puissant Ni. What's a fellow to do? :tongue:
> 
> Edit: You know what? INTP might be fine with me, in spite of the glaringly present Ni. When I really look at my days I see a good amount of Perceiving and freewheeling spontaneity countervailed by Si for daily routines and such. Maybe I was mistaking Si for Judging or something, who knows?


Well, seemingly- as you say- you have have highest Ni yet you say you're aligned with Ne as well? It has to be one or another. You have four functions but you can only be oriented single way for each one. 

If you can't decipher between Ni and Ti, what about Ni vs Ne? 

Is your intuition bringing facts together to form ideas or does it see every abstract possibility?


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

A Little Bit of Cheeze said:


> Well, seemingly- as you say- you have have highest Ni yet you say you're aligned with Ne as well? It has to be one or another. You have four functions but you can only be oriented single way for each one.
> 
> If you can't decipher between Ni and Ti, what about Ni vs Ne?
> 
> Is your intuition bringing facts together to form ideas or does it see every abstract possibility?


I would choose Ni over Ne. Ni and Ti are both strong, maybe equally.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

unctuousbutler said:


> I'm still on the fence about the differences being a priori or innately massive between INFJ and INTP but I suppose I carp more over FJ than SP types. With the FJ types I typically home in on the inane rules and general frivolity. I see INTJ criticizing organized religion and the same things, though, so I'm not sure about that working theory. It seems like all four NT types have problems with unanalyzed action and maybe society in general. Both an INTJ and INTP, in other words, would find irrational people and rules tedious. Anyway, what becomes of my high utilization of Ni then?


Not necessarily.
Te is more focused on external systems and how "logical"/fact based they are.
Ti is more interested in making things flow well.





Your high utilization of Ni could be the test mistaking Ti + Ne as Ni.



unctuousbutler said:


> This is where the dispute may arise from. Now _that _sounds categorical. I'm not sure everyone here would agree with that assessment, you know?


Actually yes, I believe they would.
If your Ti function is stronger than your Fe function, the type would either be Ti-X-X-Fe or X-Ti-Fe-X



unctuousbutler said:


> Folks like Arthur Schopenhauer and Noam Chomsky were/are putatively INFJ and their Ti was/is pretty robust. So if Arthur's Ti was slightly larger than his Fe then he would be an INTP or some other type? That seems improbable...


I'm not familiar with them.
Tho maturity of a function doesn't make a difference in your type.

The fact that you don't back your stuff up with external data, but rather go by an internal data process seems more like Ti than Te.
Tho I guess that's @LeaT's area.

You seem like an INTP to me at this moment.


----------



## A Little Bit of Cheeze (Apr 21, 2012)

Well then the next plausible step is to move on to you next function- which do you think backs up your dominant function- Fe or Ne? 

Now, you say you identify more with Ni- so how is it that you could even consider Ne?


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

A Little Bit of Cheeze said:


> Well then the next plausible step is to move on to you next function- which do you think backs up your dominant function- Fe or Ne?
> 
> Now, you say you identify more with Ni- so how is it that you could even consider Ne?


In short because I can relate to the definitions of Ne and Ni below. 

Keys 2 Cognition - Cognitive Processes

I've had people analyze my personality before and they've ubiquitously concluded dom-Ni or dom-Ti. 

This leaves four types (really three though because ISTP...not happening). I can honestly relate to the INTP profiles though so maybe I should dismiss this line of inquiry. I sometimes wonder if the indecision and search itself is indicative of Ne needing theoretical stimulation, you know?

Another article posits this: 

_Ne: There are always other perspectives and new meanings to discover
Ni: There is always a future to realize and a significance to be revealed
_
I clearly engage in _both_ of these activities. The same goes for the number below. 

_Ne: The environment must contain alternatives, new possibilities
Ni: Life must have an underlying significance to me


_


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Not necessarily.
> Te is more focused on external systems and how "logical"/fact based they are.
> Ti is more interested in making things flow well.
> 
> ...


Although I feel Si also deals in facts I generally agree with the Te/Ti breakdown. 

Yeah I also agree that the Ne-Ti combination might somehow mimic Ni. 

Perhaps I'm somehow incognizant of the Ti gears spinning, so I mistake Ne-Ti for Ni. It could be that seamless. 

I guess INTP is even plausible because I'm not really keen on Te (INTJ) or Fe (INFJ). Honestly, Judging as well. 

Thanks! Lean wit it rock wit it. :crazy:


----------



## INTJellectual (Oct 22, 2011)

Test again with another Cognitive function test from different websites. And compare if your results have a trend. Then compare. And also, fill out a questionnaire again, so other members could analyze your writing style again. Good luck


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

INTJellectual said:


> Test again with another Cognitive function test from different websites. And compare if your results have a trend. Then compare. And also, fill out a questionnaire again, so other members could analyze your writing style again. Good luck


Good idea. I'll post the the questionnaire results tonight. :tongue:


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

1. What are 5 key qualities about you, and what is each of their direct opposites?

Example: “I am nice. The opposite of that would be cruel.”

*Aggressive - Docile 
*
Intellectual - Republican (kidding...incurious) 

Withdrawn - Cheerleader :dry:

Stubborn - Accepting 

Eccentric - Phlegmatic 

*2. Now explain why each of the opposites COULD be you and why it might be GOOD to be that opposite characteristic. Own them even if they are negative traits.

Docile - I wouldn't need to think. 

Incurious - I'd fit in more with society. Probably watch more television. 

Cheerleader - My opinions would coincide with the masses. 

Accepting - Experiences would be more varied. More risks. 

Phlegmatic - I wouldn't get upset in conversations. 


Example: “I am nice. The opposite of that would be cruel. I guess I can be cruel because I never tip waiters. Tipping waiters encourages them to stay at these jobs ‘….’”

3. What would you say to a 5-year-old child if he or she asked you what the purpose of life is?

I'd say make a small contribution and find out about yourself such that you could capture happiness. 

Note: You’re talking to a young child so keep the answer short and brief.

4. What type of advice would you give that same child on how to survive in this world?

Don't bend over. Again, kidding. Find out something you're good at or that society prizes and do that thing to achieve financial security so that you could do what you really wanted. 

Note: You’re talking to a young child so keep the answer short and brief.

5. If you were told you only had one year to live from today, and it was 100% guaranteed that you would die exactly 1 year from now, what would you do in that year? 

I would definitely eat more desserts and junk food. Also, skydiving and drugs. I'd take more chances, emotionally and somatically, while utterly trashing myself. I'd probably go out on more dates. 

Note: Your health will be fine all the way up to the end. 

6. Why aren't you doing this now?

Because my tomorrow's probably longer than that scenario portends. 

7. What do you really want in your truest self? 

Understanding, energy, soulmate, more intelligence, and more experiences. 

8. What have you substituted/settled for compared to what you really want?

I've settled in relationships - romantic and otherwise. I also curb my id desires apropos food every day. 

9. What are your defense mechanisms?
Sometimes people don’t realize what their true defense mechanisms are because they are working at 100% efficiency. You may have to really think about this one.

Usually I withdraw, project, or fly off the handle in anger. I cherry pick the conversations and with whom I talk to for this reason. 

Another way to look at the question:
When you start to feel uncomfortable or anxious about a situation, what do you generally start to do?

10. What are some good habits that are needed for living a healthy adult life?

Currently in the US you need a marketable skill and a pronounced ability to withstand boredom. A healthy sex life doesn't hurt either. 

11. What are you like in relaxed and non-threatening situations?

Very intense, intellectual, somewhat empathetic, zany, and spirited at some points and stifled at others. 

12. What is your predominant fault?

Defensiveness or anger. I almost expect people to agree with me and when they don't things get nasty. 

13. Think of a time when you felt at ease and connected to yourself and others. What did you think about yourself, others, and the entire world during this time?

I thought life could be rather fair after a few choice romantic rendezvouses. After I have coffee and put on some music I usually feel grateful to be alive. Whenever I'm getting on with others I think that superficially people are different but their nature's and drive's are similar. 

14. Think of a time when you felt anxious and disconnected from yourself and others. What did you think about yourself, others, and the entire world during this time?

Since the stress is usually brought on by security worries, I normally scorn the system that creates wage slavery and these things. Whenever I have too much work on my plate I think about its existential paltriness. 

15. What is an addiction or urge that seems to drive you as almost as if you’re not in control? Almost like an alien force that drives or pushes you down.

Probably the desire to learn everything, sex, and various chemical addictions. 

16. What things do you feel you cannot do because they might jeopardize your survival?

Maybe being truly vulnerable in a relationship. On a more somatic level maybe taking unnecessary risks in this thrill seeking vein. I just feel uncomfortable relying on someone or something entirely. 

Example: “I can not express my feelings, because I feel like I need to be cool, calm, and collected to survive.”
“I have to be right. I can not afford to be wrong.”

17. What do you need in your life to face your fears?

Energy, interpersonal support, self development, and knowledge. 

18. What is your own personal mission statement?

Come to peace with the universe and yourself through self discovery. 

Examples: 
“The kind of person I would like to be ____.”
“The kind of activities I would like to be in ______.”
“My personal mission is to ______.”*


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Can you please fill out my test or Spades' test instead. We need in-depth data and the test you filled out doesn't provide. Ideally both tests if you can be arsed. 

Anyway, I do think the last questionnaire points more towards inferior Se to be honest, with the focus on sex, drugs, food and other sensory stimuli that seem to occur during times of stress more so than being sensitive of what others think about you, trying to over-emphasize logic and so on. I really don't see much Ne here either. The answers are very focused on the subject.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

LeaT said:


> Can you please fill out my test or Spades' test instead. We need in-depth data and the test you filled out doesn't provide. Ideally both tests if you can be arsed.
> 
> Anyway, I do think the last questionnaire points more towards inferior Se to be honest, with the focus on sex, drugs, food and other sensory stimuli that seem to occur during times of stress more so than being sensitive of what others think about you, trying to over-emphasize logic and so on. I really don't see much Ne here either. The answers are very focused on the subject.


You're busting my balls here cap - yeah I'll take one more and post the results shortly. 

LeaT is one tough cookie. Helpful, but one tough cookie. :kitteh:


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

1. Click on this link: Flickr: Explore! Look at the random photo for about 30 seconds. Copy and paste it here, and write about your impression of it.

I'm not doing this question. Shit I guess I will. The picture was of this man and women (attached) trading shoes. I thought of women's liberation and moves towards gender equality ("a day in his shoes, etc.") and women bringing home the bacon and other happy horse shit. Because the faces were out of the shot I was thinking more metaphorically. While I don't feel that everyone should be androgynous I think the feminist routine is pretty backwards because it dismisses nature. From my understanding feminists want women to be men (more aggressive) and men to be women (more sensitive) and that's not how nature largely intends things to be. I'm against obvious stuff like the glass ceiling and rape but I feel feminism is basically overwrought. Anyway, I noticed the black and white color scheme of the picture - like saying these aren't black and white issues. I also imagined the guy donning the heels. The gesture each is displaying, however, is cordial so maybe each feels this is best. The sizes might be different but have fun guys! 

2. You are with a group of people in a car, heading to a different town to see your favourite band/artist/musician. Suddenly, the car breaks down for an unknown reason in the middle of nowhere. What are your initial thoughts? What are your outward reactions?

Outwardly I would be calm but inwardly I would be cursing this cheap Hyundai and its inability to whisk my friends and me to the concert. I would initially try to vaguely ascertain the problem. Maybe I would capitalize on the expertise of these friends. I might wonder about different permutations of the same scenario - what if Timmy drove his shiny new car? - before calling the towing service. Depending on where this debacle put us, I would broadcast and shop alternative ways for making the concert, or part of the concert, on time. 

3. You somehow make it to the concert. The driver wants to go to the afterparty that was announced (and assure you they won't drink so they can drive back later). How do you feel about this party? What do you do?

The party sounds cool. Granted that this concert is for my favorite band, the crowd might be like-minded or at least tolerable. I'd be pretty stoked for the party itself but I'd still be wary about some jackass burning down the house. I perhaps wouldn't drink that much but I'd try to have a good time. Yeah I'm not sure what car that friend plans on driving back in but I'd probably clear up that transportation issue at the party if it ended up sucking balls. 

4. On the drive back, your friends are talking. A friend makes a claim that clashes with your current beliefs. What is your inward reaction? What do you outwardly say?

Depending on the stance and severity of the claim, I might express my own beliefs and respond accordingly. I mean, I would hope other people wouldn't defend late term abortion or terrorism or something egregious but I'd be happy to singlehandedly put this guy in his place. I'm not sure. If the guy wasn't aggressive about shoving the belief down everyone's throats I might let it slide. It irritates me when someone squeals that the other party's wrong when everyone's simply dealing in opinion or when there's no clear cut answer. 

5. What would you do if you actually saw/experienced something that clashes with your previous beliefs, experiences, and habits?

Like if I saw some kid getting fondled in an alley? I'd probably beat the guy's ass or otherwise terminate this little encounter. With something more subtle, like drone attacks on Pakistan, I'd definitely make everyone aware of the civilian collateral damage and the repercussions of perhaps unconstitutional martial force. I might go into a petite diatribe about the constitution itself, unitary executive theory, and how much of a bastard Cheney is. 

6. What are some of your most important values? How did you come about determining them? How can they change?

I have a high sense of integrity and loyalty which pervades everything I do. The former because there's so much dissimulation and bullshit in this world and the latter because I'm totally incapable of welshing on a promise. I guess, like Kant, I wouldn't want to inhabit a world in which everyone lies and stabs everyone else in the back. I've become keen on this idea of social contract recently, especially as it concerns this fiasco in Egypt. 

7. a) What about your personality most distinguishes you from everyone else? b) If you could change one thing about you personality, what would it be? Why?

I'm more withdrawn, sensitive, intelligent, principled, stubborn, intense, knowledgeable, and sarcastic than most people. Changes? I'd want to be more excited about everyday life. Maybe live more viscerally like my ESFJ sister. 

8. How do you treat hunches or gut feelings? In what situations are they most often triggered?

I probably follow my hunches more with career decisions and relationship stuff. Immediately upon meeting someone I size them up and wonder about their past and future. I usually subject these hunches to intense scrutiny in hindsight to analyze their reliability. 

9. a) What activities energize you most? b) What activities drain you most? Why?

I'm energized by being alone or consorting with like-minded folk as well as reading philosophy or sharing a laugh with somebody. Shopping, traffic, small talk, lies, too much sex, fake emotion, or overexposure to people and crowds drain me. 

10. What do you repress about your outward behavior or internal thought process when around others? Why?

I definitely repress my pessimism when I'm around people I care about. Why? Because nobody wants to hear that stuff and it only brings me down. There are other topics which don't mesh well with polite conversation. Basically I'm not going to force someone to disavow catholicism or admit that slavery produced America when I'm out at Denny's. Most of the things I think about are pretty heavy and some people can't handle that intensity. Hm. Around total strangers I guess I repress my eccentricity and congeniality until I'm ready to let them in, or until they show me that they're able to keep up.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Based on the Spades questionnaire, I would say ENP is far more likely. You definitely strike me as a perceiver dom, and I think you're either 7w8 or 8w7 but I am leaning towards the latter. I am leaning a little more towards ENFP than ENTP, but it could swing either way. It was hard to judge your auxiliary and tertiary based on these responses, but the picture question seemed to lean more towards the Fi axis to me. I do think your assessment is correct in that you're an dominant perceiver though. You might just be socially introverted.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

LeaT said:


> Can you please fill out my test or Spades' test instead. We need in-depth data and the test you filled out doesn't provide. Ideally both tests if you can be arsed.
> 
> Anyway, I do think the last questionnaire points more towards inferior Se to be honest, with the focus on sex, drugs, food and other sensory stimuli that seem to occur during times of stress more so than being sensitive of what others think about you, trying to over-emphasize logic and so on. I really don't see much Ne here either. The answers are very focused on the subject.


I think his answers to Spades' questionnaire say otherwise. Ne doesn't always have to show itself as jumping around. I've seen Ni users type like that, and I've seen Ne users talk structured. 
Just throwing this out there, but what do you think about ENFP? (Yes, you, not the OP)


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

LeaT said:


> Based on the Spades questionnaire, I would say ENP is far more likely. You definitely strike me as a perceiver dom, and I think you're either 7w8 or 8w7 but I am leaning towards the latter. I am leaning a little more towards ENFP than ENTP, but it could swing either way. It was hard to judge your auxiliary and tertiary based on these responses, but the picture question seemed to lean more towards the Fi axis to me. I do think your assessment is correct in that you're an dominant perceiver though. You might just be socially introverted.


The same enneagram type as Fidel Castro and Saddam Hussein. Lovely. I have tested as an eight before, though, and I enjoy that insight. I could definitely relate to talk about eight's vulnerabilities, fears, desires, and needs. I could accept an INTJ enneagram eight. As particularly regards the fear component of type eights, for awhile I misconstrued this as type six. There were aspects of the sixes desires and fears (phobias?), however, that didn't apply to me. An ENFP type eight. That's quite a number. I would need to be extremely dysfunctional to be an ENTP or ENFP - with all due respect to those types. I'm basically positive that I'm an introvert. What makes you think that I'm an extravert? I'm especially interested in this answer because it appears at variance with much of what I said previously. Is there a method to your madness?


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

LeaT said:


> Based on the Spades questionnaire, I would say ENP is far more likely. You definitely strike me as a perceiver dom, and I think you're either 7w8 or 8w7 but I am leaning towards the latter. I am leaning a little more towards ENFP than ENTP, but it could swing either way. It was hard to judge your auxiliary and tertiary based on these responses, but the picture question seemed to lean more towards the Fi axis to me. I do think your assessment is correct in that you're an dominant perceiver though. You might just be socially introverted.


Aha. So you do agree. This is exactly what I thought, too.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> I would need to be extremely dysfunctional to be an ENTP or ENFP - with all due respect to those types. I'm basically positive that I'm an introvert.


Why do you say that? It sounds like you have completely embraced INTJ as your type, and believe that behaving like the shadow is being dysfunctional. (No offense, I could be wrong). 

Personally, I get such a kick out of behaving like my shadow. It's only a phase - it comes and goes by itself - and doesn't last long, but it's so exhilarating.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Amaterasu said:


> Why do you say that? It sounds like you have completely embraced INTJ as your type, and believe that behaving like the shadow is being dysfunctional. (No offense, I could be wrong).
> 
> Personally, I get such a kick out of behaving like my shadow. It's only a phase - it comes and goes by itself - and doesn't last long, but it's so exhilarating.


Sure, phases are a gas but what's being discussed here? I honestly didn't create this thread to audaciously claim myself one type or another. Rather I wanted to unearth the rich opinion of forum folk. I'm not looking to uncover what my words could be construed as...I'm seeking to find my actual personality type. Is your opinion INTJ? OK I said I'd need to be extremely dysfunctional to be an ENTP_ because _​I'm actually quite introverted.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> Sure, phases are a gas but what's being discussed here? I honestly didn't create this thread to audaciously claim myself one type or another. Rather I wanted to unearth the rich opinion of forum folk. I'm not looking to uncover what my words could be construed as...I'm seeking to find my actual personality type. Is your opinion INTJ? OK I said I'd need to be extremely dysfunctional to be an ENTP_ because _​I'm actually quite introverted.


You might not be looking to uncover what your words could be construed as, but since we only have your words to go on, for us - the people trying to type you - what you meant by your words is important. 

Anyway, my opinion is ENFP or ENTP (and no I am not saying this because Lea did!).
An introverted function as the lead lends a high level of subjectivity, while extroversion is quite the opposite (objectivity). I could see quite some Ne in your answers to the questionnaire and there seemed to be more Fi than Ti - but I am not sure of that last part, since Fi and Ti are easily confused.
If I had to say only one type - ENFP.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

unctuousbutler said:


> I'm basically positive that I'm an introvert.


Correction: social introvert
We are talking cognitively
I'm a social introvert as well, just not a cognitive introvert.

This is a part of what Jung wrote about extroversion is.



> Now, when the orientation to the object and to objective facts is so predominant that the most frequent and essential decisions and actions are determined, not by subjective values but by objective relations, one speaks of an extraverted attitude. When this is habitual, one speaks of an extraverted type. If a man so thinks, feels, and acts, in a word so lives, as to correspond directly with objective conditions and their claims, whether in a good sense or ill, he is extraverted. His life makes it perfectly clear that it is the objective rather than the subjective value which plays the greater role as the determining factor of his consciousness. He naturally has subjective values, but their determining power has less importance than the external objective conditions. Never, therefore, does he expect to find any absolute factors in his own inner life, since the only ones he knows are outside himself. Epimetheus-like, his inner life succumbs to the external necessity, not of course without a struggle; which, however, always ends in favour of the objective determinant. His entire consciousness looks outwards to the world, because the important and decisive determination always comes to him from without. But it comes to him from without, only because that is where he expects it.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Correction: social introvert
> We are talking cognitively
> I'm a social introvert as well, just not a cognitive introvert.
> 
> This is a part of what Jung wrote about extroversion is.


I always enjoy perusing Jung but is there any textual demarcation of the distinction between "cognitive" and "social" introversion. Do you mean colloquially in the pure social sense? By cognitive introversion do you mean decision making or something? I'm familiar with MBTI but I have never heard these differences propounded before. So you're a social introvert who happens to be an extravert with dom-Fe as an ENFJ? That seems paradoxical. I'd rather not guess on the connotations of these terms any further. Please explain the difference between cognitive and social introversion.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Amaterasu said:


> You might not be looking to uncover what your words could be construed as, but since we only have your words to go on, for us - the people trying to type you - what you meant by your words is important.
> 
> Anyway, my opinion is ENFP or ENTP (and no I am not saying this because Lea did!).
> An introverted function as the lead lends a high level of subjectivity, while extroversion is quite the opposite (objectivity). I could see quite some Ne in your answers to the questionnaire and there seemed to be more Fi than Ti - but I am not sure of that last part, since Fi and Ti are easily confused.
> If I had to say only one type - ENFP.


Exactly. What was _meant_ by the words is important. 

In post twenty four didn't you disseminate a different opinion from the one LeaT arrived at? You seemed to tepidly endorse Ni in that post. I detected a swift solidification of the Ne position in later posts. 

I also noticed that LeaT said she didn't see much Ne in my posts, and then changed her mind abruptly. 

What's up guys? I'm merely looking for some consistency of opinion.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Amaterasu said:


> I think his answers to Spades' questionnaire say otherwise. Ne doesn't always have to show itself as jumping around. I've seen Ni users type like that, and I've seen Ne users talk structured.
> Just throwing this out there, but what do you think about ENFP? (Yes, you, not the OP)


Yes, if you read my response to the Spades questionnaire, I said ENFP too :tongue:


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

LeaT said:


> Yes, if you read my response to the Spades questionnaire, I said ENFP too :tongue:


The fact remains that you stated you didn't see Ne, like I said before. 

Yeah there still isn't consistency here. I appreciate the help though.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> Exactly. What was _meant_ by the words is important.
> 
> In post twenty four didn't you disseminate a different opinion from the one LeaT arrived at? You seemed to tepidly endorse Ni in that post. I detected a swift solidification of the Ne position in later posts.
> 
> ...


No. I mentioned even in that post that you could be an ENFP. I said that Ne doesn't have to always manifest as scattered, and that meant I still saw Ne in your posts, even if it wasn't jumping around.

And our opinions are likely to change the more information we are offered. If it confuses you, go with the opinion in the later posts rather than the earlier ones, as the later posts state more informed opinions.

However, ever since I posted here, I have said you were an ENFP. Or at least an ENP. There isn't any inconsistency in that.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> Exactly. What was _meant_ by the words is important.
> 
> In post twenty four didn't you disseminate a different opinion from the one LeaT arrived at? You seemed to tepidly endorse Ni in that post. I detected a swift solidification of the Ne position in later posts.
> 
> ...


Because the first questionnaire you answered is simply not a good qustionnaire and is better used at discerning enneagram than MBTI. I had a very incomplete picture of how you were actually thinking. Do note that I ascribe to the theory that a person can and will access all functions and will change their preferences somewhat depending on context. The end result is that it is very possible for you to score high on a function such as Ni and utilize Ni well, but this does not by any means prove that you must be Ni dominant. It simply means that it's a well-developed shadow function. 

The Spades questionnaire you filled out is much better at discerning how people actually think and reason, and this is much more important when determining cognitive preferences than motivational factors that were addressed in the first questionnaire you filled out. Cognitively you seem to think much more in line with an ENFP than an INTJ. Your thinking lacks a certain level of subjectivity and while you got strong Te, I don't see it being in your auxiliary position and working in tandem with Ni. NiTe has a vastly different result of how Ni doms (and SFPs) think and this difference will become apparent in how the Ni dom writes once you start studying these patterns. You don't match that pattern and your intuition seems extraverted, not introverted.

I would also want to point out that this consistency you're looking for seems to be Fi based. 

I am very tired right now and really just on a break from work so I won't give you any deeper explanation why I think you use Ne than Ni, but it's what Amaterasu said. The more information you provide us, the more likely we are to offer a type we think fits closer to how you seem to think based on our understanding of the MBTI. The lack of consistency here is perhaps more something you seem to perceive as being inconsistency than there actually being one. I actually see this reaction to be a little Fi wanting to rebel against Te, because I get the senes that you rather want the model to fit you than making you fit the model.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Amaterasu said:


> No. I mentioned even in that post that you could be an ENFP. I said that Ne doesn't have to always manifest as scattered, and that meant I still saw Ne in your posts, even if it wasn't jumping around.
> 
> And our opinions are likely to change the more information we are offered. If it confuses you, go with the opinion in the later posts rather than the earlier ones, as the later posts state more informed opinions.
> 
> However, ever since I posted here, I have said you were an ENFP. Or at least an ENP. There isn't any inconsistency in that.


You did say that. You also said that you've seen Ni users type like that, meaning type like I did in the first questionnaire.

For the record, I'm not doubting anyone's opinion. I just want evidence for those stances.

Also, I wouldn't flatter yourself with the confusion bit. Give me information and I can deal with it.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

unctuousbutler said:


> I always enjoy perusing Jung but is there any textual demarcation of the distinction between "cognitive" and "social" introversion. Do you mean colloquially in the pure social sense? By cognitive introversion do you mean decision making or something? I'm familiar with MBTI but I have never heard these differences propounded before. So you're a social introvert who happens to be an extravert with dom-Fe as an ENFJ? That seems paradoxical. I'd rather not guess on the connotations of these terms any further. Please explain the difference between cognitive and social introversion.


Social extroverts are the people who naturally are the center of attention. They are the people that other people circle around. The large groups that you see in school and such.



> Extroverts enjoy social situations and even seek them out since they enjoy being around people. Their ability to make small talk makes them appear to be more socially adept than introverts (although introverts may have little difficulty talking to people they don't know if they can talk about concepts or issues).


 - Definition of Extrovert -- What is an Extrovert?

Cognitive extroverts are like me. People with a dominant Fe, Te, Ne, Se.
I know a guy that is quite clearly an ESTP and he traveled around the world, now the only people he talked to were basically the people who did the same (note that he's an American tho and you know Americans :tongue and people he met along the way, tho he never had a constant traveling partner.
I currently only got 1 friend in my school, but it's alright for me because I can use my Fe when I'm around her quite freely.
ENPs might only want to be around a few people, but when they are around them they will bombard their friends with ideas, because they are Ne doms.



> When introverts want to be alone, it is not, by itself, a sign of depression. It means that they either need to regain their energy from being around people or that they simply want the time to be with their own thoughts. Being with people, even people they like and are comfortable with, can prevent them from their desire to be quietly introspective.


The only thing is that my Fe helps me fake being tired of people constantly talking (I nod and smile and give short answers to strangle the conversation).


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> You did say that. You also said that you've seen Ni users type like that, meaning type like I did in the first questionnaire.


The whole point was that your words weren't "jumping around", like I had said. 

I also said that your answer to Spades' questionnaire says otherwise, in reply to Lea's post saying she saw inferior Se. Clearly that meant I did not agree with her initial opinion of seeing the Ni-Se axis in you.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

LeaT said:


> Because the first questionnaire you answered is simply not a good qustionnaire and is better used at discerning enneagram than MBTI. I had a very incomplete picture of how you were actually thinking. Do note that I ascribe to the theory that a person can and will access all functions and will change their preferences somewhat depending on context. The end result is that it is very possible for you to score high on a function such as Ni and utilize Ni well, but this does not by any means prove that you must be Ni dominant. It simply means that it's a well-developed shadow function.
> 
> The Spades questionnaire you filled out is much better at discerning how people actually think and reason, and this is much more important when determining cognitive preferences than motivational factors that were addressed in the first questionnaire you filled out. Cognitively you seem to think much more in line with an ENFP than an INTJ. Your thinking lacks a certain level of subjectivity and while you got strong Te, I don't see it being in your auxiliary position and working in tandem with Ni. NiTe has a vastly different result of how Ni doms (and SFPs) think and this difference will become apparent in how the Ni dom writes once you start studying these patterns. You don't match that pattern and your intuition seems extraverted, not introverted.
> 
> ...


I'm tired as well so this might be my last post. Well, I consider myself an introvert for a few reasons - I'm pretty reclusive, very private, I test very high on the introverted side of the first MBTI dimension, and everyone considers me an introvert. There are some more neologisms in this post which I do not feel like quibbling over alongside some unfounded, overweening cheap shots near the end. Look, here's what I'll do: I'll look at the ENFP and ENTP profiles later today and see if anything resonates with me. For whatever reason I've ubiquitously led a few people to believe something unprecedented, namely that I'm an extravert. This wasn't a finding or even a theory at any past point in my life or at any previous junction in my personal history with this forum. It might have something to do with the abrupt way that I hashed out these answers but I'll inspect the profiles nonetheless.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Amaterasu said:


> The whole point was that your words weren't "jumping around", like I had said.
> 
> I also said that your answer to Spades' questionnaire says otherwise, in reply to Lea's post saying she saw inferior Se. Clearly that meant I did not agree with her initial opinion of seeing the Ni-Se axis in you.



The phrasing was ambiguous but I'd rather not argue.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Social extroverts are the people who naturally are the center of attention. They are the people that other people circle around. The large groups that you see in school and such.
> 
> - Definition of Extrovert -- What is an Extrovert?
> 
> ...


The article was pretty solid albeit brief. Well, I definitely _bombard _my friends with ideas if that's any consolation. I'll look at some heretofore unconsidered profiles and report back later today or early tomorrow. Thanks everybody.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> I'm tired as well so this might be my last post. Well, I consider myself an introvert for a few reasons - I'm pretty reclusive, very private, I test very high on the introverted side of the first MBTI dimension, and everyone considers me an introvert. There are some more neologisms in this post which I do not feel like quibbling over alongside some unfounded, overweening cheap shots near the end. Look, here's what I'll do: I'll look at the ENFP and ENTP profiles later today and see if anything resonates with me. For whatever reason I've ubiquitously led a few people to believe something unprecedented, namely that I'm an extravert. This wasn't a finding or even a theory at any past point in my life or at any previous junction in my personal history with this forum. It might have something to do with the abrupt way that I hashed out these answers but I'll inspect the profiles nonetheless.


Because once again, social introversion is not the same as cognitive introversion. While there is definitely a correlation between the two this is not written in stone. Jung was also very careful to not take social behavior at face value as an indicator of cognitive functions. 

I've typed several people as cognitive extraverts who are social introverts before. This should really not be too surprising to you. Also, The ENPs are the most introverted out of the extraverted types due to their auxiliary judging being introverted.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

LeaT said:


> Because once again, social introversion is not the same as cognitive introversion. While there is definitely a correlation between the two this is not written in stone. Jung was also very careful to not take social behavior at face value as an indicator of cognitive functions.
> 
> I've typed several people as cognitive extraverts who are social introverts before. This should really not be too surprising to you. Also, The ENPs are the most introverted out of the extraverted types due to their auxiliary judging being introverted.


Why shouldn't it be surprising for me? How does your past of typing people in such a manner affect me? How would I've been apprised of this information? Get over yourself. I'll still check out the information you provided but I'm seeing a lot of arrogance on your end with not enough intelligence to back it up.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> Why shouldn't it be surprising for me? How does your past of typing people in such a manner affect me? How would I've been apprised of this information? Get over yourself. I'll still check out the information you provided but I'm seeing a lot of arrogance on your end with not enough intelligence to back it up.


Well, my impression was that you had already studied Jung a bit so I simply wrote my post based on that assumption.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

That assumption and PMS? Anyway, you really need to learn syntax. 

Listen, I've taken this thread as far as reasonably profitable. 

For whatever reason, your wavelength and my wavelength aren't the same. That's cool but I'm done. 

I'm really more turned off by your haughty tone than your verdict of EXFP or whatever.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

unctuousbutler said:


> Why shouldn't it be surprising for me? How does your past of typing people in such a manner affect me? How would I've been apprised of this information? Get over yourself. I'll still check out the information you provided but I'm seeing a lot of arrogance on your end with not enough intelligence to back it up.


LeaT is quite smart.
Stubborn, but smart...
Not arrogant.

But you know, intelligence is a 2 way street. :tongue:


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> LeaT is quite smart.
> Stubborn, but smart...
> Not arrogant.
> 
> But you know, intelligence is a 2 way street. :tongue:


I easily hit the ceiling on the WAIS-III. There's nothing to worry about in that regard although I agree with the axiom in that one shouldn't cast pearls before swine.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

unctuousbutler said:


> That assumption and PMS? Anyway, you really need to learn syntax.
> 
> Listen, I've taken this thread as far as reasonably profitable.
> 
> ...


You should however *consider*being extroverted.
Tho your tone in this thread is more NTish.
You *seem like* an ENT to me (I'd vote for ENTP).

You criticizes people of not being "intelligent enough" or lacking in their analysis.
Not that they are "blunt" or "rude" or that kind of thing.

You're shining ENT to me :tongue:


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

unctuousbutler said:


> I easily hit the ceiling on the WAIS-III. There's nothing to worry about in that regard although I agree with the axiom in that one shouldn't throw pearls before swine.


Well, I think you didn't even reach the bottom on any EQ test.
There's no way for us to type you if you consider yourself "superior"

In this thread you've acted quite harshly at the people trying to help.
Add some wisdom and humility to your intelligence.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> You should however *consider*being extroverted.
> Tho your tone in this thread is more NTish.
> You *seem like* an ENT to me (I'd vote for ENTP).
> 
> ...


Yeah all vitriol aside I can sense that you want to help me. I did look at the ENTP profile, and I discovered some obvious similarities. Well, I'm used to blunt people and I expect rudeness but arrogance coupled with limitation, indeed, grates me. I only have so much patience for the LeaTs of this world.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Well, I think you didn't even reach the bottom on any EQ test.
> There's no way for us to type you if you consider yourself "superior"
> 
> In this thread you've acted quite harshly at the people trying to help.
> Add some wisdom and humility to your intelligence.


I consider everyone an equal upon first acquaintance. Disappointment comes later. Do I feel that some traits are superior to other traits? Absolutely. I'm much more humble, though, than people assume I am at first blush - they conflate my aggressiveness with tactlessness or arrogance when it's really curiosity and dedication. I'm confident in my abilities but I understand that nobody possesses all of the answers. Any harshness was a response to perceived snottiness. I'm here to learn. This was my motivation for creating the thread. I did actually learn something. I apologize to anyone that I offended.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

unctuousbutler said:


> Yeah all vitriol aside I can sense that you want to help me. I did look at the ENTP profile, and I discovered some obvious similarities. Well, I'm used to blunt people and I expect rudeness but arrogance coupled with limitation, indeed, grates me. I only have so much patience for the LeaTs of this world.


This reminds me.



> Ne vs Se
> 
> Simplicity of life is the cornerstone of the Se psyche, while for the Ne complexity is sublime. Ne will take a leap of faith while Se will first test the water. The sum total of stuff (opinions, feelings, beliefs and judgements about one's external world) accumulated defines who Se is, whereas a contextual understanding of stuff defines Ne.
> 
> ...


This is a page that I like to make quotes from: Understanding the Archetypes involving the eight functions of type (Beebe model)
But I think you can find things out on your own.
Specifically look at the ways that the functions for different types express themselves.

Also, I don't know if you've read anything from Jung, but here's the "book" or at least part of it dealing with psychological types.
Psychological Types - Wikisocion


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> That assumption and PMS? Anyway, you really need to learn syntax.
> 
> Listen, I've taken this thread as far as reasonably profitable.
> 
> ...


Where did you get the PMS part from? I never stated nor implied such a thing. And English is not my native language, although I think your issue is that I write the same way as I speak, and this is a reflection of being a dominant auditory learner. 

Also, I would like to point out that I do think your reaction is more ENFP-ish to me with regards of how you seem to perceive and attack me. I am not really concerned about that though, as I often tend to find personal attacks of this sort quite hilarious, as I never seen to see where they are coming from for most of the part *shrugs* I was never intending to attack your intelligence or anything, but I bringing up the "I'm smarter than you so your point is invalid" card without backing that up with evidence is a really poor way of proving your point. It does for one certainly not prove that you're more intelligent than me. I possess the knowledge about the subject here, and I assumed you were at least somewhat versed already, but this really seemed to have stepped on your F toes so whatever. Perhaps I worded myself in a bit of a clumsy manner, but I don't see the need to create all this dramo-rama. 

I just tend to have this effect on feelers in particular, that's all. Either you are capable of being around me and seeing that I don't intend ill or you don't. And this is why I also think you're more likely a feeler than a thinker. I get a lot of Fi vitriol from you, not Fe.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

LeaT said:


> Where did you get the PMS part from? I never stated nor implied such a thing. And English is not my native language, although I think your issue is that I write the same way as I speak, and this is a reflection of being a dominant auditory learner.
> 
> Also, I would like to point out that I do think your reaction is more ENFP-ish to me with regards of how you seem to perceive and attack me. I am not really concerned about that though, as I often tend to find personal attacks of this sort quite hilarious, as I never seen to see where they are coming from for most of the part *shrugs* I was never intending to attack your intelligence or anything, but I bringing up the "I'm smarter than you so your point is invalid" card without backing that up with evidence is a really poor way of proving your point. It does for one certainly not prove that you're more intelligent than me. I possess the knowledge about the subject here, and I assumed you were at least somewhat versed already, but this really seemed to have stepped on your F toes so whatever. Perhaps I worded myself in a bit of a clumsy manner, but I don't see the need to create all this dramo-rama.
> 
> I just tend to have this effect on feelers in particular, that's all. Either you are capable of being around me and seeing that I don't intend ill or you don't. And this is why I also think you're more likely a feeler than a thinker. I get a lot of Fi vitriol from you, not Fe.


Are you done?


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> Are you done?


I am not sure if I should roll my eyes or laugh, but yes. As I suspected, you're an 8. I am not sure which part of my enneagram it is that pisses off your 8, but there you go.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

LeaT said:


> Where did you get the PMS part from? I never stated nor implied such a thing. And English is not my native language, although I think your issue is that I write the same way as I speak, and this is a reflection of being a dominant auditory learner.
> 
> Also, I would like to point out that I do think your reaction is more ENFP-ish to me with regards of how you seem to perceive and attack me. I am not really concerned about that though, as I often tend to find personal attacks of this sort quite hilarious, as I never seen to see where they are coming from for most of the part *shrugs* I was never intending to attack your intelligence or anything, but I bringing up the "I'm smarter than you so your point is invalid" card without backing that up with evidence is a really poor way of proving your point. It does for one certainly not prove that you're more intelligent than me. I possess the knowledge about the subject here, and I assumed you were at least somewhat versed already, but this really seemed to have stepped on your F toes so whatever. Perhaps I worded myself in a bit of a clumsy manner, but I don't see the need to create all this dramo-rama.
> 
> I just tend to have this effect on feelers in particular, that's all. Either you are capable of being around me and seeing that I don't intend ill or you don't. And this is why I also think you're more likely a feeler than a thinker. I get a lot of Fi vitriol from you, not Fe.


I think you don't see Fe because you're offended.
An ENFP would put so much emphasis on expressing Fi that we couldn't miss it.

I've never met an NF that is concerned with peoples' intelligence either. It usually stops at "you're stupid" or "you're a jerk".



> I just tend to have this effect on feelers in particular, that's all.


Actually, you had the effect of annoying me and you thought I was ENTP.
I was just concealing it because my Fe is dominant. unctuousbutler doesn't do that. It's more of an "oh, sorry" when the behavior gets questioned.
Like his second post on this page.


> I apologize to anyone that I offended.


which was a response to me questioning him.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> I think you don't see Fe because you're offended.
> An ENFP would put so much emphasis on expressing Fi that we couldn't miss it.
> 
> I've never met an NF that is concerned with peoples' intelligence either. It usually stops at "you're stupid" or "you're a jerk".
> ...


PersC so slow at the moment... I don't think that necessarily has anything to do with Fe though XD I just take a quick look at gingertonic in comparison who has a really strong 8 wing and there really isn't much of a resemblence between the two. And ENFPs can be quite strong on the whole "intelligence" card too. Did you for example consider the rare NF 5s?


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

LeaT said:


> PersC so slow at the moment... I don't think that necessarily has anything to do with Fe though XD I just take a quick look at gingertonic in comparison who has a really strong 8 wing and there really isn't much of a resemblence between the two. And ENFPs can be quite strong on the whole "intelligence" card too. Did you for example consider the rare NF 5s?


No, I don't mix enneagrams and MBTI.
And I think you are rationalizing everything in your head. turning and twisting until it makes sense.
Some people just happen to not be the type they seem like.
And comparing people doesn't really help. I don't know gingertonic, so I wouldn't know. Tho it's a weak argument to compare people when you are typing.

When it came to you thinking I'm ENTP, I believe it has to do with you liking me 
When it comes to you thinking that he's ENFP, I believe it's because you don't like him :tongue:


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> No, I don't mix enneagrams and MBTI.
> And I think you are rationalizing everything in your head. turning and twisting until it makes sense.
> Some people just happen to not be the type they seem like.
> And comparing people doesn't really help. I don't know gingertonic, so I wouldn't know. Tho it's a weak argument to compare people when you are typing.
> ...


And that's wherein one of your weaknesses when understanding it lies, most likely, as enneagram can have a very strong effect on how people perceive the way you extravert your functions in text and overall behavior. My entire point is that people may not seem like the type they appear as _because enneagram can for example change the overall behavior of a person_.

And no, comparing people who is a very good example of a specific type is actually quite good in getting an idea if there are any function differences, especially if you can tell other strong similarities e.g. enneagram. There's no coincidence I think very similar like Brainfreeze_237 does.

And I am not even going to comment on the last comment because I find it rather silly and stupid. @Amaterasu, can you please come back here and give some additional input why you think ENFP over ENTP please. I feel like I am going in circles.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

LeaT said:


> Because there is no strict definition of how developed or under-developed Te has to be in any possible Te user  It could also be that you're currently exploring Te so Te is what you will rely on for now. The entire point of the MBTI and cognitive functions to develop the use of each function anyway, and function development depends a lot on environmental factors. An ENTP such as NovaStar has a strong Fe despite being tertiary where it shines through a lot in his posts but you do not sense this from gingertonic. No person is the same. There are many reasons why one ENFP would never really develop Te much beyond basic use but another ENFP would develop it to be almost as strong as their Fi.
> 
> And it's not that I am adamant of you being an ENTP. I just can't see it being a logical possibility based on your posts. I see a strong Fi-Te alignment, not so much Ti-Fe. I can of course be wrong and that's why you have to decide that on your own in the end, but the clues I see lead to ENFP, not so much ENTP. As I wrote to Acerbusvenator, I like to give people the clues I see, hone in on a few plausible options and really want them to explore those options until they can say with absolute certainty it doesn't apply to them. That's what I am trying to do here too. If you think ENFP does absolutely not fit you by any means, then go one and keep the ENTP title. You will have to make a strong argument why you think the Ti-Fe axis describes your way of thinking better, though :tongue:


In short because I can't relate to any of these ENFP self-indulgent, posturing twits online - love those guys. I definitely use Ti in conversation (weird pauses included) but I'm not sure how well that translates in text. This would undoubtedly become more obvious with a personal video, which I'm not even considering at this juncture. I have a picture, so if anyone's into physiognomy or something I could post that again. Anyway, I really can't imagine anyone watching my video that will never be made (it probably will), though, and concluding ENFP. That's the bottom line. I'm really blunt and more interested in intellectual stimulation than people as precious emotional vessels or something. I'd rather not quibble about those points (e.g., ENFP _needing_ to be gregarious) but suffice it to say I have more of an impersonal, philosophical view of reality than any ENFP I've ever heard from or come across. But yeah, I can relate to all of the ENTP profiles I've encountered - around four or five - and these hypomanic yet grouchy ENTP videos but not really any of the ENFP stuff.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> In short because I can't relate to any of these ENFP self-indulgent, posturing twits online - love those guys. I definitely use Ti in conversation (weird pauses included) but I'm not sure how well that translates in text. This would undoubtedly become more obvious with a personal video, which I'm not even considering at this juncture. I have a picture, so if anyone's into physiognomy or something I could post that again. Anyway, I really can't imagine anyone watching my video that will never be made (it probably will), though, and concluding ENFP. That's the bottom line. I'm really blunt and more interested in intellectual stimulation than people as precious emotional vessels or something. I'd rather not quibble about those points (e.g., ENFP _needing_ to be gregarious) but suffice it to say I have more of an impersonal, philosophical view of reality than any ENFP I've ever heard from or come across. But yeah, I can relate to all of the ENTP profiles I've encountered - around four or five - and these hypomanic yet grouchy ENTP videos but not really any of the ENFP stuff.


How does your behavior reflect the functions you use, though?


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Oh I get it!
LeaT wants to prove that I'm wrong and that her method is more accurate!
lol
Good luck with that LeaT. :laughing:

Truth is, I don't think you use the right strategy.

1. You criticize peoples' ability to understand themselves and their understanding of what has been said (complex about having superior knowledge)
2. You tell them that they are in a loop and that there's something wrong with them (people don't want to be typed to get a "hey, I've never met you, but you got a psychological disorder")

Truth is that there's no such thing as a loop.

I'd say that maybe there's unhealthy people who use their function is a negative way, but that's not a loop.

My mother who was brought up in a family with an alcoholic as father and has now become one herself still uses SeFiTeNi and it that order of priority.
The difference is that her Fi is extremely selfish and it's unstable when mixed with my Fe (nice way of saying that it's like clash of the titans when I have had enough of her negative Fi use).
She still wants to see the world no matter what and everyone who goes against her is a monster (yes, she will start crying or start shouting).

But that doesn't make her an ESFP in a loop. It makes her an ESFP who has had a hard life and who is protecting herself from that, which causes the functions to be filled with negative energy.

And really? You can't see when someone uses Ti rather than Fi?
The difference is quite basically
Fi - You are in my way, so I will remove you.
Ti - You are in my way so I will prove you wrong.

And there's a reason for why keirsey made the temperaments
Guardian (SJs)
Artisan (SPs)
Idealists (NFs)
Rationals (NTs)
Simply it is in how the types express themselves.
If anything, then our friend here tries to prove you wrong by giving facts and basically his attitude is quite rational.
I've never noticed even a bit of idealism in what he has said.
NFs usually sense other NFs by the way we talk (same goes for SPs, SJs and NTs).

You could bring enneagrams into this, but it's like comparing earths core to earth's crust.
The MBTI type being the core in this metaphor.

And for someone who considered eneagrams then you didn't do it when you typed me 
enneagram 6w5 is known for security concerns and can look quite rational because of it.

But you only put things into the argument if it helps your case.
Can't blame you for that tho. Most people do so.

Anyways, any good typer knows that it's up to the person being typed to decide what is credible evidence and what is circumstantial/inaccurate evidence.


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> Your rudeness from post ninety one onward was unwarranted, small-minded.
> 
> I never asked you to add anything. In fact, these posts have been an unexpected nuisance.


Sure yes it was rude... The point for me was resolving an inconsistency I saw in your post. That's fine now*. Also, due to my posts, you added some more information to the thread about yourself that was pretty interesting, that is that you work on projects and such beyond just ideas or some such that you mentioned are often "feckless". Your original post did not place any emphasis on actual projects but this is also part of who you are, right?

*: I decided not to go into questoning you about it any further because of your answer of how you actually work on a project related to the issue answered my wondering about the inconsistency (that is, resolved it). LeaT explains more about how the greenhouse issue was not fleshed out by you on a theoretical level, which is what I was originally expecting but your text was cut very short there. (Btw I'm not saying this is proof for ENFP over ENTP, this is not decisive proof for anything, I'm not big on typing you see  )


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

itsme45 said:


> Sure yes it was rude... The point for me was resolving an inconsistency I saw in your post. That's fine now*. Also, due to my posts, you added some more information to the thread about yourself that was pretty interesting, that is that you work on projects and such beyond just ideas or some such that you mentioned are often "feckless". Your original post did not place any emphasis on actual projects but this is also part of who you are, right?
> 
> *: I decided not to go into questoning you about it any further because of your answer of how you actually work on a project related to the issue answered my wondering about the inconsistency (that is, resolved it). LeaT explains more about how the greenhouse issue was not fleshed out by you on a theoretical level, which is what I was originally expecting but your text was cut very short there. (Btw I'm not saying this is proof for ENFP over ENTP, this is not decisive proof for anything, I'm not big on typing you see  )


Yeah that's cool but realize that merely because someone needlessly spouts off on one aspect of a theory it doesn't mean that they're credible or that the other party is not. That would make for an absurd universe. I can go much more in-depth but I see an internet forum as mostly frivolous play, intellectual or otherwise. I've talked about Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, time dilation, and Einstein's special relativity on other forums but I really do not feel impelled to waste much time or space (yeah I had to go there) spinning my wheels about that shit here. If anything, clearly propounding and enunciating the rudiments of some arcane or speculative theory proves one a dilettante rather than intelligent per se. I, on the contrary, merely made passing reference to an idea that was later highlighted, which understandably caused some defense of said position. Without a doubt I wouldn't have homed in on alternative energy without outside assistance. That was an offhand example meant solely to illustrate my information processing style. I'm not interested in impressing anyone or corralling in some trophies; I want to learn. That's all there is to it.


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

LeaT said:


> Because there is no strict definition of how developed or under-developed Te has to be in any possible Te user  It could also be that you're currently exploring Te so Te is what you will rely on for now. The entire point of the MBTI and cognitive functions to develop the use of each function anyway, and function development depends a lot on environmental factors. An ENTP such as NovaStar has a strong Fe despite being tertiary where it shines through a lot in his posts but you do not sense this from gingertonic. No person is the same. There are many reasons why one ENFP would never really develop Te much beyond basic use but another ENFP would develop it to be almost as strong as their Fi.


Like that flexible view. Definitely it's more than just a static concept of a specific level of development for each function. And it's definitely outside the function theory as to what things affect the functions development and thus affect basically everything about functions beyond the core essence of them, which on its own is really just a small part of what makes up or affects personality.




> And it's not that I am adamant of you being an ENTP. I just can't see it being a logical possibility based on your posts. I see a strong Fi-Te alignment, not so much Ti-Fe. I can of course be wrong and that's why you have to decide that on your own in the end, but the clues I see lead to ENFP, not so much ENTP. As I wrote to Acerbusvenator, I like to give people the clues I see, hone in on a few plausible options and really want them to explore those options until they can say with absolute certainty it doesn't apply to them. That's what I am trying to do here too. If you think ENFP does absolutely not fit you by any means, then go one and keep the ENTP title. You will have to make a strong argument why you think the Ti-Fe axis describes your way of thinking better, though


Hm, "based on your posts" ... *so far*. Is the key expression here 

Again I'm not into the typing much but even though I do see expressions that are usually attributed to Fi, I can imagine there being some other cause for the OP to use them, even something as banal as her just picking up this kind of talking style for whatever reason.

Or, the way she tried to dismiss me with Fi-like reasoning, it could also be just because she couldn't be bothered to go into it more or something. Who knows.




Acerbusvenator said:


> Oh I get it!
> LeaT wants to prove that I'm wrong and that her method is more accurate!
> lol
> Good luck with that LeaT. :laughing:


Oh wow conspiracy theory. Well unless I'm wrong and I missed a few things -.-




> 1. You criticize peoples' ability to understand themselves and their understanding of what has been said (complex about having superior knowledge)
> 2. You tell them that they are in a loop and that there's something wrong with them (people don't want to be typed to get a "hey, I've never met you, but you got a psychological disorder")


Wow such a "reasoning". Maybe you just misunderstand the lack of niceties in her impersonal analysis and mistake it for her having some ulterior personal motive. I often run into that problem with people, they misunderstand me in that way when the thing is really as stupidly simple as me just not thinking of the "people aspect" when I'm focusing on analysis so hard. (My default mode is not analysis so that may be another reason as to why I get into it so exclusively so that I can exclude any disturbance.)




> Truth is that there's no such thing as a loop.


That could very well be that there is no such thing but where was a loop even mentioned? (Sorry maybe it was mentioned much earlier...? I didn't check the very start of this thread now but it was not mentioned anywhere right now.)




> I'd say that maybe there's unhealthy people who use their function is a negative way, but that's not a loop.
> 
> My mother who was brought up in a family with an alcoholic as father and has now become one herself still uses SeFiTeNi and it that order of priority.
> The difference is that her Fi is extremely selfish and it's unstable when mixed with my Fe (nice way of saying that it's like clash of the titans when I have had enough of her negative Fi use).
> ...


That's actually a good reasoning, better than just assuming "oh loop" and trying to explain EVERYTHING with functions themselves.




> And really? You can't see when someone uses Ti rather than Fi?
> The difference is quite basically
> Fi - You are in my way, so I will remove you.
> Ti - You are in my way so I will prove you wrong.


Yeah I so get along with Ti's much much better  Or at least people who are capable of doing the latter even if they have a Fi preference otherwise. Yay, sorry for again making this complicated than your original simplistic way of judging things.




> And there's a reason for why keirsey made the temperaments
> Guardian (SJs)
> Artisan (SPs)
> Idealists (NFs)
> ...


Fuck Keirsey.




> If anything, then our friend here tries to prove you wrong by giving facts and basically his attitude is quite rational.
> I've never noticed even a bit of idealism in what he has said.


I see loads of idealism but that could be just some NT idealism too 




> Anyways, any good typer knows that it's up to the person being typed to decide what is credible evidence and what is circumstantial/inaccurate evidence.


OHH yes you are very right on that! That's really bad practice when the typer thinks they have enough information to judge what is substantial evidence and what is circumstantial. The thing is, the typer doesn't know the typee at all, so this cannot be decided by the typer.


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> Yeah that's cool but realize that merely because someone needlessly spouts off on one aspect of a theory it doesn't mean that they're credible or that the other party is not. That would make for an absurd universe. I can go much more in-depth but I see an internet forum as mostly frivolous play, intellectual or otherwise. I've talked about Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, time dilation, and Einstein's special relativity on other forums but I really do not feel impelled to waste much time or space (yeah I had to go there) spinning my wheels about that shit here. If anything, clearly propounding and enunciating the rudiments of some arcane or speculative theory proves one a dilettante rather than intelligent per se. I, on the contrary, merely made passing reference to an idea that was later highlighted, which understandably caused some defense of said position. Without a doubt I wouldn't have homed in on alternative energy without outside assistance. That was an offhand example meant solely to illustrate my information processing style. I'm not interested in impressing anyone or corralling in some trophies; I want to learn. That's all there is to it.


I think we are thinking about this issue very differently  Your argument can also make a lot of sense, but for me it wasn't about your personal credibility as I don't even know you and I don't really care about the person beyond the text here, I was simply reading the text and then seeing an inconsistency in the way things were presented, nothing more nothing less. Even if my remark did come off as "strong", it was due to how it didn't make sense to me. Not focusing on the person behind the text, again I don't even know you. So it is also not about impressing or trophies, it would be more just a fact for analysis (though I'm not doing typing here, but it can be used as a fact for others who do). Also, I understand you just made a reference to an idea but the way you originally tried to highlight it was not consistent to me even taking it into account that it was not meant to be explained in depth. But I already explained that, so okay. And sure, I understand you are just wanting to learn here. 

Btw interesting take there, you think that explaining aspects of some speculative theory makes one seem dilettante?


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

itsme45 said:


> I think we are thinking about this issue very differently  *Your argument can also make a lot of sense, but for me it wasn't about your personal credibility as I don't even know you and I don't really care about the person beyond the text here,* I was simply reading the text and then seeing an inconsistency in the way things were presented, nothing more nothing less. Even if my remark did come off as "strong", it was due to how it didn't make sense to me. Not focusing on the person behind the text, again I don't even know you. So it is also not about impressing or trophies, it would be more just a fact for analysis (though I'm not doing typing here, but it can be used as a fact for others who do). Also, I understand you just made a reference to an idea but the way you originally tried to highlight it was not consistent to me even taking it into account that it was not meant to be explained in depth. But I already explained that, so okay. And sure, I understand you are just wanting to learn here.
> 
> *Btw interesting take there, you think that explaining aspects of some speculative theory makes one seem dilettante?*


Yeah I absolutely believe enunciating a speculative theory in painstaking detail _on an internet forum _makes one a dilettante. That's why I forwent the spectacle. Also, the laughing emoticon and tone of post ninety one seemed not only to have its mind made up: it seemed arrogant and groundless. Once again: piss off. Yeah you really don't know me, but you judge anyway. I'm not even sure why you keep polluting this thread. Send me a PM with any lingering issues.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Oh I get it!


No, you don't.


> LeaT wants to prove that I'm wrong and that her method is more accurate!
> lol
> Good luck with that LeaT. :laughing:
> 
> Truth is, I don't think you use the right strategy.


Each to their own.


> 1. You criticize peoples' ability to understand themselves and their understanding of what has been said (complex about having superior knowledge)


Yep I do, because if they truly knew themselves from the very beginning they wouldn't be here in the typing forum asking for help to be typed since they clearly lack the introspection to tell what their true type is on their own. Giving them more information that any less lazy person can look for themselves will not necessarily help to clarify anything at this point. Would it have helped to me just give information about the inferior functions to Amaterasu when I helped typing her? Nope. Some people might be able to introspect that much on their own, but I personally think people need more guidance than having information tossed into their laps.


> 2. You tell them that they are in a loop and that there's something wrong with them (people don't want to be typed to get a "hey, I've never met you, but you got a psychological disorder")


Mssconstruction of everything I've said. Yes, I believe in loops, but no, I don't or never even insuniated that the OP was in one. I believe in loops because I've seen them in others when they especially take on a destructive form. I've also personally experienced them so your point saying? 

A person looping doesn't mean they don't want to be typed. You should insert fewer values in what I say.


> Truth is that there's no such thing as a loop.


Prove it.


> I'd say that maybe there's unhealthy people who use their function is a negative way, but that's not a loop.


Then wherein does the difference lie? Even Jung admits, in fact, it's one of he core ideas of his Psychological Types since his work focuses on treating mentally ill people, _that it is when we focus too much on the external or internal that we become unhealthy_. This only occurs when you give two external or internal functions precendence in your psyche. In other words, the person is looping. With that said, not every loop is destructive and I have never implied such a thing.


> My mother who was brought up in a family with an alcoholic as father and has now become one herself still uses SeFiTeNi and it that order of priority.
> The difference is that her Fi is extremely selfish and it's unstable when mixed with my Fe (nice way of saying that it's like clash of the titans when I have had enough of her negative Fi use).
> She still wants to see the world no matter what and everyone who goes against her is a monster (yes, she will start crying or start shouting).


Not seeing the point here. 


> But that doesn't make her an ESFP in a loop. It makes her an ESFP who has had a hard life and who is protecting herself from that, which causes the functions to be filled with negative energy.


Still not seeing the point here. You are talking about outside influence but not about how she cognitively operates. Was she overly focused on Se and Te as her functions where Fi was merely meant to support Te judgements instead of giving her some much needed Fi subjectivity? If she was, then she was looping.


> And really? You can't see when someone uses Ti rather than Fi?
> The difference is quite basically
> Fi - You are in my way, so I will remove you.
> Ti - You are in my way so I will prove you wrong.


If I didn't I don't think I would be in the typing forum. Also, I don't think those descriptions don't describe Fi or Ti because you're inserting values.


> And there's a reason for why keirsey made the temperaments
> Guardian (SJs)
> Artisan (SPs)
> Idealists (NFs)
> ...


I second itsme45: fuck Keirsey. There's so much wrong with the temperaments theory. So please tell me, what's the similarity between an INTP and an ENTJ? Nothing. We don't even share functions. Also, if we go back to Jung again, both F and T are rational functions. S and N are irrational functions. So why do you have this preconceived notion that an ENFP can't express herself rationally? Let's look at a person such as @Maybe who definitely seems to cognitively fit the description of an ENFP the best too. I would say she's quite the rational person based from me talking to her over the past few days. She's just giving Te more obvious precedence in her psyche because her enneagram is 584, and enneagram 5 is in the head triad, so she will obviously come off as more rational because 5 is one of the "rational" enneagram types. I seriously think you offend the more rational ENFPs out there. People, I should add, I admire. Not every ENFP has to be this happy-go-round lucky person. You know better than stereotyping people like this.


> You could bring enneagrams into this, but it's like comparing earths core to earth's crust.
> The MBTI type being the core in this metaphor.


Then you're forgetting that the core of the earth can be shaped in many ways to appear as sand, rock, diamond or what have you. The core doesn't change, but appearances can and will do so.


> And for someone who considered eneagrams then you didn't do it when you typed me
> enneagram 6w5 is known for security concerns and can look quite rational because of it.


lol yes we did. We for example looked at how your enneagram could affect the form of your inferior.


> But you only put things into the argument if it helps your case.
> Can't blame you for that tho. Most people do so.


?? I don't necessarily have a case. I attack your case. That's the basis of Ti argumentation.


> Anyways, any good typer knows that it's up to the person being typed to decide what is credible evidence and what is circumstantial/inaccurate evidence.


Where did I ever say a person has no right to make a new type me thread if they feel mistyped or tell me in my face they are mistyped after I've provided them the information I think would point towards their true type? Never. If you look at the above post I wrote, I even specifically told the OP the OP can be an ENTP but I wanted to see the OP first come up with a strong argument why the OP uses Ti-Fe instead of Fi-Te. 




itsme45 said:


> Like that flexible view. Definitely it's more than just a static concept of a specific level of development for each function. And it's definitely outside the function theory as to what things affect the functions development and thus affect basically everything about functions beyond the core essence of them, which on its own is really just a small part of what makes up or affects personality.


Definitely. Which is why we must look at it from a case-to-case basis for one.


> Hm, "based on your posts" ... *so far*. Is the key expression here


I may come across as harsh and definite, but there's usually always room for possibility one way or another 


> Again I'm not into the typing much but even though I do see expressions that are usually attributed to Fi, I can imagine there being some other cause for the OP to use them, even something as banal as her just picking up this kind of talking style for whatever reason.


Yes, which is why I would like to see the OP provide with more in-depth analysis why that must be Fe in this case, then.


> Oh wow conspiracy theory. Well unless I'm wrong and I missed a few things -.-


You didn't.


> Wow such a "reasoning". Maybe you just misunderstand the lack of niceties in her impersonal analysis and mistake it for her having some ulterior personal motive. I often run into that problem with people, they misunderstand me in that way when the thing is really as stupidly simple as me just not thinking of the "people aspect" when I'm focusing on analysis so hard. (My default mode is not analysis so that may be another reason as to why I get into it so exclusively so that I can exclude any disturbance.)



Yeah, I don't like to insert values normally when I analyze. They muddle the analysis itself too much.


> That could very well be that there is no such thing but where was a loop even mentioned? (Sorry maybe it was mentioned much earlier...? I didn't check the very start of this thread now but it was not mentioned anywhere right now.)


It wasn't. I never brought up or mentioned such a thing. The only thing I mentioned was that I thought the OP used a lot of Te and Ne in her posts. But I never implied or stated I thought he was looping.


> That's actually a good reasoning, better than just assuming "oh loop" and trying to explain EVERYTHING with functions themselves.


Yes, I agree. I don't think or has ever stated loops explain everything. 



> Yeah I so get along with Ti's much much better  Or at least people who are capable of doing the latter even if they have a Fi preference otherwise. Yay, sorry for again making this complicated than your original simplistic way of judging things.


lol not sure if there's any point apologizing at this point XD


> Fuck Keirsey.


Ditto.


> I see loads of idealism but that could be just some NT idealism too


Exactly. I see lots and lots of idealism. It's not super-apparent at surface level, but it's definitely there when you scratch a little.


> OHH yes you are very right on that! That's really bad practice when the typer thinks they have enough information to judge what is substantial evidence and what is circumstantial. The thing is, the typer doesn't know the typee at all, so this cannot be decided by the typer.


Another problem is the limitation of the forum itself. I can't judge that person's manners IRL for example.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

@itsme45 The part about loops is from my own history with her.
She is convinced that I'm a messed up ENTP in a NeFe Loop or something and that my strong Fe is fake.

That I added Keirsey was merely to make a more well rounded point.



> Oh I get it!
> LeaT wants to prove that I'm wrong and that her method is more accurate!
> lol
> Good luck with that LeaT. :laughing:





> Oh wow conspiracy theory. Well unless I'm wrong and I missed a few things -.-


Actually, she stated earlier that her method is better than mine.
It's a bit of everywhere, so it's hard to miss.
Page 8 is a kinda good example.

Another thing that annoys me is that she sees examples from the person being typed as "faulty" (thus the comment about circumstantial vs inaccurate).

I spent about 30 pages trying to explain to her that I was certain that I was NF and not NT.
The irony was that she didn't spot inferior Ti when she asked me to bring up evidence.
Inferior Ti can have problems with that stuff (thus being inferior).

So, if she couldn't spot inferior Ti in me when she's a Ti dom and when I made it clear I was an NF. Then I don't think I trust her typing.
*The customer knows best as they say, tho in this case it's the person being typed who knows best.*

btw. NTs can be idealistic, it's just really... different from NFs kind of idealism.
Everyone can be idealistic really.

Yea, if this was a bit weird and stuff I blame it on me just waking up. :tongue:


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

There are many fresh points and rebuttals in LeaT's most recent post but, to pick on one thing, generally the burden of proof rests on the person making the positive claim or assertion. That's at least how a philosophical burden of proof works. For example, if one's contention is that rats can fly, then s/he must demonstrate that rodential flying ability or face disbelief and abject humiliation. :crazy:

Anyway, the positive claim by LeaT that cognitive loops exist needs to be supported with evidence. In lieu of mathematical proofs, which are somewhat unfeasible, consensus as regards community standards should suffice for validation. I know this isn't my fight so I'll find the exit door right about now.


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> Yeah I absolutely believe enunciating a speculative theory in painstaking detail on an internet forum makes one a dilettante. That's why I forwent the spectacle. Also, the laughing emoticon and tone of post ninety one seemed not only to have its mind made up: it seemed arrogant and groundless. Once again: piss off. Yeah you really don't know me, but you judge anyway. I'm not even sure why you keep polluting this thread. Send me a PM with any lingering issues.


Ah. Your own subjective views. I know some stuff I said was put in a strong way and thus sounded like judging you but then we discussed the topic in a satisfactory way and I wished good luck to your project and now you still keep talking about the judgment issue. Anyway yeah I agree with you that this topic isn't worth more words. I would have gladly closed the whole topic when I said I hope your project will work out. I don't have any lingering issues here. 




Acerbusvenator said:


> @itsme45 The part about loops is from my own history with her.
> She is convinced that I'm a messed up ENTP in a NeFe Loop or something and that my strong Fe is fake.


That's okay (er I don't mean it's actually okay lol) but that's irrelevant to this thread, AFAIK.




> Actually, she stated earlier that her method is better than mine.
> It's a bit of everywhere, so it's hard to miss.
> Page 8 is a kinda good example.


I set the maximum amount of posts to be displayed on one page so it's not page 8 for me, but nevermind, I didn't see any such value judgment when reading the whole thread and that may be because I tend to see things in a different way/interpretation. Of course if you want to show me, you can quote a post number.




> So, if she couldn't spot inferior Ti in me when she's a Ti dom and when I made it clear I was an NF. Then I don't think I trust her typing.
> *The customer knows best as they say, tho in this case it's the person being typed who knows best.*


The whole typing task is really hard to do for an outsider (heck there is a reason why I don't want to type anyone)... so I do agree with bolded. Just the customer needs to understand how the theory applies to them... requiring understanding/knowing of theory & practice & many aspects of themselves.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> So, if she couldn't spot inferior Ti in me when she's a Ti dom and when I made it clear I was an NF. Then I don't think I trust her typing.


I very well identified Ti in you. I never said you didn't have Ti. I was in fact rather adamant when some others, especially the NFPs trying to type you, claimed you used Fi. I was absolutely certain about the Ti-Fe axis very early on when I typed you. The fact you kept using Fe to deflect in your own thread did however not help typing you in the least and I called this out somewhere midway through. Instead of giving honest answers to questions you tended to dodge them, making typing you much harder. Even when a person such as myself asked or rephrased the question, you provided with an entirely different answer that had nothing to do with the question itself. Why do you think the thread continued on as long as it did? It was because you had an inability to be honest with the way you responded when typers asked you a question. Instead of saying why you identified more with a function, your answer was for example often in the lines of "because I can see a little bit of everything in all the functions in myself". It definitely showed a strong inability to introspect for one, which put you on the extraverted fence right off the bat. 

You really shouldn't be surprised you appeared NeFe-esque to others, because you did. Your thread was very reminiscient of @_Title_'s, who did exactly what you did too, and that thread also went on for ages. If you are absolutely certain about being Fe dominant, I wouldn't overlook ESFJ for you with strong tertiary Ne. Your thinking does lack a certain level of subjectivity that would make it more balanced in my eyes, and I think this is apparent in this thread too. The way you for example carried over that I thought you were looping into this thread (and itsme45 is completely correct in that it's irrelevant) is very SiNe at first glance.

I think your problem you have with my way of typing isn't that you think I think a person can't decide on their own. It's because you simply think giving a person more generalized data is more useful but that's not how I see it. If a person is confused giving them more information is simply not the way to go if you can't help to clarify what that information means. To me clarification is very important. Information is useless on its own without providing with a clear framework in which it operates. By for example helping a person narrow down to one or a couple of types, they can look and compare and see which one they identify with more, and then we can have further discussion why that type over another type and whether this seems to fit cognitively. 

I am really much more open to discussion than you seem to think I am. I am however very allergic to when a person starts deflecting in their own type me thread. They're doing personal cognitive sabotage and it's a sign of not wanting to truly cooperate, and then I will be more obstinate about my ways, because I am not letting people get away like that. If you want my help, then please take me and what I say seriously and engage in an open discussion why this or that with me. You never really did, and it pissed me off.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

LeaT said:


> I second itsme45: fuck Keirsey. There's so much wrong with the temperaments theory. So please tell me, what's the similarity between an INTP and an ENTJ? Nothing. We don't even share functions. Also, if we go back to Jung again, both F and T are rational functions. S and N are irrational functions. So why do you have this preconceived notion that an ENFP can't express herself rationally? Let's look at a person such as @_Maybe_ who definitely seems to cognitively fit the description of an ENFP the best too. I would say she's quite the rational person based from me talking to her over the past few days. She's just giving Te more obvious precedence in her psyche because her enneagram is 584, and enneagram 5 is in the head triad, so she will obviously come off as more rational because 5 is one of the "rational" enneagram types. I seriously think you offend the more rational ENFPs out there. People, I should add, I admire. Not every ENFP has to be this happy-go-round lucky person. You know better than stereotyping people like this.
> 
> Then you're forgetting that the core of the earth can be shaped in many ways to appear as sand, rock, diamond or what have you. The core doesn't change, but appearances can and will do so.
> lol yes we did. We for example looked at how your enneagram could affect the form of your inferior.


Thank you, that is very sweet 

I realize I'm stepping into the middle of a very heated thread here without reading the majority of it, but I just wanted to point out that I think it is common (IRL and when discussing enneagram and functions) for people to imagine emotions and logic as opposites. This is an issue I have faced in my life as well. But I have come to realize they are not necessarily opposites. There is some logic to emotion (it is often part of a survival instinct) and there is some emotion to logic (how many people are TRULY objective? has anyone on this thread ever met one?) .... And @LeaT is right in a previous post - the idea is to learn to use all the functions, not to self-identify and boast that your functions are better than someone else's functions. Obviously it helps to know which functions are most accessible to you, as part of one's own personal exploration of self; but it is also limiting to subscribe to this so rigidly that another person's use of another function becomes intolerable. If anything, I'd be extra drawn to people who use functions opposite mine, so that I may learn from them.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

LeaT said:


> I second itsme45: fuck Keirsey. There's so much wrong with the temperaments theory. So please tell me, what's the similarity between an INTP and an ENTJ? Nothing. We don't even share functions. Also, if we go back to Jung again, both F and T are rational functions. S and N are irrational functions. So why do you have this preconceived notion that an ENFP can't express herself rationally? Let's look at a person such as @_Maybe_ who definitely seems to cognitively fit the description of an ENFP the best too. I would say she's quite the rational person based from me talking to her over the past few days. She's just giving Te more obvious precedence in her psyche because her enneagram is 584, and enneagram 5 is in the head triad, so she will obviously come off as more rational because 5 is one of the "rational" enneagram types. I seriously think you offend the more rational ENFPs out there. People, I should add, I admire. Not every ENFP has to be this happy-go-round lucky person. You know better than stereotyping people like this.
> 
> Then you're forgetting that the core of the earth can be shaped in many ways to appear as sand, rock, diamond or what have you. The core doesn't change, but appearances can and will do so.
> lol yes we did. We for example looked at how your enneagram could affect the form of your inferior.


Thank you, that is very sweet 

I realize I'm stepping into the middle of a very heated thread here without reading the majority of it, but I just wanted to point out that I think it is common (IRL and when discussing enneagram and functions) for people to imagine emotions and logic as opposites. This is an issue I have faced in my life as well. But I have come to realize they are not necessarily opposites. There is some logic to emotion (it is often part of a survival instinct) and there is some emotion to logic (how many people are TRULY objective? has anyone on this thread ever met one?) .... And @_LeaT_ is right in a previous post - the idea is to learn to use all the functions, not to self-identify and boast that your functions are better than someone else's functions. Obviously it helps to know which functions are most accessible to you, as part of one's own personal exploration of self; but it is also limiting to subscribe to this so rigidly that another person's use of another function becomes intolerable. If anything, I'd be extra drawn to people who use functions opposite mine, so that I may learn from them. 

Edit: Visually, I would think that many people picture emotion on one end of a continuum and logic on the other. Personally, I would picture two separate continuums, but place them crossing one another so that they may balance each other out, align to be used together as one, or inform one another. The joined effort of emotion and logic on a + continuum, would contribute to a particular moment during which both would be used to one degree or another.


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

Maybe said:


> I realize I'm stepping into the middle of a very heated thread here without reading the majority of it, but I just wanted to point out that I think it is common (IRL and when discussing enneagram and functions) for people to imagine emotions and logic as opposites. This is an issue I have faced in my life as well. But I have come to realize they are not necessarily opposites. There is some logic to emotion (it is often part of a survival instinct) and there is some emotion to logic (how many people are TRULY objective? has anyone on this thread ever met one?) .... And @_LeaT_ is right in a previous post - the idea is to learn to use all the functions, not to self-identify and boast that your functions are better than someone else's functions. Obviously it helps to know which functions are most accessible to you, as part of one's own personal exploration of self; but it is also limiting to subscribe to this so rigidly that another person's use of another function becomes intolerable. If anything, I'd be extra drawn to people who use functions opposite mine, so that I may learn from them.
> 
> Edit: Visually, I would think that many people picture emotion on one end of a continuum and logic on the other. Personally, I would picture two separate continuums, but place them crossing one another so that they may balance each other out, align to be used together as one, or inform one another. The joined effort of emotion and logic on a + continuum, would contribute to a particular moment during which both would be used to one degree or another.


Yeah, very very hard to be near 100% objectivity but I can sometimes manage for a short while and they are very interesting moments. 

It's definitely easier for me to just balance out T/F together than the 100% objectivity


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Maybe said:


> Thank you, that is very sweet
> 
> I realize I'm stepping into the middle of a very heated thread here without reading the majority of it, but I just wanted to point out that I think it is common (IRL and when discussing enneagram and functions) for people to imagine emotions and logic as opposites. This is an issue I have faced in my life as well. But I have come to realize they are not necessarily opposites. There is some logic to emotion (it is often part of a survival instinct) and there is some emotion to logic (how many people are TRULY objective? has anyone on this thread ever met one?) .... And @_LeaT_ is right in a previous post - the idea is to learn to use all the functions, not to self-identify and boast that your functions are better than someone else's functions. Obviously it helps to know which functions are most accessible to you, as part of one's own personal exploration of self; but it is also limiting to subscribe to this so rigidly that another person's use of another function becomes intolerable. If anything, I'd be extra drawn to people who use functions opposite mine, so that I may learn from them.
> 
> Edit: Visually, I would think that many people picture emotion on one end of a continuum and logic on the other. Personally, I would picture two separate continuums, but place them crossing one another so that they may balance each other out, align to be used together as one, or inform one another. The joined effort of emotion and logic on a + continuum, would contribute to a particular moment during which both would be used to one degree or another.



That's a useful analogy. I imagine emotions and logic could be on some sort of cartesian plane. The telos might be to nab balance by staying on that 0,0 point. Maybe that's why that point is called the origin. :crazy:

I feel this relates to a Nietzsche quote that's stayed with me somehow: "Not the intensity but the duration of high feelings makes high men." Smart guy. 

Anyway, I've noticed many enneagram types, especially the aggressive types, include this balance of logic, will, and emotions for high functioning individuals of that particular type. OK, I'm thinking of enneagram type eight.


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> That's a useful analogy. I imagine emotions and logic could be on some sort of cartesian plane. The telos might be to nab balance by staying on that 0,0 point. Maybe that's why that point is called the origin. :crazy:
> 
> I feel this relates to a Nietzsche quote that's stayed with me somehow: "Not the intensity but the duration of high feelings makes high men." Smart guy.
> 
> Anyway, I've noticed many enneagram types, especially the aggressive types, include this balance of logic, will, and emotions for high functioning individuals of that particular type. OK, I'm thinking of enneagram type eight.


Eh, by 0,0 do you mean this ideal of 50% F, 50% T?

Enneagram 8 is not really about F things at all... as for enneagram 8 being about emotions, well anger is sure an emotion  an instinctual emotion, not MBTI F......


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

itsme45 said:


> Eh, by 0,0 do you mean this ideal of 50% F, 50% T?


I believe he talks about a balance between reason and emotions.
A balance where neither emotions nor reason is neglected.


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> I believe he talks about a balance between reason and emotions.
> A balance where neither emotions nor reason is neglected.


If that's not 50% F and 50% T then it would mean it's individual where the balance is for each person. And the setup that is balanced for one person wouldn't be so balanced for another person then, that is, it would feel like one side is neglected


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

itsme45 said:


> If that's not 50% F and 50% T then it would mean it's individual where the balance is for each person. And the setup that is balanced for one person wouldn't be so balanced for another person then, that is, it would feel like one side is neglected


I wasn't speaking in MBTI terms.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> I wasn't speaking in MBTI terms.


Neither was I but I would have hoped that the cartesian plane example would have set folks straight. :crazy:


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

*I felt the sudden compulsion (and energy) to take LeaT's questionnaire. Enjoy! :crazy:
*
2. Study these two images here and here. Which one do you prefer and why? How would you describe it?

Aurora Borealis? Yeah I like the first one more because it's neat and tranquility inducing, unlike the city. 

3. Please describe yourself as a person if you were to introduce yourself to someone else like in a cover letter. What kind of person are you and why?

Honest, persistent, curious, innovative, smart, and loyal. Because it happens to be true. 

4. What kind of person would you LIKE to be? Why? What kind of person would you NOT want to be? Why?

I wouldn't mind being more fearless and less dogmatic. The former because I would experience more and basically be a better person and the latter because I'd piss fewer people off that way. 

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

Probably not too many discrepancies. I'm pretty blunt, sometimes harsh, and I basically let it all hang out. Well, maybe I'm more shy or anxious upon forging new relationships than most people would deduce. I might wash my vulnerability in brashness. 

6. What in life do you find to be of importance? Why? If you are unsure you can always take the Value Testand post the results here. Do note that it helps if you narrow it down to 20 or ideally 10 values as suggested at stage 2.

Integrity, happiness, knowledge, novel experiences, challenges, deep relationships, family, individuality, and truth. 

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

That's really vague. When I moved to a new city I made some friends and learned about some places that I could depend on for food, recreation, or whatever. 

8. Please describe yourself when you are in a stressful situation. How do you act and why? Real life experiences are welcome.

When I'm really stressed I either basically shut down in the moment and instill order or, especially when things are out of my control, I indulge in sensual stuff like sex and food. I sometimes look for a stimulant, supplement, or food to temporally surmount the hump. Meh, I usually look to instill order. 

9. Please describe yourself when you are in an enjoyable situation. How do you act and why? Real life experiences are welcome.

I'm usually in the zone or doing something I've never done before. To an outsider the former wouldn't look like much beyond stoicism but when the latter involves other people I can be pretty animated. 

10. Describe your relationship to socialization. How do you perceive one-on-one interaction? How do you perceive group interaction?

Both are fine. With one on one interaction I like to go deep with people and challenge them, hoping they reciprocate. Group interaction is typically fun and energizing for me at first and then my enthusiasm wanes. The conversations can get pretty retarded with more than five people over one hour in. I get pretty bored. 

11. Describe your relationship to society. What are the elements of it you hold important or unimportant (e.g. social norms, values, customs, traditions)? How do you see people as a whole?

I see today's society as a bureaucratic machine catering to pointless jobs and mostly unoriginal people. There's been a clear ascension into decline since the industrial revolution in terms of automatization and fatuousness. Most people are disenfranchised from the larger political process without really being aware of their powerlessness. On the positive side of industrialization, I enjoy the greater accessibility to food and other commodities. Today's people? Mainly mindless consumers running on a hamster wheel. They can definitely do better - this makes my surprise especially marked whenever I find an interesting or first-rate person. 

12. Describe your relationship to authority. How do you perceive authority? What does it mean to you, and how do you deal with it?

Some laws and enforcers are clearly necessary but I feel power gets abused and money usually triumphs - I'm more into social contract than strict laws per se. The prison industrial complex in the US is a big problem that represents overweening power, collusion, bad laws, and racism. I basically feel most laws are stupid because their creators (yeah even the founding fathers) were stupid themselves or merely myopic. Come on, the third and seventh amendments? Anyway, I think most police officers are jagoffs who failed tenth grade algebra and I give them the respect that they're warranted. 

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

I'm actually pretty cozy with chaos. I like to unhinge people in conversations to find out what they're really thinking. Also, since I'm not usually overwhelmed, I like more information and stimulation almost all the time. I guess I try to keep my character and thinking modalities dry but I throw everything else into the pool of chance. 

14. What is it that you fear in life? Why? How does this fear manifest to you both in how you think and how you act?

Fear? Maybe disintegration of my personality or becoming doddering or losing touch with consensus reality. I'm not really put off by rejection like some people. It's kind of irrational but I might take fewer chances or actions to avoid change. Maybe reactionary is the better word. 

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

Achievements, accolades, fame, these things aren't important to me. I want an understanding mate, self-understanding, security, intelligence...just enough money to live the life that I'd prefer. I want to avoid demeaning labor and boring people. I guess these motivations are inspired by a drive towards personal enrichment and freedom. 

16. a) What activities energize you most? b) What activities drain you most? Why?

I'm energized by stimulating conversation, books that present fresh (sometimes controversial) theories, really connecting with people, and trying unexplored things (people, places, drugs, music, etc.) without it blowing up in my face. I'm drained by noticing mediocrity and resignation in people and institutions. 

17. Why do you want to know your type? What type do you think you are? Why this/these type(s)? Is there a type that appeals to you, to your self-perception, that you would like to be? Why? If you know yourenneagram, please post this here. If you have done any online function tests such as the Keys2Cognition, it helps if you post these results here as well.

Good opening question. :crazy: As far as I can tell I'm an ENXP and enneagram five or eight - choose your poison. I want to know my type for basically selfish reasons of personal development, to see how I fit into the MBTI schema, and to see who I'm most compatible with. There are types that I wouldn't want to be (ESTP, ESFP, ISTJ, ISTP) but whatever truth holds for my real type, I'll live or die by.


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> I wasn't speaking in MBTI terms.


Then replace T and F with logic and emotions, my statement still applies.




unctuousbutler said:


> Neither was I but I would have hoped that the cartesian plane example would have set folks straight. :crazy:


Well the original post was connecting it to MBTI too. I associated your 0,0 coordinates with the 50-50 ideal that I've heard people talk about before.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

itsme45 said:


> Then replace T and F with logic and emotions, my statement still applies.


OH C'MON!
Learn MBTI
By your statement
F = emotions
T = logic
IT IS WRONG AND OUT OF CONTEXT!

You don't balance your functions, they mature.


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> OH C'MON!
> Learn MBTI
> By your statement
> F = emotions
> ...


You completely misunderstood me. My statement was about kinds of balances. It does not matter what the exact concepts are here, I was talking about the structure.

And yup, my whole point was about how inconsistent the idea of such a balance ideal is, I agree it is more about maturing.


----------



## petitpèlerin (Apr 23, 2012)

LeaT said:


> I get a lot of Fi vitriol from you, not Fe.


Exactly. This one reminds me almost exactly of an old friend of mine I knew closely for a long time. It took me forever to type him. At first I thought he (my friend) was an introvert because he hated people. (But, by the way, while maintaining his superiority complex, he just can't leave people alone. He makes friends, or at least disciples, everywhere he goes.) I finally figured out that he's an Ne-dom, and thus extroverted. Then I assumed he was ENTP, because of the sheer mass of his intellect. He's one of the most phenomenally intelligent people I've ever personally known. But then I got it: the Fi vitriol. That's exactly it. It's not Ti, it's Fi. It's not about logic, it's all about what he likes and dislikes (and add in Te which refers more to others' thinking than one's own, such as referring constantly to favorite authors, musicians, etc.). He's an ENFP megalomaniac (an endearing one, but still). I didn't get it sooner because the ENFP I know best now is deeply humble, in his own crazy way, and this old friend of mine was deeply insecure and arrogant. But even he wasn't as personally insulting to the people around him as unctuousbutler. Anyway, what I'm saying is, I see ENFP clearly here. No bubbles, no clouds, no fluff, no fuzzies. Just some endearing megalomania and a large and insatiable intellect that uses Fi-Te over Ti-Fe.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

ltldslwmn said:


> Exactly. This one reminds me almost exactly of an old friend of mine I knew closely for a long time. It took me forever to type him. At first I thought he (my friend) was an introvert because he hated people. (But, by the way, while maintaining his superiority complex, he just can't leave people alone. He makes friends, or at least disciples, everywhere he goes.) I finally figured out that he's an Ne-dom, and thus extroverted. Then I assumed he was ENTP, because of the sheer mass of his intellect. He's one of the most phenomenally intelligent people I've ever personally known. But then I got it: the Fi vitriol. That's exactly it. It's not Ti, it's Fi. It's not about logic, it's all about what he likes and dislikes (and add in Te which refers more to others' thinking than one's own, such as referring constantly to favorite authors, musicians, etc.). He's an ENFP megalomaniac (an endearing one, but still). I didn't get it sooner because the ENFP I know best now is deeply humble, in his own crazy way, and this old friend of mine was deeply insecure and arrogant. But even he wasn't as personally insulting to the people around him as unctuousbutler. Anyway, what I'm saying is, I see ENFP clearly here. No bubbles, no clouds, no fluff, no fuzzies. Just some endearing megalomania and a large and insatiable intellect that uses Fi-Te over Ti-Fe.


I appear to possess a special charm with the self-identified ladies on this forum. :crazy:

Very intriguing analysis. Bluntness, which wasn't threatened with extinction in the above post, is certainly encouraged as long as it's sincere and somewhat accurate. 

Aw yeah, give me some of that John Lennon Fi vitriol. Just like mamma used to make it. :laughing:

I could have done without the "personally insulting" par excellence crack near the end, and perhaps my username is increasingly ironic, but the post was entertaining nonetheless.


----------



## petitpèlerin (Apr 23, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> Very intriguing analysis. Bluntness, which wasn't threatened with extinction in the above post, is certainly encouraged as long as it's sincere and somewhat accurate.
> 
> Aw yeah, give me some of that John Lennon Fi vitriol. Just like mamma used to make it. :laughing:
> 
> I could have done without the "personally insulting" par excellence crack near the end, and perhaps my username is increasingly ironic, but the post was entertaining nonetheless.


I didn't mean I found you personally insulting, I meant you personally insulted people. Fact. But I do strive for sincerity and relative accuracy. Thanks. And glad you're entertained. 

Also, I enjoyed reading your response to LeaT's questionnaire, and I'm still coming up ENFP. That's my vote.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

I have to say that I'm not totally unconvinced or disabused from the finding that I'm an ENTP. Found this on another site. 


> ENTP/ESFJ: Ne/Fe or Fe/Ne--Narcissistic Personality Disorder. This type often behaves impulsively and manipulatively, needing constant approval and admiration from others, running around investing in new thing after new thing but never developing the self-confidence of a strong subjective perspective. *Fe used negatively may use its awareness of the cultural standards of others to intentionally offend or upset them, in order to service Ne's curiosity about the patterns in their responses. *If Ti/Si were working properly, it would give the user a balancing sense of personal, subjective importance and free him of his dependence upon the adulation and unconditional acceptance of others. (Horrible example: Patrick Bateman from American Psycho.)


The part I bolded is almost what I instinctively do. I know: it's bad. Anyway, this at least resonates with the unanimous reports outlining narcissistic tendencies. It's somewhat funny because I know some forum chick is going to rail against me (or thought about doing such) for making that admission. :tongue:

There's some dispute on this forum, and especially in this thread, whether cognitive loops actually exist. Whatever. :kitteh:


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

@unctuousbutler

Still think you're ENFP. After reading the statement of your values in the questionnaire you posted recently.
Not sure if you want my opinion here in this thread, though.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

@unctuousbutler, after reading a part of that questionnaire I'd make a guess for ENFP as well and the first and strongest of the values you chose was integrity, lol.
Also, I don't like disagreeing with @ltldslwmn or @Amaterasu 
Plus, ltldslwmn made some good points as well.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> @_unctuousbutler_, after reading a part of that questionnaire I'd make a guess for ENFP as well and the first and strongest of the values you chose was integrity, lol.
> Also, I don't like disagreeing with @_ltldslwmn_ or @_Amaterasu_
> Plus, ltldslwmn made some good points as well.


Ahahaha you'd better NOT disagree with me if you don't want to see my bad side. On that note, I don't think I would _want_ to show my bad side to you :kitteh:


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

Okay, my first type-me thread, as requested. I might not respond to all of it but if anything jumps out at me, it shall be stated here.  Just so you know I have not read ANY of the other responses or the previous posts on this thread, so this reaction is purely based on THIS POST ALONE and my gut reaction, not influenced by anyone or anything prior/ no outside data beyond our comments on each other's walls and a few posts before the one I commented on. 


unctuousbutler said:


> *I felt the sudden compulsion (and energy) to take LeaT's questionnaire. Enjoy! :crazy:
> *
> 2. Study these two images here and here. Which one do you prefer and why? How would you describe it?
> 
> Aurora Borealis? Yeah I like the first one more because it's neat and tranquility inducing, unlike the city.


Hmm.. not sure how to interpret this. It is worth noting that you named the specific constellation, and explained your preference in a logical manner, rather than just referring to a feeling/ internal reaction.



> 3. Please describe yourself as a person if you were to introduce yourself to someone else like in a cover letter. What kind of person are you and why?
> Honest, persistent, curious, innovative, smart, and loyal. Because it happens to be true.


Many 5s would say 'truth is relative.' The phrase "It happens to be true" points to a very smart, intellectual Enneagram 1 to me. An enneagram 1 who values honesty, persistence, curiosity, and loyalty. Commitment to the truth.. willingness to accept something as truth is a gut impulse. :O



> 4. What kind of person would you LIKE to be? Why? What kind of person would you NOT want to be? Why?
> 
> I wouldn't mind being more fearless and less dogmatic. The former because I would experience more and basically be a better person and the latter because I'd piss fewer people off that way.


You'd like to be less dogmatic? :O this is another sign of e-1. I can see some undertones of 5 in your writing but I believe many 5s (like me, Ms. Maybe) would love to be able to make decisions quickly and commit to things, trusting their gut.
As for the "more fearless" section, well obviously as a quick gut-reaction anyone would say this is associated with the enneagram 6, or anyone in the head triad.. though many 7s in my 'fear thread' have claimed they are already fearless; so I'm not sure if this would come to mind immediately for a 7. Most 6s will openly admit they'd like to be more fearless, and I suppose 5s as well. But if a 1 values fearlessness, this can also apply to a 1. 1s often hold in their feelings in the interest of 'doing what's right' and feel something like 'fear of being wrong.' Well, everyone feels fear to some extent I suppose. This comment on its own could point to 6 but in light of previous posts I'd still say it could be 1ish.



> 5. Do you think there are any differences to how you described yourself and how people actually perceive you? How do you think others would describe you? If there are any discrepancies between these two that are you are aware of; do you know why exactly that is?
> 
> Probably not too many discrepancies. I'm pretty blunt, sometimes harsh, and I basically let it all hang out. Well, maybe I'm more shy or anxious upon forging new relationships than most people would deduce. I might wash my vulnerability in brashness.


"Let it all hang out" is not typical of 5s, but I do this also, and often people ask me, "Are you really a 5?" for this very reason. So I would say while this quality could belong to a 5 who has done major work on himself, it is not LIKELY to point to the 5 category. Umm... answering with my Ne and Fe and my gut here.. I dated a 1 who was very bold in forging a relationship but he did this because beneath, he was very anxious about it. He also was brash when he felt vulnerable. Not sure if that helps. 8s and 1s and 6s all have this specific trait, and 5s can hide their vulnerability in a variety of ways too. CP 6 might have anxiety and display it as brashness... I know a CP6 who does this. She's also blunt and harsh and lets it hang out. 1s don't usually let it ALL hang out because they prefer to do what's right and maybe think things through a bit; but they are a gut type so I suppose this could depend on your MBTI stacking, your self-analysis in the past and wing. From this I'm feeling more CP6 than 1. "Anxious" is not something most 8s would think to say in a short answer, though when digging deep , it could be the case.



> 6. What in life do you find to be of importance? Why? If you are unsure you can always take the Value Testand post the results here. Do note that it helps if you narrow it down to 20 or ideally 10 values as suggested at stage 2.
> 
> Integrity, happiness, knowledge, novel experiences, challenges, deep relationships, family, individuality, and truth.


Integrity, truth... hmm... this list could apply to me personally and probably to a lot of people of all types. But if I'm gonna be really nitpicky.. considering "happiness" and "truth" are relative to most 5s, and "novel experiences" and "deep relationships" might scare some 5s though they might fight that fear, I'm not feeling '5' here. However knowledge is really important to you.. individuality, etc. This could be CP 6w5. CP6 can look like 8s because they love to be counter phobic about their fear and seek challenges to prove this to themselves. 6s are also quite taken with deep relationships. All of these values can apply to an intellectual 1 as well! :O



> 7. How do you react to new situations in your life? Can you describe an event in your life where you were in an unknown situation? How did you deal with it?
> That's really vague. When I moved to a new city I made some friends and learned about some places that I could depend on for food, recreation, or whatever.


Not a 5!!!!! LOL. Can you lend me some of your courage for a week, next time I have to move to a new town?? :O
Can I ask how quickly you made friends, and how you went about this, and what you consider "friends"??

My gut reaction: SP/SO CP 6w5.

The 1 I dated also was really good at moving to new places and making friends, and self-preservation tactics like seeking out food he likes quickly. I'm really really leaning towards 1 or 6 for you. Though if 1, I'm not sure about the wing yet. Also I must confess, this post shows much more confidence than I see in most 6s, and also feels 1ish... in some way you trust your gut. But CP6's often conquer their fear outwardly. I don't know. Did this act make you anxious??



> 8. Please describe yourself when you are in a stressful situation. How do you act and why? Real life experiences are welcome.
> 
> When I'm really stressed I either basically shut down in the moment and instill order or, especially when things are out of my control, I indulge in sensual stuff like sex and food. I sometimes look for a stimulant, supplement, or food to temporally surmount the hump. Meh, I usually look to instill order.


Interesting self-preservation instinct here. Also 7s probably 'treat themselves' when stressed, though I am not sure it would register quite in this way. The fact that you wrote "instill order" points to 1 for me. 1s have an inherent order, probably more than most other types.



> 9. Please describe yourself when you are in an enjoyable situation. How do you act and why? Real life experiences are welcome.
> 
> I'm usually in the zone or doing something I've never done before. To an outsider the former wouldn't look like much beyond stoicism but when the latter involves other people I can be pretty animated.


Interesting. Not sure what to make of this. Stoicism... hmmm.. *scratches head*
Can you give a concrete example?



> 10. Describe your relationship to socialization. How do you perceive one-on-one interaction? How do you perceive group interaction?
> 
> Both are fine. With one on one interaction I like to go deep with people and challenge them, hoping they reciprocate. Group interaction is typically fun and energizing for me at first and then my enthusiasm wanes. The conversations can get pretty retarded with more than five people over one hour in. I get pretty bored.


"challenge them" is a phrase often attributed to enneagram 8s, but it is not exclusive to 8s. In fact, the two people I know who LOVE to challenge me endlessly are both 1s. One of them, I thought he was an 8, but I tested him last week and he is UNMISTAKABLY a 1. Once he and I and his gf read the stuff for a while it was really obvious , his 1ness. And his favorite activity is challenging people. He also gets bored in groups.
Hmm.. this also points to a SX rather than SO instinct that I did not notice before.

To be fair, on its own this could be 8ish in 'words' and 'logic' but my gut does not respond to this with 8ish 'conquerer' flavor. Many of my closest people in my life have been 8s and I can usually pick up on this vibe pretty well... so that's just my honest reaction.. that I'd look at 1 over 8 for you.

My CP6 friend likes to challenge people, too, and gets anxious in groups; but not bored specifically.



> 11. Describe your relationship to society. What are the elements of it you hold important or unimportant (e.g. social norms, values, customs, traditions)? How do you see people as a whole?
> 
> I see today's society as a bureaucratic machine catering to pointless jobs and mostly unoriginal people. There's been a clear ascension into decline since the industrial revolution in terms of automatization and fatuousness. Most people are disenfranchised from the larger political process without really being aware of their powerlessness. On the positive side of industrialization, I enjoy the greater accessibility to food and other commodities. Today's people? Mainly mindless consumers running on a hamster wheel. They can definitely do better - this makes my surprise especially marked whenever I find an interesting or first-rate person.


Ahh.. you are fun.  Lets see... I'd say 1. Not sure I can explain this one. Except that my 1 friend could have (and has) said this himself.



> 12. Describe your relationship to authority. How do you perceive authority? What does it mean to you, and how do you deal with it?
> 
> Some laws and enforcers are clearly necessary but I feel power gets abused and money usually triumphs - I'm more into social contract than strict laws per se. The prison industrial complex in the US is a big problem that represents overweening power, collusion, bad laws, and racism. I basically feel most laws are stupid because their creators (yeah even the founding fathers) were stupid themselves or merely myopic. Come on, the third and seventh amendments? Anyway, I think most police officers are jagoffs who failed tenth grade algebra and I give them the respect that they're warranted.


"most laws are stupid because their creators were stupid or myopic" - this sort of brash gut-based judgement screams 1 to me!! :O



> 13. Describe your relationship to order and chaos. What do order and chaos mean to you? How do they manifest in your daily life?
> 
> I'm actually pretty cozy with chaos. I like to unhinge people in conversations to find out what they're really thinking. Also, since I'm not usually overwhelmed, I like more information and stimulation almost all the time. I guess I try to keep my character and thinking modalities dry but I throw everything else into the pool of chance.


This statement on its own sounds very 8w7. 
Maybe that CP6 has a 7wing.

Or maybe I need more data. 



> 14. What is it that you fear in life? Why? How does this fear manifest to you both in how you think and how you act?
> 
> Fear? Maybe disintegration of my personality or becoming doddering or losing touch with consensus reality. I'm not really put off by rejection like some people. It's kind of irrational but I might take fewer chances or actions to avoid change. Maybe reactionary is the better word.


"Consensus reality" .. interesting.
"Disintegration of my personality"
Does this fall into a fear of wrongness of a 1? 
1s notoriously avoid change; like to keep things consistent. Recognizing this as 'irrational' is also 1ish. There's a strict mode of 'rationale' most 1s hold up as a standard for themselves.
Rejection is not 'wrong' so it may not be offputting to a 1. I think 6s mostly don't like rejection very much. 
The phrase 'consensus reality' is something people would attribute to a 5s' phrasing on the surface, but it may be a bit too 'certain' for a 5. I'm being nitpicky here.



> 15. What is it that you desire in life? What do you strive to achieve? Why? Where do you think these drives and desires stem from or are inspired by?
> 
> Achievements, accolades, fame, these things aren't important to me. I want an understanding mate, self-understanding, security, intelligence...just enough money to live the life that I'd prefer. I want to avoid demeaning labor and boring people. I guess these motivations are inspired by a drive towards personal enrichment and freedom.


"Understanding mate, security" - type 6 jumps out here. "Self-understanding, intelligence" - many types, many 1s value intelligence highly. Enough money to live by, could be something a 5 would say, but also really any type who values their own freedom over worldly possessions. The best I can do with that statement is rule out type 3 who likes to win that game.  Avoid demeaning labor... boring people.... this is what my type 1 friend would also say  This idea of avoiding "boring " people points to any type - nobody likes boring people.. but I think type 5 would be more likely to avoid 'intrusive' people than boring people.. 



> 16. a) What activities energize you most? b) What activities drain you most? Why?
> 
> I'm energized by stimulating conversation, books that present fresh (sometimes controversial) theories, really connecting with people, and trying unexplored things (people, places, drugs, music, etc.) without it blowing up in my face. I'm drained by noticing mediocrity and resignation in people and institutions.


7 flavor here, I think?? 1 and 7 have a direct line to each other. You're definitely taken with newness, you don't like boredom. You like real connection with people - many 5s do desire this, but it's not necessarily something they'd emphasize on a list like this?? (I might, but again I'm not your typical 5.) Unexplored things - 7s love this. Umm... hmmm. Could you be a 7? I don't know... you seem focused on your own values quite thoroughly (1) but your ability to make friends quickly and your interest in knowledge (a 7 integrates to 5) might be you putting your best foot forward....... now I don't know, 7 , 6 , or 1.... 



> 17. Why do you want to know your type? What type do you think you are? Why this/these type(s)? Is there a type that appeals to you, to your self-perception, that you would like to be? Why? If you know yourenneagram, please post this here. If you have done any online function tests such as the Keys2Cognition, it helps if you post these results here as well.
> 
> Good opening question. :crazy: As far as I can tell I'm an ENXP and enneagram five or eight - choose your poison. I want to know my type for basically selfish reasons of personal development, to see how I fit into the MBTI schema, and to see who I'm most compatible with. There are types that I wouldn't want to be (ESTP, ESFP, ISTJ, ISTP) but whatever truth holds for my real type, I'll live or die by.


I don't think you're a 5 or an 8. But again, I have never done a type-me thread before, and it's not necessarily a talent of mine. I'm not as good with Te or Ti; I feel things out. I'm responding to this from the heart.. I don't know you that well for a thorough analysis and I'm not good with objective facts. Please take this with a grain of salt, but here it is, for whatever it's worth.  Hope it can be helpful in some way.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Any thoughts on recent developments? @LeaT


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> *I felt the sudden compulsion (and energy) to take LeaT's questionnaire. Enjoy! :crazy:
> *
> 2. Study these two images here and here. Which one do you prefer and why? How would you describe it?
> 
> Aurora Borealis? Yeah I like the first one more because it's neat and tranquility inducing, unlike the city.


I get from Si here. You're so short and to the point though, that making anything else out of this answer is hard.


> 3. Please describe yourself as a person if you were to introduce yourself to someone else like in a cover letter. What kind of person are you and why?
> 
> Honest, persistent, curious, innovative, smart, and loyal. Because it happens to be true.


Fi and Te. 



> 4. What kind of person would you LIKE to be? Why? What kind of person would you NOT want to be? Why?
> 
> I wouldn't mind being more fearless and less dogmatic. The former because I would experience more and basically be a better person and the latter because I'd piss fewer people off that way.


8w7 enneagram? Hard to say anything about the functions here.


> 5. Do you think there are any differences to how you described yourself and how people actually perceive you? How do you think others would describe you? If there are any discrepancies between these two that are you are aware of; do you know why exactly that is?
> 
> Probably not too many discrepancies. I'm pretty blunt, sometimes harsh, and I basically let it all hang out. Well, maybe I'm more shy or anxious upon forging new relationships than most people would deduce. I might wash my vulnerability in brashness.


I still get a strong underlying Fi-vibe here.


> 6. What in life do you find to be of importance? Why? If you are unsure you can always take the Value Testand post the results here. Do note that it helps if you narrow it down to 20 or ideally 10 values as suggested at stage 2.
> 
> Integrity, happiness, knowledge, novel experiences, challenges, deep relationships, family, individuality, and truth.


I can say here that most NTs tend to favor NT-esque values, e.g. wisdom, intelligence, knowledge and so on, but the only one you have are knowledge and truth at the end, suggesting that they're not necessarily that highly prioritized to you. This can probably be generalized for most NT values Iv'e seen NTs mention in this thread. For the NT ego, values such as intelligence are vital when it comes to describing themselves because of how T is integrated into the ego. 

That your first value here is integrity could either point towards Si or Fi. Happiness is such a general value but I see feelers being more likely to pick values such as happiness over other values. Novel experiences could definitely point towards Pe use. Strong Pe users, especially dominant ones, always seem to be in the search of new experiences to spice up their lives. Challenges could be attributed to your enneagram 8, and so does deep relationships and I think you got a strong sexual instinct so that falls in place there too. However, deep relationships are usually not something the NT mind will first think of when listing their values either, because feeling is their least preferred judgement function, meaning that they are not likely to first associate to people at all when taking tests like these. As I mentioned, the general tendency among NTs have been to enlist values that seem to point towards intelligence or be intelligence-related. Family is another more F-esque value here too, but I am not sure how much stock we should put into it. Individuality on the other hand, is a value you see many Fi users and enneagram 4 people favoring. 



> 7. How do you react to new situations in your life? Can you describe an event in your life where you were in an unknown situation? How did you deal with it?
> 
> That's really vague. When I moved to a new city I made some friends and learned about some places that I could depend on for food, recreation, or whatever.


Again, the answer is too short to really get something useful from it.


> 8. Please describe yourself when you are in a stressful situation. How do you act and why? Real life experiences are welcome.
> 
> When I'm really stressed I either basically shut down in the moment and instill order or, especially when things are out of my control, I indulge in sensual stuff like sex and food. I sometimes look for a stimulant, supplement, or food to temporally surmount the hump. Meh, I usually look to instill order.


Yeah, seems kind of Si-Te to me, although I'm thinking maybe you're more of an Fi-dominant than Ne-dominant. You focus more on order than the sensation-seeking aspect. Do you also become nitpicky and overly detail-oriented or do you become more paranoid and start reading meanings in things that you realize later were never there?


> 9. Please describe yourself when you are in an enjoyable situation. How do you act and why? Real life experiences are welcome.
> 
> I'm usually in the zone or doing something I've never done before. To an outsider the former wouldn't look like much beyond stoicism but when the latter involves other people I can be pretty animated.


I think the hey phrase here is "To an outsider the former wouldn't look like much beyond stoicism". This suggests Fi again.


> 10. Describe your relationship to socialization. How do you perceive one-on-one interaction? How do you perceive group interaction?
> 
> Both are fine. With one on one interaction I like to go deep with people and challenge them, hoping they reciprocate. Group interaction is typically fun and energizing for me at first and then my enthusiasm wanes. The conversations can get pretty retarded with more than five people over one hour in. I get pretty bored.


How and why do you get bored with group interaction?


> 11. Describe your relationship to society. What are the elements of it you hold important or unimportant (e.g. social norms, values, customs, traditions)? How do you see people as a whole?
> 
> I see today's society as a bureaucratic machine catering to pointless jobs and mostly unoriginal people. There's been a clear ascension into decline since the industrial revolution in terms of automatization and fatuousness. Most people are disenfranchised from the larger political process without really being aware of their powerlessness. On the positive side of industrialization, I enjoy the greater accessibility to food and other commodities. Today's people? Mainly mindless consumers running on a hamster wheel. They can definitely do better - this makes my surprise especially marked whenever I find an interesting or first-rate person.


Te overload here. So much focus on beaurocracy.


> 12. Describe your relationship to authority. How do you perceive authority? What does it mean to you, and how do you deal with it?
> 
> Some laws and enforcers are clearly necessary but I feel power gets abused and money usually triumphs - I'm more into social contract than strict laws per se. The prison industrial complex in the US is a big problem that represents overweening power, collusion, bad laws, and racism. I basically feel most laws are stupid because their creators (yeah even the founding fathers) were stupid themselves or merely myopic. Come on, the third and seventh amendments? Anyway, I think most police officers are jagoffs who failed tenth grade algebra and I give them the respect that they're warranted.


Yeah, I get more Fi-Te here. I also want to point out that since you seem to describe Te in negative terms (you don't like beaurocracy and laws), it would indicate not being one of your stronger or preferred functions.


> 13. Describe your relationship to order and chaos. What do order and chaos mean to you? How do they manifest in your daily life?
> 
> I'm actually pretty cozy with chaos. I like to unhinge people in conversations to find out what they're really thinking. Also, since I'm not usually overwhelmed, I like more information and stimulation almost all the time. I guess I try to keep my character and thinking modalities dry but I throw everything else into the pool of chance.


This here would point towards Pe-dominance, as it seems you constantly desire new ideas to keep you going.


> 14. What is it that you fear in life? Why? How does this fear manifest to you both in how you think and how you act?
> 
> Fear? Maybe disintegration of my personality or becoming doddering or losing touch with consensus reality. I'm not really put off by rejection like some people. It's kind of irrational but I might take fewer chances or actions to avoid change. Maybe reactionary is the better word.


What does consensus reality mean? I don't think the meaning is as obvious as you seem to think it is.


> 15. What is it that you desire in life? What do you strive to achieve? Why? Where do you think these drives and desires stem from or are inspired by?
> 
> Achievements, accolades, fame, these things aren't important to me. I want an understanding mate, self-understanding, security, intelligence...just enough money to live the life that I'd prefer. I want to avoid demeaning labor and boring people. I guess these motivations are inspired by a drive towards personal enrichment and freedom.


If anything I get a strong rejection of enneagram 3 think here. Your head fix could be 6w5, and you have a self-preservation instinct with sexual. And what do you mean by boring people? People who are the same?


> 16. a) What activities energize you most? b) What activities drain you most? Why?
> 
> I'm energized by stimulating conversation, books that present fresh (sometimes controversial) theories, really connecting with people, and trying unexplored things (people, places, drugs, music, etc.) without it blowing up in my face. I'm drained by noticing mediocrity and resignation in people and institutions.


Yeah, points more towards Pe-dominance here again. So very focused on the extraverted world, especially ideas. I think you're the first one to say you're drained by noticing mediocrity instintitutions. What do you mean by that, and why institutions?


> 17. Why do you want to know your type? What type do you think you are? Why this/these type(s)? Is there a type that appeals to you, to your self-perception, that you would like to be? Why? If you know yourenneagram, please post this here. If you have done any online function tests such as the Keys2Cognition, it helps if you post these results here as well.
> 
> Good opening question. :crazy: As far as I can tell I'm an ENXP and enneagram five or eight - choose your poison. I want to know my type for basically selfish reasons of personal development, to see how I fit into the MBTI schema, and to see who I'm most compatible with. There are types that I wouldn't want to be (ESTP, ESFP, ISTJ, ISTP) but whatever truth holds for my real type, I'll live or die by.


All right, you don't want to be a sensor with a thinking preference. Why is the ISTJ in there? It's the only judger type you mentioned you don't want to be. Also, why do you have a dislike towards sensors with a thinking preference in general?


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

Very perspicacious response. I especially liked the parsing of questions six, twelve, and eight. With respect to the rebuttal or reaction to question eight (and twelve), I can see that you're trying to uncover ENFP or INFP by ascertaining whether I use Si or Te as an inferior function. You, then, appear to conclude Ne-dom and ENFP via response to question sixteen. I'm increasingly inclined to agree with that assessment. As a little background, I read all of Psychological Types on Tuesday, I immersed myself in countless articles, YouTube videos, and descriptions of the cognitive processes, and I watched many ENFP, ENTP, INFP, INTP, and INTJ in action over the last week. 

I feel the assessment of the cognitive processes I regularly employ is pretty accurate - Fi, Si, Ne, and Te (in whichever order you like). One video in particular convinced me of the primacy of Ne-Si as my go-to information processing device; in some ways, Ne-Si resembles Ni-Se, which perhaps accounted for some confusion in the past. Anyway, I actually feel some camaraderie with more authoritative and smart ENFP politicians (Ralph Nader?) and authors (Naomi Klein?), perhaps some of whom are Enneagram one? Again, nice analysis and I will aver some responses to some of your questions in the next few hours, although there already appears to be more convergence than debate at this juncture. @LeaT


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> Very perspicacious response. I especially liked the parsing of questions six, twelve, and eight. With respect to the rebuttal or reaction to question eight (and twelve), I can see that you're trying to uncover ENFP or INFP by ascertaining whether I use Si or Te as an inferior function. You, then, appear to conclude Ne-dom and ENFP via response to question sixteen. I'm increasingly inclined to agree with that assessment. As a little background, I read all of Psychological Types on Tuesday, I immersed myself in countless articles, YouTube videos, and descriptions of the cognitive processes, and I watched many ENFP, ENTP, INFP, INTP, and INTJ in action over the last week.
> 
> I feel the assessment of the cognitive processes I regularly employ is pretty accurate - Fi, Si, Ne, and Te (in whichever order you like). One video in particular convinced me of the primacy of Ne-Si as my go-to information processing device; in some ways, Ne-Si resembles Ni-Se, which perhaps accounted for some confusion in the past. Anyway, I actually feel some camaraderie with more authoritative and smart ENFP politicians (Ralph Nader?) and authors (Naomi Klein?), perhaps some of whom are Enneagram one? Again, nice analysis and I will aver some responses to some of your questions in the next few hours, although there already appears to be more convergence than debate at this juncture. @_LeaT_


As I said, just because you're a feeler it doesn't mean you can't be intelligent and intellectual or confrontational in your behavior. Unfortunately these are just stereotypes made because people misunderstand what "feeler" and "thinker" means. It merely describes how we rationalize our thinking. Similarly, I've engaged with a lot of quite irrational and un-intellectual thinkers. Unfortunately people think that just because you're a T you have to be smart. That's not how it goes, although T people tend to like to think of themselves as smart because how T is integrated into the ego. This is because when the ego favors T, then it will automatically also reject F. Since F helps us to deal with interpersonal relationships better (especially Fe), the ego will naturally think of being people-oriented being one of its weaknesses.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

LeaT said:


> As I said, just because you're a feeler it doesn't mean you can't be intelligent and intellectual or confrontational in your behavior. Unfortunately these are just stereotypes made because people misunderstand what "feeler" and "thinker" means. It merely describes how we rationalize our thinking. Similarly, I've engaged with a lot of quite irrational and un-intellectual thinkers. Unfortunately people think that just because you're a T you have to be smart. That's not how it goes, although T people tend to like to think of themselves as smart because how T is integrated into the ego. This is because when the ego favors T, then it will automatically also reject F. Since F helps us to deal with interpersonal relationships better (especially Fe), the ego will naturally think of being people-oriented being one of its weaknesses.


Holy crow! I see INTJ in your tagline and profile. How did that come about?! 

Isn't the INTJ functional stack the polar opposite of INTP? I'm actually curious about the details fueling this transition. 

Yeah, anyway, I do think MBTI "thinkers" seek to demonstrate aptitude and prowess because of the ego's configuration. 

At any rate, very cute Abraham Lincoln kitty (avatar).  That headwear must be thimble-sized. :tongue:

Hm, this isn't entirely confirmation bias either, but I always thought of you as INTJ - you appeared to easily exude your data-based judgements and conclusions via this conduit of Te with this overarching idea already packaged (Ni). I hope that's not taken the wrong way. 

Your judgements appeared rather firm or stable to me. Flags also went up when you questioned my idiosyncratic use of some terms - that's not something I've had an INTP call me out on. The INTPs I've interacted with would be more likely to ponder what "consensus reality" could mean or its historical antecedents. Well, they'd also be too proud or verbally maladroit to inquire about the phrase in the real world...with people (gasp). :crazy:


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> Holy crow! I see INTJ in your tagline and profile. How did that come about?!
> 
> Isn't the INTJ functional stack the polar opposite of INTP? I'm actually curious about the details fueling this transition.
> 
> ...


I'm just borrowing their label. I can see why people think the INTJ label would fit me, but I am not an INTJ at the end of the day.


----------

