# Diagnose me



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

I've looked at Socionics before, and I was amazed by how well the IEI functions (I tested as IEI) fit me. Nothing had ever fit better. Socionics Ni - "intuition about time" - fits me very well. I am, however, working on being "officially" typed in socionics. 

But, to go through these dichotomies:

Extraverted Types
Generally have higher energy levels.
Tend to be more active and initiating.
Often make new friends easily.
Often better at presenting themselves.
Often prefer to work in a team.

Introverted Types
Psychic energy more often flows inward.
Energy level increases when alone.
Energy level decreases when interacting with a large group of people. 
More often focused on their thoughts and feelings. (I am, but I'm not? It's weird.)


Rationals
Tend to plan ahead, make decisions early
Are more often rigid and stubborn
Do not like to change their decisions
Tend to finish what they started.
Usually have stiff movements.
Low stress tolerance. (Sort of. I thrive under stress but also hate it.)

Irrationals
Tend to start new things without finishing them. (This applies to writing and reading especially)
Usually have gentle movements. (I am very gentle but also "uptight"? It could be do to one of my neurological conditions, but the idea of "loosening up" is something i struggle with. I try to be gentle, but I can also be jerky in my movements (to my dismay) (this "jerkiness" is also specifically tied to my neurological conditions, but it's there nonetheless).
Usually more 'democratic' leadership style.
High stress tolerance 


Sensing Types
More realistic and down to earth.

Intuitive Types
Rather see the big picture than the details.
More focused on ideas than on surroundings.
Less naturally comfortable with physical confrontations.
Often more interested in theory than in practice.


Ethical Types
More often make decisions based on their own feelings.
Rather talk about ethical evaluations ("good or bad")
Frequently better at solving interpersonal problems
More often have problems with finding logical solutions
Tend to prefer persuasion over argumentation. (Not really me? If you can convince me through argument (which is very hard to do) you've basically got me, but persuasion is harder. I am pretty critical of rhetoric.)
More vulnerable to "logical" manipulation.

Logical Types
Frequently interested in systems, structures and patterns.
Tend to prefer argumentation over persuasion.


Static Types
These are confusing to me. Memory is something that's painful for me at this point in time because I've experienced some trauma that I am currently working through, and it's difficult for me to remember how I recalled things in a healthy state. 

Dynamic Types
Perceive event
The stories of dynamics usually involve multiple main characters. (Definitely.)


I can come back and do all of them if you find that helpful, but that's all I have time for now. Thank you again for continuing to help me confirm my type.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Also, I just tried "Holly's tip" (where she says it helps to take a basic test only answer it opposite yourself so you arrive at your shadow type). While I understand that the MBTI tests are essentially flawed, a lot of people correctly come to their shadow type using this. I came to ISTP, which is consistent with angelcat's ENFJ typing. Here are my results:


> ISTP
> Introvert(44%) Sensing(94%) Thinking(62%) Perceiving(89%)
> You have moderate preference of Introversion over Extraversion (44%)
> You have strong preference of Sensing over Intuition (94%)
> ...


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

I just went back and took the official test as sociotype.com. Here were my results there:


> Test Results
> 
> Your Sociotype: EIE-0 (ENFj)
> 
> ...


I still have a hard time seeing myself as that extroverted (the IEI description felt a lot more accurate), but looking at the function explanations (again) allowed me to easily see myself as EIE.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Sorry to add more (again) but I tried another one of the suggestions for finding my type at the top of the page. Again I got the typical ENFJ results


> The Big Five is currently the most accepted personality model in the scientific community. The Big Five emerged from the work of multiple independent scientists/researchers starting in the 1950s who using different techniques obtained similar results. Those results were that there are five distinct personality traits/dimensions. Here are your results on each dimension:
> 
> Extroversion results were high which suggests you are overly talkative, outgoing, sociable and interacting at the expense too often of developing your own individual interests and internally based identity.
> 
> ...


This is actually helpful for personal growth too, as it shows that it would be beneficial for me to work on "emotional stability".


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

I also just spent a long conversation discussing my childhood with my mother. Apparently I was a very outgoing and friendly child who, according to her, was a very "normal" extroverted child except sometimes I showed that I thought over things too deeply and showed unexpected insight. I definitely wasn't "shy" - she insists on this. For some reason I've been perceiving myself as extremely introverted in my childhood, but she's assured me that I was in fact more of a bubbly, smiley, excitable but socially engaged little girl. I read over the EFJ child descriptions and somehow it really matches what she told me about myself. 

But I'm still curious what you have to say, Straystuff. Does the things I've said seem ENFJ, or something else?


----------



## Slagasauras (Jun 26, 2013)

Yeah, I think you're an INFJ.
Also I took that quiz last not and got INTJ as a primary type, I don't think that's accurate.
But I DO agree with a lot of others, you seem very Ni-Fe to me!


----------



## Straystuff (May 23, 2014)

alittlebear said:


> I can come back and do all of them if you find that helpful, but that's all I have time for now. Thank you again for continuing to help me confirm my type.


Yeah it would be beneficial if you went through them all  Just check which one of the two in each section is more like you. ENFJ's and INFJ's are in opposite sides when it comes to e.g. negativist/positivist dichotomy so it makes it easier to tell which one you are.

Do you use your Ni more to envision your future or abstracting in the now? How do you feel about really self-confident/authoritarian people?


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Straystuff said:


> Yeah it would be beneficial if you went through them all  Just check which one of the two in each section is more like you. ENFJ's and INFJ's are in opposite sides when it comes to e.g. negativist/positivist dichotomy so it makes it easier to tell which one you are.
> 
> Do you use your Ni more to envision your future or abstracting in the now? How do you feel about really self-confident/authoritarian people?


The only thing is, I'm having a hard time differentiating between some of them the further down I go? I'll try some more out, but it's difficult to differentiate for some of them. 

To answer these questions:

I don't really know how i use my Ni? I read the descriptions and find myself thinking, "That's how my brain works," but it's harder for me to articulate. To be honest, I use my Ni in daily life more than anything. For example, as soon as I came to consciousness this morning my mind started laying out my projected plan for today, along with some basic consequences ("If I sleep in too long the teacher might be upset that I didn't do the voluntary assignment or he might not really care at all. Regardless, I need to get ahead in his class, especially since we have to have read that entire book next week. When will I have time to schedule that book in along with all the other reading I have to do?") I have Ni for the long-term future in the sense that I am creating a unique path in life that I have personally envisioned, and I make big decisions around that goal (and see how some little decisions impact my progress towards that goal), but I don't do _everything_ with thought of the large future. For me it's more about looking at time and what I predict to be the emotional states of people to gently manipulate the situation and get what I want done (for instance, sometimes if I don't do something like the voluntary assignment I was contemplating I will go out of my way to see the professor and ask him for help on an assignment so he knows I'm trying and doesn't just assume I'm an incredibly lazy student.)

I love authoritarian people? I find them absolutely intriguing - that is, unless they're one of my peers and are using that confidence in such a way that it intimidates the other students. Apart from that, though, I love confident authoritarian people and often go out of my way to spend time with them. My best friend for most of high school was an outwardly authoritarian kid with a lot of projected self confidence. I love talking to my neighbor, even though I don't agree with half of what he says, because he believes what he believes so passionately and the crudeness of those beliefs fascinate me. Most (if not 90%) of the students in my Shakespeare class find our professor extremely stifling and uptight, but I go after class to talk to him for an hour simply because I like talking to him. 

As long as someone isn't abusive towards others in their confidence and authoritarian manner, I usually love them. 

And alright. Ill do some more dichotomies now and then try to come back later for more. Thank you again!


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

For these, it's difficult to answer because I am somewhat healthy right now. Yesterday I was actually diagnosed with PTSD, and so that's made me less optimistic (as opposed to a time when I was once very optimistic, at least outwardly). I'll look at the pairs though and try to pick one, or explain why it's harder for me. 

Positivists

X More inclined to optimize already functional systems of things and processes. (Working within the framework is the way to go. I sometimes fantasize about how a new system could be created that would serve its (in my thought process usually, humanitarian) purpose better, but at the same time I mostly realize that it is unrealistic to tear a system apart (unless it's a personal system, in which case I'm more inclined to do so.)
X "This glass is half-full"; "We have already collected $438,000 for that project." (In 2014 I completed my Gold Award for Girl Scouts and I switched between positive and negative approaches. To the librarian who we were doing the project for, I was sure to highlight the positives ["Home Depot donated that rug you really wanted! Just wait until you see it, it's the perfect rug for this library, it even _has a library on the rug_"] but privately I worried a lot about the project. I was constantly rewriting my backup plan (in my head), plotting how we could maximize our resources in the short time we had, and I think this allowed us to complete the project in a way even better than what I had imagined even after the resource we most counted on bailed out. 
In regards to optimism, however, I really did maintain it. I had my private doubts, but had this inner faith that we would make it work no matter what happened. I would say most every day, "That was great! We got a the paint we needed, and so-and-so has agreed to paint it, and if we need to we can get WalMart to at least donate this," while my parents were more outwardly stressed out and having to remind me that the pieces hadn't fallen together yet, and we didn't even know that they really _would_ fall together. I just knew they would anyway. I guess that's pretty positive, looking at the glass as half-full even when it really wasn't.)
X Usually more complimenting than reprimanding (Ideally, yes. Reprimanding is very difficult for me, even and especially when I am in a place of authority of the group.)
X Socially and intellectually more trusting. (Intellectually, no. I am skeptical of everything I read and am always questioning the author's motives in a way that makes my ISFJ friend just wonder what happened to me to make me think it's okay to be so skeptical about things. Socially... yes? I trust people a lot more, but [and partially because of the trauma] I have a hard time thinking everyone is entirely trustworthy. I used to believe that - that I could get anyone to open up if I just talked to them - but now I can be more hesitant. I still do open up and share things with people more openly than some think I should, but not to the doubtless extent I once did.)
Explains what things are (irrationals) or should be (rationals). (A little confused by this? I tend to explain the reality of the situation mostly. Sometimes that involves highlighting what is not there, but most the time it's just me explaining what is there.)

Negativists

More inclined to solve problems in systems of things and processes.
"This glass is half-empty"; "We need $62,000 for that project."
Usually more reprimanding than complimenting.
Socially and intellectually more mistrusting.
Explains what things are not (irrationals) or should not be (rationals).

I'm not sure, however, if my behavior was wholly one way or another. I express optimism outwardly, but for the majority of my life I have been filled with doubt on the inside. I act trusting, but in actuality I am mistrustful (emotionally) even of my closest friends, and in no way can I trust someone entirely. With intellectual things, I am doubtful to the point where others find it crippling. 

I actually have to get ready for that class I didn't do the voluntary assignment for, but I will come and do some more dichotomies once it's over.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Askers

X Tendency to dialogue.
X? Much of what an asker says seems more question-like, even statements. (I do tend to use questions, at least when speaking with strangers or people I'm not super close to.)
X Always, as the other person talks, affirm the receipt of information with yeah, mhm, etc. (YES)
X Can talk to an audience as a whole very well. (I can talk to audiences or individual people. It doesn't much matter to me. There's a time for both things and neither makes me particularly uncomfortable.)
Starts talking at times expecting someone to get interested and start paying attention. (Sort of..?)
X Has a tendency to interrupt and feels comfortable pausing half way on the speech and with "questions allowed all the time" way, returning to what was said later if necessary. (Yeah... I've been told I interrupt too much. I don't know about the pausing though?)
Quite often asks a non-rhetorical question and answers it himself. (Not really..?)
X Often just asks questions to fill in time, without serious need to actually find the information asked. (Yes, in conversation. )

Declarers

Tendency to monologue. (That's not socially acceptable. Even when telling a story or whatever I pause whenever people react. I can monologue when it's my place - like when giving a speech - but I would feel uncomfortable doing that in conversation.)
Much of what a declarer says seems more statement-like, even questions. (Sometimes?)
Listens attentively and silently to others' speeches to return to a long speech. (I do listen patiently - at least when someone is emotional and they need someone to listen - but I still respond with sympathetic sounds and facial expressions. I don't interrupt them, but it don't sit there stony-faced.)
X Finds it easier to talk to one person at a time. (I can do either, it doesn't really matter to me.)
X Before starting to talk, first ascertains that attention is grabbed. (YES, I wait until I have everyone's attention because I'm very cautious of the emotional state and when the best time to speak would be.)
Is very patient in terms of others speeches in terms of letting finish. (On the outside I try to be patient... on the inside not so much.)
Prefers to finish the speech before letting others talk, likes closure and that their point was conveyed. (I like to do this, but unfortunately I have to recognize that I have to cut it short if people are getting bred or pause if someone suddenly has a story they want to share.)
Questions are often either rhetorical or only strictly motivated by serious need for certain information. (I usually use rhetorical questions to convey frustration, to attempt to prove a point, or to add a humorous effect. It's not solely what I use questions for, though.)

Sorry, I was going to add this last night but my Wifi has been acting up.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Process

Do things sequentially, from the beginning to the end (no, mostly, although I do have a definite process to how I do things. For instance, I was talking with a girl about an assignment we shared and she told me how she just wrote down her ideas and then worked to connect them, and used that as her paper. For me, I had to make an outline for my paper, gather the evidence, reread for context, and then sit down to plow through writing it all at once, and later to edit. It's not the usual sequential order, but everything I do tends to follow that order. So in that way, yes, I am very sequential.)
X? Immersed to a process and tends to single-tasking. (Again, with my most recent essay, everything I did was focused on that essay, and if had to just plow through it because my mind wouldn't let me rest with an easy conscience until it was done. Honestly, that's how most of my schoolwork has been since I was young, my large assignments at least. For homework things I tend to jump around and worry just about getting them done, but large assignments they completely occupy my thoughts.)
X Focus between the beginning and the end of processes (sounds right.)
X More inclined to read texts on books or computer from beginning to the end (Is there another way?)
X? "Of course the answer is right, since we followed the correct procedure." (I sort of had this attitude about my latest research paper, as I checked with my teacher every step of the way and did as he told me, so it would have been frustrating if I had a bad grade on it.)

Result

X? Do things randomly, seemingly doing them from the end to the beginning. (Well, I answer questions on tests randomly, but only because it helps me not be so aware of how many I've answered in reality. For other things though, I have to do it sequentially.)
Detached from processes and tends to multitasking. (On homework assignments and things, yes.)
Focus on the beginning and the end of processes (I don't know? I think my energy comes during the process and I just get super happy at the end of the process but I really can't say for sure?)
X More inclined to read texts on books or computer randomly, maybe reading random paragraphs or chapters. (OH. If it's a novel I'm reading, of course I read it from start to finish, but if I'm just looking for information I will flip through the book and sometimes find a paragraph I needed or be more inclined to open one page, skim that page and know if this is a book I would want to read further. I usually just use this to test the book first.)
"Of course we followed the correct procedure, since we got the right answer." (Nope? If anything I don't follow the official procedures when I get the right answer - I do things my way - so I wouldn't ever brag about following the correct procedure.)


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

I'm going to try to finish the dichotomies today. Some are too confusing for me, but I will try to explain those and then compile all of the ones I've done together on one post so it's easier for you to decipher. 

Tacticals

Focus on methods, and manipulate them, with goals unsettled. (A bit confused? A goal is a goal, I usually have a goal before I have a process. Unless it's like... like when I have to sell Girl Scout cookies, before I learned how many were expected of me I didn't have a goal at all except to "sell cookies," and even that was vague, while once I found out I set my actual goals, "sell 500 and do two booths" so I guess I do this?)
X Goals are defined by, and modified to fit methods.
X Prefers to expand options. Doesn't like to have too few of them.

Strategicals

Focus on goals, and manipulate them, with methods unsettled.
Methods are defined by, and modified to fit goals. (True of my career path, but not true usually.)
Prefers to defend goals. Doesn't like to be forced to deviate from them. (I do this with my goal in the future with my career. I know it's weird and the path I'm taking doesn't support it - no path supports it really, because it's a unique path I'm making for myself - but I'm going to find a way through the already existing paths to achieve it anyway, no matter what it takes.)


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Constructivist

Tend to minimize the emotional elements of interaction, preferring to focus on the 'business' elements. (Not at all.)
X Have emotional 'anchors' (eg, books, films, places) which they use to support their internal emotional state. (Yes.)
X Can become 'emotionally hooked', and can have a strong reaction to a particular part or section regardless of their feelings towards the entirety. (Yes, but this is natural? For example I really like hydrogen ions [for what they represent] and when I read about them I feel happy and excited, but I don't carry that excitement with me into the section about meiosis. But doesn't everyone do this? Really like one part of a book over others? I don't know.)
Have greater difficulty disassociating from others' emotions and experiences than from requests for action or consideration. (This confuses me.)
â€œI prefer when people offer concrete solutions instead of comfort or sympathy.â€� (Yes and no? For example, when I was suffering with my trauma my parents would sometimes show sympathy, but wouldn't suggest a solution. It felt a lot better when they did. But at the same time, when I tell my room mate about my problems I don't want to hear her solutions, I just want some comfort and for someone to give me sympathy. I feel like I want sympathy more than anything unless it is a big issue like dealing with PTSD.)

Emotivists

Tend to concentrate foremost on the emotional background of interaction, with 'business' a secondary concern. (Yes.)
Prefer the new and novel over the old and known. (Of course? I don't see this as an alternative for the Constructivist though?)
Information perceived as unprofessional or low-quality can leave them indifferent. (It depends on the medium. If it's something like in a math book and it gives me really basic directions for how addition works even though I'm reading a Calc book and that's extraneous, I'm going to be a bit miffed but more amused than anything and feel that "indifference". If it's say, low-quality information in a psych book that teaches psych nurses how to handle patients and the information is bad, I will feel a lot more upset because it's unprofessional misinformation that could really hurt people. The same goes for a book that has something racist or sexist in it that is acclaimed on an academic level. If it doesn't matter and is just extraneous or a dull attempt at being "funny" I won't care, but if it could potentially hurt someone and hurt society I care a lot more.)
Have greater difficulty disassociating from requests for action or consideration than from others' emotions and experiences. (Still confuses me.)
â€œIf a conversation is emotionally negative, I consider it wasted.â€� (What? If someone ends up getting angry with me after I converse with them of course it's wasted, but if I discuss something someone needs to talk about and they express their negative emotions I in no way consider it wasted, because they needed to get those bad emotions out and I fulfilled that for them. I don't see how someone could see that as wasted :/)


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Carefree

X Inclined to solve problems by primarily using that information which is 'at hand'. Accordingly, their solutions are likely to be particular to that situation. (Yes.)
The search for the solution is implied in the answer. (What?)
X â€œYou cannot prepare for everything.â€�

Farsighted

X Inclined to solve problems by primarily using that information which they possess through knowledge and experience. Accordingly, their solutions are likely to be of a general nature. (A bit of both? If you don't use both innate knowledge and knowledge of the situation at hand, you're doing something wrong and being unbalanced.)
The search for the solution is explicit in the answer.
â€œIt is best to prepare in advance.â€� (It IS good to prepare in advance, but at the same time one must realize that they cannot prepare for everything and deal with that.)


----------



## Straystuff (May 23, 2014)

Hm, all I can say is that you are most likely EXFJ. Reading through this you tell stuff which is common for both of them 

Have you checked the quadras? As an EXFJ you should relate to either Alpha or Beta quadra.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Now, to put them together:


> Carefree
> 
> X Inclined to solve problems by primarily using that information which is 'at hand'. Accordingly, their solutions are likely to be particular to that situation. (Yes.)
> The search for the solution is implied in the answer. (What?)
> ...





> Constructivist
> 
> Tend to minimize the emotional elements of interaction, preferring to focus on the 'business' elements. (Not at all.)
> X Have emotional 'anchors' (eg, books, films, places) which they use to support their internal emotional state. (Yes.)
> ...





> Tacticals
> 
> Focus on methods, and manipulate them, with goals unsettled. (A bit confused? A goal is a goal, I usually have a goal before I have a process. Unless it's like... like when I have to sell Girl Scout cookies, before I learned how many were expected of me I didn't have a goal at all except to "sell cookies," and even that was vague, while once I found out I set my actual goals, "sell 500 and do two booths" so I guess I do this?)
> X Goals are defined by, and modified to fit methods.
> ...





> Process
> 
> Do things sequentially, from the beginning to the end (no, mostly, although I do have a definite process to how I do things. For instance, I was talking with a girl about an assignment we shared and she told me how she just wrote down her ideas and then worked to connect them, and used that as her paper. For me, I had to make an outline for my paper, gather the evidence, reread for context, and then sit down to plow through writing it all at once, and later to edit. It's not the usual sequential order, but everything I do tends to follow that order. So in that way, yes, I am very sequential.)
> X? Immersed to a process and tends to single-tasking. (Again, with my most recent essay, everything I did was focused on that essay, and if had to just plow through it because my mind wouldn't let me rest with an easy conscience until it was done. Honestly, that's how most of my schoolwork has been since I was young, my large assignments at least. For homework things I tend to jump around and worry just about getting them done, but large assignments they completely occupy my thoughts.)
> ...





> Askers
> 
> X Tendency to dialogue.
> X? Much of what an asker says seems more question-like, even statements. (I do tend to use questions, at least when speaking with strangers or people I'm not super close to.)
> ...





> For these, it's difficult to answer because I am somewhat healthy right now. Yesterday I was actually diagnosed with PTSD, and so that's made me less optimistic (as opposed to a time when I was once very optimistic, at least outwardly). I'll look at the pairs though and try to pick one, or explain why it's harder for me.
> 
> Positivists
> 
> ...


And then here's the post from when I first started the dichotomies. Here I just kept the ones that fit me as opposed to when you told me to just put a mark next to the ones that fit me.


> I've looked at Socionics before, and I was amazed by how well the IEI functions (I tested as IEI) fit me. Nothing had ever fit better. Socionics Ni - "intuition about time" - fits me very well. I am, however, working on being "officially" typed in socionics.
> 
> But, to go through these dichotomies:
> 
> ...



The other dichotomies I looked at, but was greatly confused by them. I can, of course, look again at any specific one you really want my input on, but doing them all would really confuse me, and I think I would provide wrong answers because I am unaware of what each trait is truly saying. 

Thank you again so much for helping me with this. I know it's going to be a lot to try and cipher through these answers and continue helping me determine my true type, but I really appreciate your patience and willingness to help me. Just let me know if you have any more questions or if you need any clarification on any of the answers. 

I would just highlight your name, but I'm not quite sure how to do that yet, so I'll send you a PM (unless you see it before then)


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Straystuff said:


> Hm, all I can say is that you are most likely EXFJ. Reading through this you tell stuff which is common for both of them
> 
> Have you checked the quadras? As an EXFJ you should relate to either Alpha or Beta quadra.


Oh, sorry, you just replied! 

I'll look through the quadras now.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

I really relate to these from Beta


> Beta types tend to enjoy group activities where the whole group participates in generating a common emotional atmosphere, as in laughing at jokes, etc.
> Beta types tend to feel energized in the presence of people who share their beliefs and express them with obvious enthusiasm and emotion.
> Beta types tend to give more value to feelings when they are demonstrated with clear emotional expression, and tend to increase the level of their own emotional expression in order to get a reaction from other people.
> Beta types tend to describe personal views of special meaning with "poetic" or "dramatic" expressions and language.
> Beta types are often deeply concerned about social issues and the direction the world is heading. They believe that apathy is a significant cause of societal problems, and work to fight against it.


because that _is_ more or less how I feel/react to social things. I don't just love groups with positive atmospheres, as the Alpha counterpart seems to, but rather I like it when everyone is getting along and showing that they're getting along by smiling and especially laughing. If people are laughing, I seem to take that as a sign that they're all okay, at least for the moment, and no one is feeling too left out. 
Of course I love being around people who express my beliefs! I don't get to be around people like that a lot, but when I do I love it. I finally have a chance to openly share how I believe instead of slyly covering it up, and that does tend to make me louder, more energetic, and more expressive. 
I value feelings whether or not they are matched with emotional expression, but I know it's really something significant if the person shows an expression. For instance my room mate might say, "That's funny!" or something of the sort, but it's only when she crinkles up her face and laughs that I really know she found it amusing. The same goes for when she openly cries as opposed to just has a tint of sadness in her voice, that's how I can tell that she is experiencing a significantly more sad emotion than she typically does when we discuss sad things.)
And finally, yes. Social issues are _extremely_ important to me. Again with my ISFJ room mate, I tend to get upset about her nonchalance (she cares about feminism and education as a woman and a future teacher, but isn't as up in arms about homophobia, racism, and other issues as I am) over social issues that don't affect us. 

I do relate to some Alpha things


> Alpha types are inclined to discuss stories told in detail and according to the sequence in which events happened, rather than "jump to the point" quickly.
> Alpha types are inclined to show affection for others in the form of small practical services or gifts.


Unlike my ISFJ room mate, I know how to cut stories short. I include it here, however, because preferably I like to be able to fully tell my stories and prefer to tell them in detail (not detail as in what the surroundings were like during the experience, but in detail as in details of significance, telling all the things that highlight the event).
I prefer to show affection to others through what our Bible study has identified as "words of encouragement," but I also show common courtesy for strangers through picking up things for them and holding open doors. I'm actually less inclined to go out of my way to perform these little gestures for the people I truly care care care about, but but I do use acts to service to show affection. 

And, as I hinted at earlier, the other to Alpha qualities don't fit me well. Parties and holidays are nice, but not my favorite, and I prefer laughter as opposed to a calm exchange of positive exchange of feelings (such an exchange makes me uncomfortable just to consider, because I've been apart of such calm exchanges so frequently and they always feel trivial and damp to me.)


----------



## Straystuff (May 23, 2014)

Ok so leaning towards ENFJ 

How do you feel about sharing negative emotions? Would you say you are a bit of a drama queen?


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

It depends who the person is. To those I'm very close to - best friends and my immediate family - I can definitely be a drama queen. When I'm in public though, or around strangers, teachers, or not-so-close friends, I will _solely_ show positive emotions. The other day I had to discuss with one of my teachers how the class material was upsetting and triggering me, and while it caused me a lot of pain in the moment and afterwards I had to go rant and cry about it to my father and room mate, when I told my professor about these upsetting things I was a bit terse but I downplayed the hurt it had caused me because I _didn't_ want him to see me as a drama queen and I didn't want to inconvenience him with my problems which he didn't sign up for. 

So... Yes, I show strong negative emotions, but never with people who I am not very, very close with.


----------



## Straystuff (May 23, 2014)

Hmm.

The difference I'm looking here is democratic vs aristocratic and Se vs Ne.

Betas are loud and like party atmosphere, and you're expected to share the emotion and intensity level of the group. They'll attack you if you go against the group or violate their rules. Betas like power dynamics and exclusion, so you are either in the group or you are forced out.

Alphas are much more relaxed, everyone can do whatever they want. Playful is the main term here.

Betas want as much positive atmosphere as possible while Alphas focus on avoiding negative emotions.

Alphas are chill and comforting. Betas are intense, fun and dramatic.

Alpha athmosphere:






Beta athmosphere:


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

I am definitely _not_ an exclusive person - it's something I strive to work against, and really something that I've worked against my entire life, even as a child. Party atmospheres bother me when I can't get in the emotional group with people (when I'm stuck on the outskirts of the dance floor, or whatever), but when I am in the middle of the dance floor with a group of people who I have connected with enough to dance with them, I am very happy in that party environment. I got in such an environment my freshman year, and I remember thinking over and over again "this shouldn't end, life should be exactly like this"
However, it's hard for me to get into that environment. Most the time I am feeling timid at parties (I've also been diagnosed recently with anxiety nos) and worrying about how i do not have that intimidate group so I'm unable to get in that dancing high energy center

I secretly _do_ like being apart of intimate friendship circles... but I've just not been able to establish those groups, except with like a few boys. 

For example, in my dorm there is a group of evangelist Christian honors kids who are in a "squad" together. I wish I was in that group, but I recognize that I'm not. They're going to have their inside jokes. They're going to be more close around each other than to me and my room mate. I get that. My room mate, however, doesn't get that - instead of trying to make her own connections and little group, as I'm quietly doing, she just wishes she was apart of that group and complains about them having a group chat that she's not apart of. To me that's not really an issue - it's sad we aren't in that group, I secretly wish we were in a clique like that, but we aren't. They still like us, and we're their friends. That's all we're going to be with them, and I'm respectful of that friendship boundary they have. 
(It's also funny because that's an SJ-dominated group with maybe one NTJ and an SFP - I don't particularly want to be in that group anyway because they don't share my values and we don't agree. I want the intimacy, but not necessarily with these people.)

And that's another thing - I've been very cautious of cliques my entire life, which has hindered me socially because I recognize when I'm not socially apart of another group and respect unspoken boundaries that are incomprehensible to everyone I try to explain this to.

But I'm not about excluding anyone. I'm the person who goes out of my way to include the outsiders, even when I'm with my mini clique. Exclusion is extremely unethical to me, and I get no enjoyment from making someone feel like they're not in my social circle. That's just rude to me, and flat-out mean. 

Unless it's like when I catch my room mate's eye and laugh because we have an inside joke no one gets, and everyone else can just appreciate our connection and envy it a little. That's just friendship?

I have to say that I liked In Your Arms a lot better. It's a bit sickly sweet, but the message is a lot better than Ugly Boy. I couldn't quite decipher Ugly Boy's message, but it didn't quite seem nice like In Your Arms. I liked the aesthetics of Ugly Boy a lot better, but I'm not one for that style of music while In Your Arms is a bit more in alignment with my music style.


----------



## Straystuff (May 23, 2014)

Ok that's a point to ESFJ :'D

Which of the following relationship styles sounds better to you: this or this?


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

> especially because he rarely understands the sphere of abstract ideas and does not consider himself to be competent enough to argue about them. He is more interested in mundane problems. This is why he willingly cares for health and appearance of The Analyst, and by this softens his severe soul. He can protect practical interests (his dual does not always clearly understand them), round the departments, make arrangements, take care of everyday chores. He bravely rejects would-be-friends who in fact only want to use The Analyst’s skills for their own interest.


This is the opposite of me. Theoretical matters are my favorite conversational piece. Health is something I strive for, but which I cannot decide on my own. Mundane matters are, to me, jus that - mundane. I can't deal with them. 

I do encourage others with laughter and jokes, but I am not a touchy feely person. 



> The Mentor is capable of emotionally influencing people, of inspiring them with his ideas. He 'calculates' in advance all the options of exiting a critical situation. He is a person with a spiritual nature and he constantly strives for self-development.


This, on the other hand, fits me perfectly. I am well aware of how I can emotionally influence others. I don't know how well I successfully inspire others with my vision, but ideally I do. Calculating in advance is basically my mind most the time. The last part especially fits me - I've been a spiritual since I was a little girl (and this is what mainly separated me from my peers, apart from my physical disabilities), and self development is extremely important to me. 

Some of the things in these descriptions are hard to determine given that I'm not in a relationship with anyone right now, especially not with someone of the specific types given.


----------



## Straystuff (May 23, 2014)

Neither am I but I do click pretty strongly with the second one  The idea is that your dual is able to provide things you are lacking the most in life: ESFJ's get new ideas and exitement while ENFJ's get stability and order.

Do you usually know how long things will last? Do you find yourself planning your near future a lot (e.g. writing detailed schedules in a calendar)? 

Are you good at keeping your life in order? Are you aware of your body?


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Yes, I am very good at determining time and my future. I have a better grasp on time and realistically how long things will take than almost anyone else I know. Sometimes I use detailed schedules (I have in the past), but usually I just keep a very thorough schedule in my head. 

Not quite sure what you mean by "keeping my life in order"

I am not very aware of my body, no. Sometimes I have moments where I'm like, "wow, I have a body!" but I have been told a lot that I need to realize that I have a body, feelings, and a brain, not just a brain. Life would be a lot easier for me if I didn't have to deal with my body. I'm not good at describing physical internal things like pain, which has caused trouble for me with doctors before, because they don't know how to treat things I can't describe. 
I can't deal with things like feeling my heartbeat or internal processes (even tense muscles) because it makes me really uncomfortable just to think of those things.


----------



## Straystuff (May 23, 2014)

Hm, ok. I'd say that you are either an ENFJ or a type that's not mentioned here. ESFJ's are often very aware of their bodies.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Would you have any ideas outside of ENFJ? I want to settle on one type, and finally breathe and say "this is my type," but it worries me a little that you say I could be ENFJ or another type.


----------



## Straystuff (May 23, 2014)

Well what I think would be beneficial to you is to ask to be videotyped. Entropic from this forum (currently banned ) does those sometimes and I do think he's good at what he does. 

If you want to you could always wait until his ban ends and ask him to help you. He's this guy. As you can see he has also helped me with my type


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

I actually can't do that... I've been trained to not give away extremely personal information, and a visual of me would unfortunately fall into that. There's also some things about me that are there with disability, but which would be attributed to type (I make a lot of weird movements, I breathe irregularly, I have a lisp, I twitch a lot and make involuntary movements that I've seen people attribute to type but which is really just because I have some weird neurological stuff going on). also, due to my anxiety, being video taped makes me very self conscious, and I would really stress about it a lot

But thank you a lot for your help. Considering that angelcat has said I seem like an ENFJ and at least an Fe-dom and you've said that I resemble an Fe-dom but probably not an ESFJ, I'll go with ENFJ. (Unless, that is, you have any last-minute objection to that.)

As I've stated earlier, I really appreciate you helping me figure out my type. I understand that this must have taken some of your time and it means a lot to me that you put in so much effort to help me, it definitely has helped me


----------



## Straystuff (May 23, 2014)

No I totally understand. I'm terrified of cameras even without any kind of mental reason. It's just the best way to get information since you can tell so much more about a person's type by looking at their mannerisms etc. You can edit your text but not what you are in reality: e.g. I'm much more scattered irl than what I sound online 

The posts you made had some very contradicting information so I'm sorry if I dragged this out  I tried to be as throughout as possible. Atm I think ENFJ is the most likely type for you. But seriously, there's no rush with the one and only type. Hang out in ENFJ forums and check if you feel like home. If you do, ENFJ is most likely your type. If you later on find something that makes you doubt it you can always do this typing rumba again  I went through it 3 times and I know people who found their type after 10 or more typing sessions. Keep your mind open and the truth will come to you


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

That does make me feel a lot better, thank you. 

Sorry for the contradicting information! There's just a lot of things about me that are "contradictory," but they're how I am nonetheless. That's part of why it's been so hard for me to find my type, because I can be a lot like this but then I'm a lot like that. 

I agree with a lot of things I see in the ENFJ forum. It's just difficult for me to see myself as any Fe-dominant type, because I feel so awkward in life and constantly struggle to be socially acceptable, to have a type that is prone to being socially excellent is something I have to come to terms with. Another thing I'm realizing is that I have a negative and inaccurate self perception, so has owing my type and having an idea of who I am and how I appear to other people is important to me. 

Again, thank you so much! I'll revive this thread any time I feel that serious doubt creeping in, but until then I'll be settled with ENFJ


----------

