# I am just a grumpy tiger that would like some discussion on type. Thanks a lot.



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

I picked parts of several questionnaires here and I spent a bit of time to give answers that do reflect how I am. I skipped some questions where I didn't have a relevant well thought-out answer. You don't have to read all of them, pick and choose if you wish, some of them are really easy to read short answers; but do try and read at least the following ones: my answers to questions 20 and 22 as they show how I see things more in-depth.


0. Is there anything that may affect the way you answer the questions? For example, a stressful time, mental illness, medications, special life circumstances? Other useful information includes sex, age, and current state of mind.

*No. Female, 23.* 

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.

*It's a pretty nice picture of a sunset at a rocky sandy deserted stretch of a beach. 

Nice because of the sky with all the "colour-changing" clouds there in a blue and orange-yellowish background where gradually changing shades of these background colours mix together pretty neatly with the clouds and particularly with the sun just reaching down to the horizon. 

Then there is a brownish grey high wall of rock at the left side of the foreground with a few smaller rocks stretching into the sea with that old stone brick lighthouse tower thingie slightly hiding beside it - due to the almost identical colour and similar arrangement of tall overall shape. 

And finally it's cool too with the sand in the very front that seems to borrow a bit of extra colour of rust from the sunset to match it well while greatly contrasting with the originally blue wavy sea on top of that. In actuality, it's not simply blue, the waves have taken on a light blue colour under these circumstances the picture was created. 

All the colourful elements are definitely eye-catching altogether with all the colours and shapes making up the whole picture quite well. 

The building in addition looks not only old but also a slightly mysterious area to be explored - if there is no open door, you should still be able to climb in through one of those truly old fashioned small slits serving as windows with some effort and look around; then at the top look outside and even sit on the bottom part of the openings to look out more and enjoy the heights, no scare here heh.

There's a few more little objects in the picture that I could list but they are unimportant and don't contribute too much to anything so I'm not bothered.*


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?

*Uh, fuck that, annoying shit getting in the way. Now let's see what's going on, what people are trying to think about and do, let me orient myself and I'll see if I'm to take charge or just stand aside and follow things until I may see the need to intervene. The latter is my default. In either case I will keep track and analyze everything. I will remain calm for the most part with some irritation shown for a few moments and if taking action or making/affecting a decision, I will look relatively involved though not actually emotional. Meanwhile I never really doubt that there'll be a solution, I just want to get this pain-in-the-ass thing out of the way. Depending on the situation, we may find an alternative vehicle or get the car fixed, etc.* 


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?

*Eh, I'll want to know how long this party is going to last. If it's very long I might protest against the idea or find another way to get home, etc, whatever solution works to avoid going to the party. If we do go there, I hope there'll be good food/drinks and someone to spend time with or at least some good stuff going on so I'm not utterly bored after a few minutes. I can also sit somewhere and use my phone to get online or read something. Though, if I'm with good friends then I probably don't mind a long afterparty and I'll feel more involved overall.*


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?

*Inwardly: Bullshit.
Outwardly: I will care and argue heatedly when it's a strong belief/view of mine and the bullshit is big enough. In general, I easily make comments/add my judgments on things when I'm in the mood for doling out my snap judgments. Though my default attitude is more of a listener's.*


5. You are on the clock to fix something, a friend of yours sits beside you and gives a lot of interesting ideas, none of them actually help or are related to your situation, but they are still something you find interesting. What is your reaction? What do you say? What do you do? What's your train of thought?

*This one is simple, I won't find it interesting. I will tell them to leave. In my head I will be thinking, I am under a time constraint here, so yes go fuck off with your unrelated crap.*


6. You are in a car with some other people, the people in the car are talking. Someone makes a claim that you see as immoral/rude/cruel. What is your inward reaction? What do you think? What do you say?

*I won't think much beyond noticing it's something considered as rude. I may not even notice that it's supposed to be an ethical violation. I will speak up only if I do have a strong opinion on it for some reason but then I will be pretty direct in telling them off and shutting them up.*


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

*I'd want to understand how it is possible for this thing to happen. 

If the facts truly refute my understanding, and not just on the surface, I can update my understanding in specific areas alright. Otoh, if it clashed with my basic worldview, that'd really really upset me. 

I want to be objective though so I try to not ignore it even if it's hard. It will be put aside until I can see how to assimilate it into my previous frameworks. It's going to be annoying though.*


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

*Objectivity, fairness, seeking the unattainable Absolute Truth. 
Commitment. Persistence, willpower. 
Ability to rise to the challenges. Firmness with adaptability. 
Sense of purpose and visionary high goals besides material goals. Progress of society.
Physical, intellectual and spiritual improvement.

I determined them by introspecting and inspirations. I don't want to change any of the above.*


8b. Can they change? What would be the reason if they changed?

*Not likely. My views in general do not change easily but they can - if I find new facts contradict them not only on the surface but deeper too; so that I move closer to the Absolute Truth that I know we can't reach but have to still keep moving closer to it if we can. Must keep objective at all times. What may not ever change is my axioms for my default worldview from which everything else comes. It would require the entire world or my way of experiencing it to go upside-down first, most likely.*


9. Do you believe you are introverted or extraverted? Why do you believe that? (Please be as detailed as possible)

*I'm more responsive than initiating when I am with confirmed extraverts and I prefer this. Otherwise I'm not strongly introverted, I don't get drained by stuff that easily or it doesn't matter because I can keep going if I want to.*


10. Please describe yourself, what do you see as your greatest strengths and what do you see as your greatest weaknesses?

*Greatest strengths - Persistence, will, toughness. Ability and patience to analyze thoroughly and deeply, intelligence. Resourcefulness for adaptability.
Greatest weaknesses - Emotions. No lateral thinking.*


11. What is your "soft spot" (the area that makes you upset if people mess with)?

*I get real pissed off if you try to assume things about me without verifying first. Personal attacks in place of reasoning and passive aggressive sarcasm also set me off like there's no tomorrow. People in general attempting to troll, as well. And if I approached you with good intentions and you don't acknowledge that but treat me unfairly instead.*


12. What's your opinion of getting frequent feedback on what you do? (Someone pointing out what is good, what is bad, what and how to improve) Is there a limit to how often you want feedback? If so, what is the limit?

*I don't need feedback of any kind by default. I know when I did something well. I do not respond well to unsolicited advice. Even if I ask for opinions, expect me to argue with you if I disagree, which is not for the tender-hearted as I get very blunt. Unless your expertise is much greater than mine, in which case I won't yet have my own judgments so I will listen. Hm, also, I don't mind someone giving compliments, it can lift my spirits a bit, which is a nice bonus though I'm not in need of it, but please don't overdo that either because that'll sound unrealistic.*


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

*a) Doing what I have expertise in that actually impacts real life. Having to respond to whatever -concrete thing- comes up is pretty energizing too. Competition. Short interactions with people engaging me.
b) Talking to too many people; utilizing active emotional expression. Trying to understand vague theory. Trying to make sense of random bullshit. Too much new information to get into.*


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

*A lot of my judgments because it would be rude to voice them so freely. I also avoid behaviours that would possibly look out of place or weird. As I want to be respected, not looked down on. I'm pretty reserved and private overall.*


15. 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?

*If it's new and complex, I'll need time to work it out. I may still attempt to act and that may be effective but I'll feel a bit disoriented and can even seriously waste time until I reorient myself by analyzing and understanding things. With such new situations in general I prefer taking the time to immerse in it before I can really "get into" it. If it's new but I can directly and concretely react to it, I'll just do that without a problem.

Describing unknown situation in my life... please specify more as to what kind of situation and I'll pick an actual example then.*


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

*I don't perceive it as stressful consciously. I will usually remain unfazed and calm. I will take action to solve it or analyze a lot first. If shit keeps tripping me up, I'm going to be irritated at the least or even full-on rage but that's energizing.* 


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

*Nothing out of the ordinary. My usual calm though I will possibly be enthusiastic. Or when explicitly having fun with friends.. then maybe I laugh a bit and be more freely active overall.*


18. 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?

*Society is a given and it gives a lot of purpose to your life. I like to be useful to society. I find social status important and I strive for good status including the material gains. I am very competitive due to that too besides other reasons. I do not directly pay attention to people in the context of society though, I am more indirectly relating to society through the things I've listed. I pay attention to basic social norms but not all of the traditions, just some of them.*


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

*Authority means the leader/leading group that has power. I will always notice authority and I will have special attention for it - it doesn't phase me but I will follow it with interest. No problem interacting with the authority, working with it by default especially if it is advantageous to me - or even arguing with it if their shit gets in my way or I find shit unfair. As long as this doesn't jeopardize my goals overall.

I can also see experts as authority and I respect them but it does not mean I can't have my own opinion if I have understood enough of the area they are experts in.*


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

*Order is where things are not random but willfully structured instead (order in the universe is another matter though). I have a good sense to detect structure and I navigate it easily, by either strictly keeping to it or by manipulating the objects and the situation at will while relying on the understanding of their organization but going after my own head. I do keep some things in order in my head and in my environment. Actually, I go by a daily plan and a mid term and a longer term draft of a plan and I have a lot of structure for my things but if I don't have the energy to do everything, some things can temporarily fall into disorder. I don't like that though, I feel better when stuff is sorted. Disorder always nags me a bit in the background but I can ignore it for a long time. Otherwise, I'm good at organizing a job and enjoy instructing others. I don't want much open-ended stuff with my tasks either because I find that too vague and unconstrained, so overall I work well with structure and expectations and I rely a lot on deadlines with a worthy end goal in my mind. 

Chaos is random at least on the surface and it is again something to navigate for an objective I have. Feeling in control over the chaos is good. But, I always need to start with orienting myself in chaos. This may happen very quickly in a concrete physical situation or may take time if it points beyond that. If chaos does not affect me by disrupting my own stuff, then it's fun navigating it for the objective. If it's unwelcome disruption I will be very pissed off. Still, I can react very well in crisis situations too, seeing how the objective determines the decisions, easily grabbing immediate opportunity while, as I said above, I need time in other situations to build my framework from a lot of detail and that is when I am disoriented temporarily but I can still act "blindly" if necessary. I can also see change as chaos but again, I can work with changes like I do in crisis situations.* 


21. 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?

*Setbacks where I didn't expect them and where I don't know how to put them out of the way; not succeeding or losing what I already have. But I don't have time to worry, I just keep pushing.*


22. Finally, is there something else you find to be of importance you want to add about yourself you think might be of relevance when helping to type you? 

*The way I think... By default I'm hard concrete, distinct and detail oriented. I learn from concrete experience and I like to end things in firm logical conclusions that I rely on very much. I prefer structured material or I will structure it myself. How I get there is, I collect a lot of details that are first unsorted and I build things slowly in my head but it's pretty solid. Not easily changed after it's been built up, though. It will be an objective and especially extensive, precise and deep understanding that others don't have. Abstracted away from the concrete eventually but usually easily leading back to it. 

Now, I will usually not build this understanding if I have no objective with it in real life, no goal to achieve with it, yet I do continuously build a bit more understanding than strictly needed at the moment. This is what leads to my having a deeper understanding than most people. Sometimes I also force myself to educate myself on matters where I do not have a practical goal with it but I do that in bits at a time as it gets tiring. 

So, I strongly stick to concrete anchors in actual reality while building my understanding, I don't like to get too removed from the factual side of reality in my thinking though I do experience myself as detached overall, removed from the object when thinking about it. When I do get really deep, I will also become very abstract instead of just looking at concrete data but that, while enchanting, also gets tiring after a while. I need to get back to my concrete anchors and factual data. But in the background the deep abstract structures support my overall thinking and I like insights and mysterious things sometimes, paradoxes, double meanings, etc.

Overall I'm very focused. Also, I'm virtually always task oriented in my mind, thinking about something or executing a task for a goal or when not busy, ready to respond to things coming up. Always ready to evaluate things as well and I do so constantly, though what's first on my mind when I look at an object is whether I own it or if I want to get it or not based on its appearance. And as a consequence of all the above, I hate the so-called creative brainstorming of irrelevant bullshit, I'm useless at rapid idea generating and don't like to get scattered.*


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

I noticed @Maker of helmets likes to post in these threads so if you or -anyone else- have thoughts please don't spare me.


----------



## Maker of helmets (Sep 8, 2014)

@grumpytiger seems like to me there is introverted sensing and also strong Thinking involved in some way or another


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Maker of helmets said:


> @grumpytiger seems like to me there is introverted sensing and also strong Thinking involved in some way or another


Thanks for the input, are you able to say a bit more on this? A couple of questions for that. Where do you see Si? Are you hinting at xSTJ?


----------



## Maker of helmets (Sep 8, 2014)

grumpytiger said:


> Thanks for the input, are you able to say a bit more on this? A couple of questions for that. Where do you see Si? Are you hinting at xSTJ?


I think XNTP or XSTJ


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Maker of helmets said:


> I think XNTP or XSTJ


OK, so are you saying S/N is unclear? How do we clarify this further?


----------



## Maker of helmets (Sep 8, 2014)

grumpytiger said:


> OK, so are you saying S/N is unclear? How do we clarify this further?


I suppose I cannot tell if your preference is more for extroverted or introverted Thinking, but the things which seem more certain to me are that you may use extroverted intuition and introverted sensing, plus Thinking


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Maker of helmets said:


> I suppose I cannot tell if your preference is more for extroverted or introverted Thinking, but the things which seem more certain to me are that you may use extroverted intuition and introverted sensing, plus Thinking


Which parts in my answers seem to be utilizing extroverted intuition?


@Kitty23 I'd be glad to hear your input too as I see you also like to post in this section.


----------



## Maker of helmets (Sep 8, 2014)

grumpytiger said:


> Which parts in my answers seem to be utilizing extroverted intuition?


I am not as sure about that because seemed to me introverted sensing was clearer, in the sense of what I perceived from your writing as being grounded in a collection of experiences ...

extroverted intuition was less obvious to me, apart from maybe how there seemed to me like there was a structure, to your thoughts, which shows you have considered the many possibilities in order to get to the structure that you have


----------



## Kitty23 (Dec 27, 2015)

Maybe ISTJ? 

The intuition functions: 

Ni is about being able to see subconscious patterns and symbols. It analyzes the past, but then looks far out into the future. It is not detail oriented, sentimental, or nostalgic like Si. It looks for the deeper symbols and patterns. Ni finds one idea and builds on it over time. Ni users talk streamlined/one thing at a time. Ni is linear. On the other hand, Ne is about possibilities, more so several possibilities at once, the "what could be and what if's." It looks for broad shallow patterns and symbols. Ne users tend to talk about possibilities and sound random. Ne is non-linear. Ni and Ne are both abstract. 

The sensing functions: 

Se and Si are both sensing functions. So both want/use concrete-empirically experienced data. Se wants to live in the right now. When playing a video game you have played before Se just thinks about that moment. It doesn't think "Oh how did I win this game last time?" like a Si user would. Se doesn't care about all the joy you got from playing that same game before. What matters is RIGHT NOW. It wants to discover as it goes. It's good at improvising. It doesn't think about the past or future, just right now. A Se user sees a bird. All they think is "Wow, a bird." They are the adrenaline junkies-race car drivers. Se wants to go on adventures, be spontaneous, be reckless, and impulsive. Se is not scared of trying anything new. Think Harry Potter-either ISFP or ISTP. 

Si on the other hand, looks to the past when dealing with the present. It is about the tried and true method. So if I get into a fight with someone I'll think how did I win this fight last time? And use the same methods. It is about getting the same joy from something over and over/reliving emotions. I feel all those past feelings/emotions/memories when I play Kingdom Hearts over and over again. I generally stick to same gaming methods. When I look at a picture of a bird, I think of my own bird. I think wow he looks like my bird, he has the same grumpy, bossy, look on his face. Si gets scared about new things. Si loves physical concrete symbolism. Think of Hermione Granger- either ESTJ or ISTJ.

Ni and Te are linear.
Ti and Ne are non-linear. 

Also, Ni and Si are similar. They both have an abstract quality to them. They are both introverted perceiving functions. Both are connected to memory and experience. They both create archetypes. Ni- conceptual archetypes. Si- physical archetypes. Both have hard time dealing with things they haven’t dealt with before. Both have an attitude about taking short cuts “Oh, I’ve seen this before. This is the answer. " They don’t need to think through the specific details to know what’s going to happen, since they’ve already seen it before. Both look to the past to help them figure out new situations. But Si is concrete. Ni is conceptual. 

Biggest difference: Si is about concrete experiences. Ni is about conceptual experiences. Si cares about the past and present. Ni cares about the past and far out into the future. 

(from Robert2928's example)

conceptual experience- 1.“Wow that girl hugged me so she must like me…wait isn’t this what happened on (insert TV show here)? Oh she doesn’t like me after all”

concrete experience- 2. What has personally happened. “Wow that girl hugged me so she must like me…then again (insert other girl name here) hugged me and she didn’t like me so maybe I’m wrong”

In math class, in order to understand the problem, do you need the general idea-conceptual thinking or examples-concrete thinking?

Si isn't actually about tradition. It's just Si can lead to tradition. So say I like throwing the same party every year, in the same location, with the same music, .....That party can turn into a tradition. Or like every year I pretty much do the same thing for my birthday, why? because I ENJOY to. Si users don't do the same thing over and over again if the method is flawed, or if it brings them no joy, or if it's impractical. Si is the saying "If it ain't broken, why fix it?" Si users can hate change if they feel their current method works fine. Like why solve a math problem a different way, if solving it this way worked all the times before? It's about preserving past way of doing things that worked, were practical, and brought joy. 

Si is an introverted perceiving function. Si is a subjective storehouse of detailed information which you gather over time. 

“Dominant Introverted Sensing (Si)
Directing energy inwardly and storing the facts and details of both external reality and internal thoughts and experiences.

Current Sensory Experience: What is currently happening in reality.
*Trigger*: Reality prompts you to access your internal sensory catalog
Cataloged sensory experience: What has happened prior and thoughts and experiences are tied to that"

Si is also about concrete symbolism. For example (this also might have some Fi in it), when I got a cup from Mercy Corps:

“When I first got the mug I noticed it felt smooth, cold, silver, it’s made out of metal... My cup *symbolizes* my faith in helping others. The black and white flowers painted on the cup *represent* blooming into a fresh new start. The black lowercase words “be the change” *symbolize* that anyone can help make a positive change in someone’s life. The images of the birds on mug *represent* people rising out of their struggles. The different angles of the birds *symbolize* different strategies of breaking free from poverty. The different outlines of the birds (clean in lines, definable feathers) *represent* the difficulty of the poverty. The visibility of the bird’s heads, beaks, tails, and certain wings *represent* how visible a person’s struggles can be.” - The symbolism is tied to a concrete physical object that is from MY (personal) life. 

Si is sentimental and nostalgic. I love taking pictures of moments I want to remember forever. For example, say I took a picture of my bird. Then years later when I look at the picture, it's like I'm transported to that exact moment I took that picture. The emotions I felt, if I had a headache that day,...maybe the time if I looked at the clock when I took the picture, maybe I'll think "I remember feeling like I had bad hair when taking this picture". So again, my bird is a real physical and concrete object. My bird is not an abstract thing. He is real, here in this moment, and I want real physical pictures of him so I can use my Si even more lol. 

Si also tells me how something should be based on past subjective experiences. Say I always eat apples that always look the same. But then one day I get a new apple and it looks different. I'll zoom in on the details and notice EXACTLY how it's different than all of the other apples. 

Or say I always go to the same theme park every summer. Then next year I go to a different theme park. But I immediately notice all the ways, even the tiny details, of how this theme park is different from the original theme park. So then I'll feel like this isn't a real theme park. I’ll feel like I didn't get the real theme park experience. Why? Because MY PERSONAL SUBJECTIVE DEFINTION of what a theme park experience is, is now being contradicted. So see how my definition is subjective, my definition was created through my own personal past experiences. But in reality there is no definition for what a “True theme park experience,” is.

What is Fi?
Fi is also subjective like Si is. Yet, Fi is an introverted judging function. Fi is about your personal values, which cannot be influenced by others beliefs, and originally came from yourself. They are strict values, which will rarely ever waver over time. Fi is a moral code. For example, I want a career that is about helping people. Why? Because helping others is one of my Fi values. Yet, I won't work for a "Helping organization" that promotes beliefs I personally disagree with or/ and that are illogical. So if a Christian homeless shelter requires its workers to say to the homeless "You're homeless because you haven't accepted Jesus into your heart," Then I will decide IMMEDIATELY that I cannot work there and NEVER WILL (See how that value is so strong I made a decision immediately and that value cannot be changed by others, and I originally came to that belief on my own, and it will 99.9% stay the same throughout my lifetime). Even if my mother said “So what if they do something you don't like. That’s ridiculous, how else are you going to the pay the bills?” I would still personally feel it would be wrong of me to promote that belief/work there. If I promoted that belief I would hurt those who are already suffering. Also, that belief is illogical to me- Te, so another reason I could not work there. So see how Fi is rigid. I become very rigid and tense when someone violates a personal value of mine. 

And if I do go at it with someone who violated a value of mine, I share personal experiences that back up my value- Si, and how my value is logical- Te.


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Maker of helmets said:


> I am not as sure about that because seemed to me introverted sensing was clearer, in the sense of what I perceived from your writing as being grounded in a collection of experiences ...
> 
> extroverted intuition was less obvious to me, apart from maybe how there seemed to me like there was a structure, to your thoughts, which shows you have considered the many possibilities in order to get to the structure that you have


Ah, I see. No, to structure my thoughts or other things, I don't perceive myself considering many possibilities. It must not be very conscious if I do so. I just cannot jump from one idea to another far-flung idea. I may deduce things logically -favourite way of doing that is by moving around in a logical map- but that's all I can do. Consciously, I really just do what I described about collecting details, experiences, all sorts of data and then over time I come to sorting them out and structuring them in a framework with logical principles. 

With the sorting out process, if the thing is too new, I can get really sequential considering the details one by one, comparing stuff, but when I do get to the actual judgments, it'll be all rearranged and structured, seeing everything, details, all the facts, in terms of relevance and consequences, because I will have extracted the main logical points from which everything else originates, it's a pretty hierarchical structure really, I really like the structural abstraction and I'm able to do very precise snap judgments from that point on. That's when I get real judgmental-judging of things and then my views don't change easily.

Additionally, as I noted in my OP, I'm very bad at considering too many ideas, my brain is quite one-track and I'm instantly turned off by unrealistic ideas if someone brings up such things. I'm very judgmental of those really. If you want to piss me off, the quickest way to do that is by bringing up "what if!!" stuff or these random jokes or in general fuck around with irrelevant bullshit, lol.


----------



## Kitty23 (Dec 27, 2015)

I would say you use low or no Ne.


----------



## Maker of helmets (Sep 8, 2014)

grumpytiger said:


> Ah, I see. No, to structure my thoughts or other things, I don't perceive myself considering many possibilities. It must not be very conscious if I do so. I just cannot jump from one idea to another far-flung idea. I may deduce things logically -favourite way of doing that is by moving around in a logical map- but that's all I can do. Consciously, I really just do what I described about collecting details, experiences, all sorts of data and then over time I come to sorting them out and structuring them in a framework with logical principles.
> 
> With the sorting out process, if the thing is too new, I can get really sequential considering the details one by one, comparing stuff, but when I do get to the actual judgments, it'll be all rearranged and structured, seeing everything, details, all the facts, in terms of relevance and consequences, because I will have extracted the main logical points from which everything else originates, it's a pretty hierarchical structure really, I really like the structural abstraction and I'm able to do very precise snap judgments from that point on. That's when I get real judgmental-judging of things and then my views don't change easily.
> 
> Additionally, as I noted in my OP, I'm very bad at considering too many ideas, my brain is quite one-track and I'm instantly turned off by unrealistic ideas if someone brings up such things. I'm very judgmental of those really. If you want to piss me off, the quickest way to do that is by bringing up "what if!!" stuff or these random jokes or in general fuck around with irrelevant bullshit, lol.


I am still not sure though if you are more of an Si-Te user (in some order), or introverted Thinking ... do you see yourself preferring extroverted Thinking or introverted Thinking


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Kitty23 said:


> Maybe ISTJ?


Thanks for the input. Can you give me a short summary on what gives you that impression?

I'll also describe how I am compared to your function descriptions below. You don't have to read it all but if you can skim it, I'd really appreciate it. Tbh it's a mind dump for the most part, comparing myself to your function descriptions but if you get any additional insight from it, then it was worth it. 




> The intuition functions: (...)


Yeah I sure as hell don't do Ne as described here. I'm quite linear in some things but that's not really Ni either as I don't think in this symbolic way, though it sometimes seems cool. I just don't think I'm good at this either. I do analyze the past, experiences, problems in retrospect but then I don't look into the future much, not far by default. 




> The sensing functions: (...)


I definitely use concrete data, I'm quite empirical. It hurts my head if I was to disconnect for too long from the empiricism. 

With video games, I hardly bother to waste time on them now but in the past I would optimize the way I played games so in this sense I definitely did build on what I've already tried. I did enjoy playing the same games again and again... with the same experience/joy, I suppose? But if I finally got to win by setting a crazy enough record I lost interest and moved on. 

Otherwise I perceive myself as living in the present pretty well. In terms of doing something new and risky, I perceive my current limits rather well instinctually but I can gradually extend them. I'm not extremely risk avoidant like some people are when I see it's not really a risk going past those limits that I perceive so quickly. 

Other than that, I do like some adventures, I can jump in right away if I don't have to practice and learn the new limits first so then I actually do some really crazy reckless seeming things not recognizing there may be danger but to me it's just about not overstepping those -in my eyes- realistic limits. I view those extremely cautious people as not logically knowing the limits so well so they don't venture anywhere due to that.

I'm able to improvise to a degree, see more below on that. But I'm not very spontaneous otherwise. I often get really rigid actually. Set on one single course/task/goal. And I enjoy that. 

I don't get impulsive for impulsivity's sake much, just for a few moments here or there and I'm fine that way, I have good control over this stuff. It's only with some friends of mine that I get quite... spontaneous. That's fun then 

Well the one time I get a bit more impulsive is when I get angry. But even then I'm controlled to a good degree, I don't lose my head, I'm still coldly calculating about (physical) consequences and I act based on that. 




> Si on the other hand, looks to the past when dealing with the present. (...)


Same gaming methods and other methods - yes. Tho', I do refine methods over time. 

Otoh, when I look at a bird, if it does not look extremely similar to the bird I own (I don't actually own one), I won't think of mine. But yes if they look *very* similar, sure, I will think of mine then. Hm, I don't easily relive emotions even when I repeat the same game but this doesn't seem like a significant detail.

If I get into a fight then no, I actually don't think of how I won it before unless it was under the same circumstances. If not the same circumstances, I'm going to have to see some other way to win it. 

It may feel like going "blindly" then but if the new situation is fully physical, such as in a physical fight, no problem then, I will easily make moves based on what I see right there and then. Not scared of such new situations.

However, in any new situation, I just cannot for the life of me think of options beyond what I see as immediately present or beyond options that are not directly logically deducible. I do have a good overview of the concrete situation otherwise... it can be sequential or can be broad.

All in all, if I do not have a method for the situation, I can feel a bit disoriented, though I will still try to act if I must. 




> Ni and Te are linear. Ti and Ne are non-linear.


Well.. I'm linear and broad as well. But it's not "non-linear", it's just a broad sensory or logical picture of the thing/situation. When I reason I can get linear but even then I prefer to pull from the broad (sensory or logical) picture.




> Also, Ni and Si are similar. (...)


I do relate to the Si here over the Ni because I'm concrete and experience-based. 

Yes if I'm familiar with something, if I understand it well, then I easily make snap judgments. If I do not yet understand it then I can take my time first. 

With that, I can do trial and error experimenting but I'm not very fond of it beyond a point. Well, sometimes I do enjoy poking a (physical) object to figure it out but I feel like it takes time if it's very new.. I poke a lot at first then I realize what logical main points I see and I "pull" them from the object and use those with ease. But until then, doing the trial and error shit gets quite frustrating after a while. Of course with simpler objects it doesn't take long. It depends on the complexity.

Yup, I do not have to think through all the details if I already analyzed them out. 

As for looking to the past.. hm, I'm not sure how conscious that is for me. I notice it only when I'm put in a new situation that's partially similar to the previous one and then the structure I use for the previous one will not fully match the new one. It's such a disconcerting feeling, lol. Then I rebuild from scratch... or maybe I try to reuse parts of the previous structure but the conflict between the two structures feels so weird, LOL.

Say more on this physical archetypes thing please. Example?




> conceptual experience- 1.“Wow that girl hugged me so she must like me…wait isn’t this what happened on (insert TV show here)? Oh she doesn’t like me after all”
> 
> concrete experience- 2. What has personally happened. “Wow that girl hugged me so she must like me…then again (insert other girl name here) hugged me and she didn’t like me so maybe I’m wrong”


Hm I do neither because the two girls (or situation with girl and tv show situation) are not the same. So I don't want to draw any conclusions here unless the situation is obvious on its own or there is some compelling -and obvious- logical reason to do so. Not willing to do much speculation.

In this case it would be obvious she likes me if I have already seen other signs of that before and it all matches up. If it's a consistent pattern. I can recall some specific examples of the pattern if I try but it's more a feel of how things have been consistent over time. Until then I would not be sure so in that sense I do relate to the latter after all ("concrete experience" example).




> In math class, in order to understand the problem, do you need the general idea-conceptual thinking or examples-concrete thinking?


I learned in math class via the examples. That was the easy effortless way to do it. 

I also used to read some math books on the side (not too many though lol), I enjoyed reading about the logical concepts and trying to really delve deep in them. I liked how I usually had a feel for the logical concept. It does drain me a bit though if I stay in this very abstract mode for long. I can force myself to stay in it if I have to, say when I was sent to math competitions, I would keep working in this mode then, no problem. 

It's weird because even though the very abstract mode tires me, I see something in it that feels like very much part of me.




> Si isn't actually about tradition. (...)


OK good because I can't see myself as just a tradition-oriented person. That would be an oversimplification of myself. Yes I'm conventional in many things but I don't see myself as a totally average person... I do invent my own little traditions though sometimes, lol. But that's some personal thing unless someone else wants to join in but as I'm pretty private by default, I hardly share these things with others. 

Otherwise, I don't mind going to the same place with the same friend, if it's enjoyable, but I also don't mind going to a new place if they have something else in mind as long as it's not against my preferences and if I'm not yet too set on going to the already known place (set on it as an in-the-moment goal). I can still be convinced with a bit of difficulty in the latter case.

Sure, if it ain't broken, why fix it. I have that saying actually. I do sometimes stir up small things though in-the-moment, because why not. It's when I deal with a routine that consists of several parts or manipulating several objects where the order isn't strictly determined by logic.. then I may change things around a bit no problem.




> Si is also about concrete symbolism. For example (this also might have some Fi in it), when I got a cup from Mercy Corps:


Whoa, I don't think I do this one too often. It's actually cool but I really don't go around all day thinking like this. Where it gets to outlines of birds and then to the difficulty of poverty from that, that for me seems a far too random association. 




> Si is sentimental and nostalgic. (...) Then years later when I look at the picture, it's like I'm transported to that exact moment I took that picture. (...)


Hm I'm not often sentimental but I know the feeling. Yes my autobiographical memory is very good in the way you describe here. 




> Si also tells me how something should be based on past subjective experiences. (...)


Details themselves to me are not subjective actually. I can list and describe details as if on a photo and it's supposed to be the same as if someone else described them. Just like you described the cup as being of silver colour and made of metal. 

What would be subjective is if I got stuck on one specific detail and immersed in that more. I usually just take in the broad picture of the object though, I don't bother with looking at something that's not that impactfully looking. If it looks impactfully then yes I will look longer and absorb its details closely.

Yes I can see all the detail if I look at an object, like that apple, and I can see how it differs from other apples but I actually don't think they all look the same lol if we take this literally. If you just mean the main features, sure, if I was usually eating a red kind of apple (I don't know the names of these species), I would notice that it's a green kind next time. That seems basic to me though...




> Or say I always go to the same theme park every summer. (...)


Yes this is what I talked about above about the new situation's structure not matching the previous -somewhat similar- situation's. I notice the overall structure being different, I notice details filling that structure too.

If I really enjoyed the first theme park, I might be wanting to go back to that first... but then if I discover the new park is pretty good too, I'll be able to enjoy it just fine.




> What is Fi? (...)


Ah yeah I do relate to feeling like I have some introverted judging function. I have my strict opinions that don't change easily unless new facts counter them - but for that, they must counter my view not only on the surface. Because the surface of the facts doesn't really count. 

Lol the Christian homeless shelter example, I would also refuse to work there (unless I was starving to death otherwise but that's not likely ), that belief they have is just ridiculous. And they try to enforce such bullshit, really, that makes it even worse. I agree it's illogical.

I relate to becoming rigid in defending my views, oh yeah. My views are primarily logical, though. Do you always reach for your Te first to determine if something is wrong/right, correct/incorrect?




Kitty23 said:


> I would say you use low or no Ne.


Ha, yeah, I'll agree on that.


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Maker of helmets said:


> I am still not sure though if you are more of an Si-Te user (in some order), or introverted Thinking ... do you see yourself preferring extroverted Thinking or introverted Thinking


Which parts seem introverted vs extraverted thinking? If you can point that out, I'll try to tell you more on how I do it exactly and hopefully that'll clarify enough.

What I can tell you about my investigations on type so far is that I have checked out basic type descriptions and the P stuff seems a bit too carefree and aimless for my liking. But that's not about functions specifically.

On this test I get ISTJ: scottmunson.info/myers/#1 - It doesn't measure functions though. (This is supposedly an official MBTI test.)


----------



## Maker of helmets (Sep 8, 2014)

grumpytiger said:


> Which parts seem introverted vs extraverted thinking? If you can point that out, I'll try to tell you more on how I do it exactly and hopefully that'll clarify enough.
> 
> What I can tell you about my investigations on type so far is that I have checked out basic type descriptions and the P stuff seems a bit too carefree and aimless for my liking. But that's not about functions specifically.
> 
> On this test I get ISTJ: scottmunson.info/myers/#1 - It doesn't measure functions though. (This is supposedly an official MBTI test.)


I think the order of your thoughts represents what seems like to me are processes of extroverted Thinking ....

and I think it is the clarity with which you seem to describe what are your internal thought processes, which seems to me like introverted Thinking ... however I think there is some doubt in my head between what sees to me like introverted Thinking, by itself, or introverted sensing/extroverted Thinking, together


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Maker of helmets said:


> I think the order of your thoughts represents what seems like to me are processes of extroverted Thinking ....
> 
> and I think it is the clarity with which you seem to describe what are your internal thought processes, which seems to me like introverted Thinking ... however I think there is some doubt in my head between what sees to me like introverted Thinking, by itself, or introverted sensing/extroverted Thinking, together


Ah, I see, so how to go on with resolving this? When you talk of extraverted thinking, is it my structured way of expressing myself? Did I understand that right?


----------



## Maker of helmets (Sep 8, 2014)

grumpytiger said:


> Ah, I see, so how to go on with resolving this? When you talk of extraverted thinking, is it my structured way of expressing myself? Did I understand that right?


yes, in the sense that what I think that seems to reveal is extroverted Thinking processes


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Maker of helmets said:


> yes, in the sense that what I think that seems to reveal is extroverted Thinking processes


Alright. If you can think of anything else to figure out this SiTe/Ti stuff, do let me know. Thanks a lot for all your input.


----------



## Maker of helmets (Sep 8, 2014)

grumpytiger said:


> Alright. If you can think of anything else to figure out this SiTe/Ti stuff, do let me know. Thanks a lot for all your input.


that's alright 

I think if you are a Thinking type, this means both Thinking functions would be strong anyway


----------



## Kitty23 (Dec 27, 2015)

My analysis of your questionnaire answers: 

When describing the picture, it was very just at face value, what you saw right in front of you- Sensing. 



> Uh, fuck that, annoying shit getting in the way. Now let's see what's going on, what people are trying to think about and do, let me orient myself and I'll see if I'm to take charge or just stand aside and follow things until I may see the need to intervene. The latter is my default. In either case I will keep track and analyze everything. I will remain calm for the most part with some irritation shown for a few moments and if taking action or making/affecting a decision, I will look relatively involved though not actually emotional. Meanwhile I never really doubt that there'll be a solution, I just want to get this pain-in-the-ass thing out of the way. Depending on the situation, we may find an alternative vehicle or get the car fixed, etc.


– Taking charge could be Te. Analyzing is Ti. Not looking emotional could be thinking or Fi.



> Inwardly: Bullshit.
> Outwardly: I will care and argue heatedly when it's a strong belief/view of mine and the bullshit is big enough. In general, I easily make comments/add my judgments on things when I'm in the mood for doling out my snap judgments. Though my default attitude is more of a listener's.


 - Sounds like Fi 



> This one is simple, I won't find it interesting. I will tell them to leave. In my head I will be thinking, I am under a time constraint here, so yes go fuck off with your unrelated crap.


 - Very focused, which makes me think a J type, or/and low/no Se or Ne. 



> I won't think much beyond noticing it's something considered as rude. I may not even notice that it's supposed to be an ethical violation. I will speak up only if I do have a strong opinion on it for some reason but then I will be pretty direct in telling them off and shutting them up.


 – Could be Fi 



> Objectivity, fairness, seeking the unattainable Absolute Truth.


 – Could be Fe or Te, and maybe Ni 



> Commitment. Persistence, willpower.


 – J type/ Te 



> Ability to rise to the challenges. Firmness with adaptability.


 – Maybe Te 



> Sense of purpose and visionary high goals besides material goals. Progress of society.


 - Goals is Te. Progress of society could be Fe 



> Physical, intellectual and spiritual improvement.


 - Physical could indicate sensing. 



> I determined them by introspecting and inspirations. I don't want to change any of the above.


 - Not wanting to change any of the above makes me think Fi over Fe. Fi user’s values are based on a strict moral code. Their values are firm and will hardly ever waver throughout their lives. Fi= internal values. Fe= external values 



> Not likely. My views in general do not change easily but they can - if I find new facts contradict them not only on the surface but deeper too; so that I move closer to the Absolute Truth that I know we can't reach but have to still keep moving closer to it if we can. Must keep objective at all times. What may not ever change is my axioms for my default worldview from which everything else comes. It would require the entire world or my way of experiencing it to go upside-down first, most likely.


 - Again, sounds like Fi. It sounds like your values are mainly from facts? 



> I'm more responsive than initiating when I am with confirmed extraverts and I prefer this. Otherwise I'm not strongly introverted, I don't get drained by stuff that easily or it doesn't matter because I can keep going if I want to.


 - Extraversion 



> I don't need feedback of any kind by default. I know when I did something well. I do not respond well to unsolicited advice. Even if I ask for opinions, expect me to argue with you if I disagree, which is not for the tender-hearted as I get very blunt. Unless your expertise is much greater than mine, in which case I won't yet have my own judgments so I will listen. Hm, also, I don't mind someone giving compliments, it can lift my spirits a bit, which is a nice bonus though I'm not in need of it, but please don't overdo that either because that'll sound unrealistic.


 – Sounds like Fi over Fe. Fi users deal with emotions on their own. Fe users deal with emotions through talking them out and they like validation. 



> A lot of my judgments because it would be rude to voice them so freely. I also avoid behaviours that would possibly look out of place or weird. As I want to be respected, not looked down on. I'm pretty reserved and private overall.


 - Kind of makes me think Si or maybe Fe 



> If it's new and complex, I'll need time to work it out. I may still attempt to act and that may be effective but I'll feel a bit disoriented and can even seriously waste time until I reorient myself by analyzing and understanding things. With such new situations in general I prefer taking the time to immerse in it before I can really "get into" it. If it's new but I can directly and concretely react to it, I'll just do that without a problem.


 - Sounds like Si or/and J type over Se/ P type 



> Describing unknown situation in my life... please specify more as to what kind of situation and I'll pick an actual example then.


 - Evidence for concrete thinking- sensing over abstract thinking- intuition



> Society is a given and it gives a lot of purpose to your life. I like to be useful to society. I find social status important and I strive for good status including the material gains. I am very competitive due to that too besides other reasons. I do not directly pay attention to people in the context of society though, I am more indirectly relating to society through the things I've listed. I pay attention to basic social norms but not all of the traditions, just some of them.


 – Maybe Si or/and Fe 



> I have a good sense to detect structure and I navigate it easily, by either strictly keeping to it or by manipulating the objects and the situation at will while relying on the understanding of their organization but going after my own head. I do keep some things in order in my head and in my environment. Actually, I go by a daily plan and a mid term and a longer term draft of a plan and I have a lot of structure for my things but if I don't have the energy to do everything, some things can temporarily fall into disorder. I don't like that though, I feel better when stuff is sorted. Disorder always nags me a bit in the background but I can ignore it for a long time. Otherwise, I'm good at organizing a job and enjoy instructing others. I don't want much open-ended stuff with my tasks either because I find that too vague and unconstrained, so overall I work well with structure and expectations and I rely a lot on deadlines with a worthy end goal in my mind.


– Maybe Si and/or J type 



> Still, I can react very well in crisis situations too, seeing how the objective determines the decisions, easily grabbing immediate opportunity while, as I said above, I need time in other situations to build my framework from a lot of detail and that is when I am disoriented temporarily but I can still act "blindly" if necessary. I can also see change as chaos but again, I can work with changes like I do in crisis situations.


– Grabbing immediate opportunities is Se. But then you use objectivity to determine decisions, which could be Te... But then seeing change as chaos is Si or/and J type. 



> The way I think... By default I'm hard concrete, distinct and detail oriented. I learn from concrete experience and I like to end things in firm logical conclusions that I rely on very much. I prefer structured material or I will structure it myself. How I get there is, I collect a lot of details that are first unsorted and I build things slowly in my head but it's pretty solid. Not easily changed after it's been built up, though. It will be an objective and especially extensive, precise and deep understanding that others don't have. Abstracted away from the concrete eventually but usually easily leading back to it.


– Sounds like Si and Te 



> Overall I'm very focused. Also, I'm virtually always task oriented in my mind, thinking about something or executing a task for a goal or when not busy, ready to respond to things coming up.


 – Te or/and J type 



> And as a consequence of all the above, I hate the so-called creative brainstorming of irrelevant bullshit, I'm useless at rapid idea generating and don't like to get scattered.


 - Low or no Ne


----------



## Kitty23 (Dec 27, 2015)

> I'll also describe how I am compared to your function descriptions below. You don't have to read it all but if you can skim it, I'd really appreciate it. Tbh it's a mind dump for the most part, comparing myself to your function descriptions but if you get any additional insight from it, then it was worth it.


Ok. I'll read it. 

What I see so far: Sensing and probably Fi, linear thinker. 

So when dealing with a situation in the present you don’t think back to a similar situation and see how you dealt with it? 

Yes, I would say you are a sensor over intuitive. Your video gaming could be Si. So how impulsive an spontaneous are you? I am a very cautious person. How good do you think you would be at improv acting? I would be terrible lol. How often do you get rigid? Why do you get rigid? What sets off you being rigid? Sounds like you don’t like to multi-task, which suggests J type. How spontaneous are you compared to the most spontaneous person you know? Like what things are spontaneous for you? Yes, Si users only use the same methods, if the method is tried and true, if it’s practical, and if it brings them joy, otherwise that method is open for improvement. 



> Otoh, when I look at a bird, if it does not look extremely similar to the bird I own (I don't actually own one), I won't think of mine. But yes if they look *very* similar, sure, I will think of mine then. Hm, I don't easily relive emotions even when I repeat the same game but this doesn't seem like a significant detail.


 –

Maybe Se over Si? Si is about reliving past emotions. That’s why I love re-playing Kingdom Hearts and taking pictures XD 



> It may feel like going "blindly" then but if the new situation is fully physical, such as in a physical fight, no problem then, I will easily make moves based on what I see right there and then. Not scared of such new situations…. However, in any new situation, I just cannot for the life of me think of options beyond what I see as immediately present or beyond options that are not directly logically deducible. I do have a good overview of the concrete situation otherwise... it can be sequential or can be broad.


 - 

Maybe Se over Si



> All in all, if I do not have a method for the situation, I can feel a bit disoriented, though I will still try to act if I must.


 -

Maybe Si over Se 



> Well.. I'm linear and broad as well. But it's not "non-linear", it's just a broad sensory or logical picture of the thing/situation. When I reason I can get linear but even then I prefer to pull from the broad (sensory or logical) picture.


 -

Sounds like thinking…. Te. Te looks at the broad picture. Ti likes to classify things.



> As for looking to the past.. hm, I'm not sure how conscious that is for me. I notice it only when I'm put in a new situation that's partially similar to the previous one and then the structure I use for the previous one will not fully match the new one. It's such a disconcerting feeling, lol. Then I rebuild from scratch... or maybe I try to reuse parts of the previous structure but the conflict between the two structures feels so weird, LOL.


 -

Sounds like Si 



> I relate to becoming rigid in defending my views, oh yeah. My views are primarily logical, though. Do you always reach for your Te first to determine if something is wrong/right, correct/incorrect?


 -

Yes, pretty much, because my Te is above my Fi. Plus personal experiences- Si have taught me illogical beliefs hurt others, much more so than logical beliefs. 

Ni vs Si:

Ni vs Si - Funky MBTI in Fiction

Se and Si are both sensing functions. So both want/use concrete-empirically experienced data. Se wants to live in the right now. When playing a video game you have played before Se just thinks about that moment. It doesn't think "Oh how did I win this game last time?" like a Si user would. Se doesn't care about all the joy you got from playing that same game before. What matters is RIGHT NOW. It wants to discover as it goes. It's good at improvising. It doesn't think about the past or future, just right now. A Se user sees a bird. All they think is "Wow, a bird." They are the adrenaline junkies-race car drivers. Se wants to go on adventures, be spontaneous, be reckless, and impulsive. Se is not scared of trying anything new. Think Harry Potter-either ISFP or ISTP. 

Si on the other hand, looks to the past when dealing with the present. It is about the tried and true method. So if I get into a fight with someone I'll think how did I win this fight last time? And use the same methods. It is about getting the same joy from something over and over/reliving emotions. I feel all those past feelings/emotions/memories when I play Kingdom Hearts over and over again. I generally stick to same gaming methods. When I look at a picture of a bird, I think of my own bird. I think wow he looks like my bird, he has the same grumpy, bossy, look on his face. Si gets scared about new things. Si loves physical concrete symbolism. Think of Hermione Granger- either ESTJ or ISTJ.


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Maker of helmets said:


> that's alright
> 
> I think if you are a Thinking type, this means both Thinking functions would be strong anyway


So you are going for ISTJ for me?


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Kitty23 said:


> My analysis of your questionnaire answers: (...)
> - Again, sounds like Fi. It sounds like your values are mainly from facts?


Well that description there was more general about my views in general. But yes it's from analysis of facts. The things I answered to the values questions are a bit different, that stuff comes from some sort of inspiration.




> – Extraversion


I was actually arguing for introversion there. Though not extremely strong introversion. Did you misread/typo?

I'll add, I can go pretty long completely alone. Months, actually. I can also go for quite a while being around people if I have some task to focus on or if they are good friends or at least they are really cool nice people and so then it's not bad being around people but I'm pretty used to my default solitude too. Otoh, it's funny but I'm perfectly fine in a crowd too, I'm not bothered by the loads of stimuli or the obstacles, I just navigate around and enjoy it, heh.




> – Sounds like Fi over Fe. Fi users deal with emotions on their own. Fe users deal with emotions through talking them out and they like validation.


Oh the feedback, I meant it in terms of tasks mainly but yeah, I don't look for feedback on anything by default. I wouldn't know about talking about my emotions, wouldn't be easy if I tried, that's an understatement actually. But then, I don't even think about them most of the time.




> – Grabbing immediate opportunities is Se. But then you use objectivity to determine decisions, which could be Te... But then seeing change as chaos is Si or/and J type.


I'm actually pretty fine at that Se thing if I need it, yeah. And yes, the objective matters. So that Se is definitely channeled through some Judging, it's given a direction in that way. If this makes sense.




> – Sounds like Si and Te


Well yeah I actually noticed this ISxJ description by Lenore Thomson that has parts that really fit me there. (Though not only the ISxJ description.)





Kitty23 said:


> Ok. I'll read it.
> 
> What I see so far: Sensing and probably Fi, linear thinker.


Thanks for reading  So you still suspecting ISTJ?




> So when dealing with a situation in the present you don’t think back to a similar situation and see how you dealt with it?


I would say, it happens automatically, if it's applicable. It also has to make logical sense.

But sometimes, I don't actually get to fully understand why, for example, a situation turned out bad before I decide to just avoid it in future. With seriously bad stuff, one try is enough, I don't ever try again, unless later I realize what I need to change about my approach by coming to a new understanding through retrospective analysis. But even then, it may involve betting on speculative outcomes if I was to try again so I wouldn't in that case. With less seriously bad stuff, I can try a second time before I decide there is no point getting into it again and having it play out the same way again. Again, I know it would play out the same if I don't know how to change my approach/methods. 

I wouldn't though call this simply getting conditioned mindlessly because I make the decision about avoiding the situation consciously. It's a pretty logical decision when I see something is wrong even if I don't yet understand what it is. I just isolate the type of situation in my mind so I know how to treat it later if it comes up again. And these decisions don't change on their own, I stick to them easily.

That retrospective analysis in general, it works when I get to learn something else later, e.g. seeing a similar situation and then I'm able to compare them and analyze and get to an understanding that way.




> Yes, I would say you are a sensor over intuitive. Your video gaming could be Si. So how impulsive an spontaneous are you? I am a very cautious person.


We can totally agree on S.

I said I'm not very spontaneous, definitely not more than the average person is what I can say for sure, I'm not sure how to specify further than that. I can have impulses come up but easy for me to disregard or just simply forget them unless they are strong. Then sometimes I just go by the impulse anyway but this isn't my default, I'm too task/goal oriented for that.

I wouldn't call myself "very cautious" however, as I explained about not seeing as much danger as certain worrywart people do, heh. Because of that sense of the realistic limits that I have.




> How good do you think you would be at improv acting? I would be terrible lol.


Improvisational theatre? No shit, I would be terrible too. I'd have to be put in some very good mood first to even try some move? And then I'm pretty sure I'd shut down really fast if it didn't turn out to be good enough. Which I'm pretty sure would be the case. And btw this isn't about shyness, I'm not shy, I just simply would not be spontaneous by default and I don't like to get things wrong.




> How often do you get rigid? Why do you get rigid? What sets off you being rigid? Sounds like you don’t like to multi-task, which suggests J type.


Yeah I don't do multitasking easily. I can sometimes hold two processes together, such as, navigating or driving and talking to my friend but it looks like, I navigate, then I switch to talk to her, then switch again and I pay attention to the environment again and so on. It's challenging to keep that up but it's fun because it fully occupies my mind then so no chance for boredom heh.

As for rigidness, that happens when I'm set on a goal where I have already sorted out my analysis of things related to it. This is often the case with longer term goals. The more detailed my plan is for it, the more rigid as well. I can be relatively flexible when the plan consists of a draft of a few "movable" main points only. I'm very decisive on-the-spot with that. These are more short term or immediate goals. But I'm still goal oriented then too, not carefree or aimless.

Damn the only time I'm not like this is probably when I'm having really really good times with some friend(s). But I'm still controlled even then to some degree. Except when for a few moments here and there they make me act or express myself spontaneously.




> How spontaneous are you compared to the most spontaneous person you know? Like what things are spontaneous for you? Yes, Si users only use the same methods, if the method is tried and true, if it’s practical, and if it brings them joy, otherwise that method is open for improvement.


Compared to the most spontaneous person, I'm not.

If I act on impulse, which does happen sometimes, that's spontaneous to a degree - I do first decide that I will go after the impulse. It may be for example when I'm out shopping and I spot something cool to get, though I'm usually very goal oriented with my shopping too. Hm, when wandering around in some unknown environment, navigating to find the way around, I do feel more flexible and spontaneous there too. With that, I sometimes get to feel that I'm really adapting to the things around me. 

Sure, why change a working method, that's for the high Ne users right?




> Maybe Se over Si? Si is about reliving past emotions. That’s why I love re-playing Kingdom Hearts and taking pictures XD


I really don't have many emotions so not much to relive there. Even if I do, entering the same situation later will not make me relive the emotion. Say, I read a book and it had me feel some emotion at one point, reading the same passage later will not elicit the same emotion. It's too bad really, I'd like to relive it sometimes. I do otherwise have a good memory especially based on physical locations, if I go back to the same location, I can easily remember things if I make myself recall them, but emotions are not actually relived, nope. Well, wait, music does actually work for that, I guess that's the exception. 




> Maybe Se over Si


Oh yeah that's the Se that gets channeled as I explain above. Depending on situation though, I can go beyond that channeling and it becomes a very broad perception. That's situations that do truly just require immediate reactions without that much of a mental framework. Very quick and adaptable to the situation then, with just the immediate goal of winning or hitting a target or something like that in mind. It does have me extravert more than my default, though.




> Maybe Si over Se


Yeah the exception from needing a method is as above.




> Sounds like thinking…. Te. Te looks at the broad picture. Ti likes to classify things.


Oh I'm pretty sure I classify things when sorting them out. But yes, broad picture overall.




> Yes, pretty much, because my Te is above my Fi. Plus personal experiences- Si have taught me illogical beliefs hurt others, much more so than logical beliefs.


Ha, lol, my logical opinions have hurt some people before. Wish what you were saying would be always true.



> Ni vs Si:
> 
> funkymbtifiction.tumblr.com/post/119394231790/ni-vs-si


Ah this thing, I definitely don't do the Ni one much. Though it looks cool. The Si, hm, I'd be more like, I meet many people then I figure out over time my criteria for who's a good candidate for the Prince, lol. My criteria are definitely not going to come from some fairytale.


----------



## Maker of helmets (Sep 8, 2014)

grumpytiger said:


> So you are going for ISTJ for me?


Yes, or second guess ESTJ


----------



## Kitty23 (Dec 27, 2015)

I would still guess XSTJ.


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Maker of helmets said:


> Yes, or second guess ESTJ


OK how do you investigate introversion vs extraversion?




Kitty23 said:


> I would still guess XSTJ.


The same question to you


----------



## Maker of helmets (Sep 8, 2014)

grumpytiger said:


> OK how do you investigate introversion vs extraversion?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Good question - my approach would be this kind of depends on which function you think may be your "primary referent" - being an introverted or extroverted type as according to the Myers-Briggs system is not necessarily what most people understand as having preference for introversion/extroversion, even though I cannot say for sure there is no overlap .... indeed, I think there is overlap, but for the sake of answering what type you are, and if I were you, I would ask myself which function do I think is my "primary referent" - and if you do not know what functions you are asking between, then just look at introverted and extroverted functions in general, and try and judge what are the similarities between different introverted functions, and what are the similarities between different extroverted functions, and which do you think you may use in general as your primary referent - an introverted or extroverted function


----------



## Kitty23 (Dec 27, 2015)

How much time do you spend in your head? How aware of your external environment are you?


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Maker of helmets said:


> Good question - my approach would be this kind of depends on which function you think may be your "primary referent" - being an introverted or extroverted type as according to the Myers-Briggs system is not necessarily what most people understand as having preference for introversion/extroversion, even though I cannot say for sure there is no overlap .... indeed, I think there is overlap, but for the sake of answering what type you are, and if I were you, I would ask myself which function do I think is my "primary referent" - and if you do not know what functions you are asking between, then just look at introverted and extroverted functions in general, and try and judge what are the similarities between different introverted functions, and what are the similarities between different extroverted functions, and which do you think you may use in general as your primary referent - an introverted or extroverted function


Well the point of this thread is have others look at how I am to exclude my own biases - so if you yourself have any ways to investigate this, I'd appreciate that a lot.


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Kitty23 said:


> How much time do you spend in your head? How aware of your external environment are you?


Well I spend a lot of time putting pieces together like I described earlier about how I build my understanding/my views. I definitely would feel that life was too shallow if I wasn't doing that. But I don't feel I really get disconnected from the actual reality with that and I wouldn't want that either. (It happens if I go very abstract in my head but I don't do that for long.) I do also like getting active taking some action for my goals and then I'm definitely not in my head too much - but I'm not constantly active. 

I'm aware enough of my environment but I easily filter out the irrelevant parts/objects. I have no problem with being observant sizing up the situation and then standing aside watching what's going on until I feel the need to step in. I'm most comfortable that way, the watching and sometimes taking action. I do feel pretty aware of things with that and in control and I like that.

Additionally, I don't have a problem with a lot of sensory stimuli as long as it's not socializing with people. With people, I do actually get energized in a sense if someone engages me in interaction but then it feels a bit too "high energy" even if it's an enjoyable interaction. I can force myself to go on with that for quite long though so it's not like I'm drained too much. It's nothing terrible.

On the other hand, when I spend time alone I just feel like my default. I can go forever that way. I wouldn't say that's high energy but it's a stable state and my energy does not decline when alone. I do like to hang out with my close friends too, otherwise I'd feel like I'm missing something from life but that's a basic human desire I guess.


----------



## Kitty23 (Dec 27, 2015)

How each type acts when stressed:

How Each MBTI Type Reacts to Stress (and How to Help!) - Psychology Junkie

Who you are at your worst:

Accurate Typing: The Inferior Function - MBTI Notes

Inferior Fi:

Inferior Fi - Funky MBTI in Fiction

Inferior Fi (EXTJ): My beliefs are very strong, but I spend little time thinking about them. Many of them are tied to my feelings, and I’m not comfortable dwelling on my emotions. It’s easier to adopt a simple, straightforward moral code and stick to it without deviation. I don’t see the point in determining which causes are more important than others. I have a tendency to think that my values are right for others. I really want to do something greater than myself, and am fiercely loyal to what I believe in but I would rather donate time, energy, and money than emotional support. It’s hard for me to be loyal to people whose decisions I profoundly disagree with. I need to respect you before I can emotionally support you in those times. Slowly, I am learning to be more tolerant and not see the world as black and white.

Inferior Ne:

How Functions Work: Inferior Ne (ISTJ/ISFJ) - MBTI Notes

Inferior Ne (ISXJ): I know that these two things are connected, but I’m not sure how. I’m sorry, but that idea is completely unrealistic. Can we stick to one idea, please? Hmm, the last time I thought something might happen, it happened; so maybe I can trust my intuition this time, too.

(Rough outline) What each function looks like in all 4 positions:

Cognitive Functions - Funky MBTI in Fiction


----------



## Maker of helmets (Sep 8, 2014)

grumpytiger said:


> Well the point of this thread is have others look at how I am to exclude my own biases - so if you yourself have any ways to investigate this, I'd appreciate that a lot.


this is my best description for the process I would use for myself, I think ... I am not sure though if you would agree extroverted Thinking and introverted sensing are more likely the functions you are choosing between, these are also only guesses on my part

as an example, I have wondered if I am not ENFJ instead of INFJ, however one way I think that I could end arriving again at the idea I think I am most likely INFJ, using introverted intuition and extroverted Feeling, is I think I use introverted intuition as my "primary referent" - I'm sorry I did not really describe what I meant by this, and I am not sure if I really meant anything more complex than (I guess) categorising/checking my thoughts against an internal, hierarchical index, where introverted intuition is the top of that index, and first consideration for what I will choose to remember/hold as valuable. 

Introverted functions I think do hold internal consistency as a value - extroverted functions I think have more of a direct link to their environment, taking the qualities of their environment and ordering them into some kind of material fabric where everything affects each other ... introverted functions I think judge more on the perceived inherent value in things, for example as according to the perceived internal consistency of a thought or argument, and judge less on the effects of things, whereas extroverted functions, to my mind, seem like they judge more on the effects of things than the perceived inherent value in things.

For example, I think introverted intuition, for me, has the approach of judging between the integrity of different arguments, mostly taken by themselves, whereas extroverted Feeling, for me, is much more concerned with judging between the effects of different ideas on the world around them.


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Maker of helmets said:


> this is my best description for the process I would use for myself, I think ... I am not sure though if you would agree extroverted Thinking and introverted sensing are more likely the functions you are choosing between, these are also only guesses on my part


I do relate to some STJ things is all I can say for sure for now. The dichotomies themselves here are pretty clear I think. Functions seem more complicated for some reason.




> as an example, I have wondered if I am not ENFJ instead of INFJ, however one way I think that I could end arriving again at the idea I think I am most likely INFJ, using introverted intuition and extroverted Feeling, is I think I use introverted intuition as my "primary referent" - I'm sorry I did not really describe what I meant by this, and I am not sure if I really meant anything more complex than (I guess) categorising/checking my thoughts against an internal, hierarchical index, where introverted intuition is the top of that index, and first consideration for what I will choose to remember/hold as valuable.


Yeah I understand that, however it may require a deep understanding first to see what that function hierarchy even consists of specifically and then in what order. So that's why I asked if you had some way to determine the order - where I naturally thought of some concrete steps or discrete definitions. I think you are seeing my Sensing perspective here really 




> Introverted functions I think do hold internal consistency as a value - extroverted functions I think have more of a direct link to their environment, taking the qualities of their environment and ordering them into some kind of material fabric where everything affects each other ... introverted functions I think judge more on the perceived inherent value in things, for example as according to the perceived internal consistency of a thought or argument, and judge less on the effects of things, whereas extroverted functions, to my mind, seem like they judge more on the effects of things than the perceived inherent value in things.


I've mentioned in my posts here (to @Kitty23) how I check for consistency in things over time. Would this count here?

When I look at things, including the environment, I may see objects but they don't affect each other like that fabric you are talking about. To be entirely precise, they are -preferably- inside an organization, a structure. that's what I always look for at first. But the objects inside that structure don't affect each other directly by default. Well if I throw a glass onto the hard floor then sure the glass gets affected by the floor. But that's beyond what I look for at first.




> For example, I think introverted intuition, for me, has the approach of judging between the integrity of different arguments, mostly taken by themselves, whereas extroverted Feeling, for me, is much more concerned with judging between the effects of different ideas on the world around them.


So, here you don't use the expression "judging" in the sense that MBTI uses it, right?


----------



## Maker of helmets (Sep 8, 2014)

grumpytiger said:


> I do relate to some STJ things is all I can say for sure for now. The dichotomies themselves here are pretty clear I think. Functions seem more complicated for some reason.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


that's right, was not using in the MBTI sense

to me, what you described does sound like it could be what we think of as extroverted Thinking


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Kitty23 said:


> How each type acts when stressed:
> 
> How Each MBTI Type Reacts to Stress (and How to Help!) - Psychology Junkie


Well I can pick parts here and there so that's not very clear.




> Who you are at your worst:
> 
> Accurate Typing: The Inferior Function - MBTI Notes


Uhm, again I can pick parts...

I'm mostly like, stress very rarely breaks through to me, I'm unaffected by most things in general, but ok, if it does get to affect me, the first sign is that I'm irritated or angry more than my baseline. (The baseline is a calm neutral state which includes very short flashes of irritation here and there but that's pretty normal to me, I don't call that stress, lol.) If it's worse stress than that then I get to feel unfocused, which is pretty terrible. At that point I either keep defiantly pushing my mind back into focus or try to get some rest first. Also, in general I always try not to think of terrible possible outcomes. Note, if the source of stress is people specifically, I also get negative about their attitudes/opinions towards me and I'll argue with them, either directly about the attitude issue or about other issues in their behaviour or in their thinking.


As for the tertiary/inferior Fi/Ne, I checked out your funkymbti link and I definitely do not relate to the tertiary Ne. I don't brainstorm like that, just no. The inferior Ne is ok, I definitely say things like "completely unrealistic idea", "stick to one (relevant) idea", and I don't know how two things may be connected - so I relate well to this inferior Ne description, except I don't trust my intuition about "something might happen" even as much as this says. Just because it accidentally (?!) happened last time, it means nothing for this time if I don't know enough data determining the course of things. And lol I usually don't know enough about predicting it beyond basic generic templates.

As for tertiary/inferior Fi, well, in tertiary, I relate to putting a lot of time and energy into meaningful activities and wanting to contribute to social issues, and I definitely prioritize about who/what I'm loyal to. And in inferior Fi, I relate to not being comfortable with dwelling on emotions at all, my code of behaviour/about treating people is unemotional, and I'm pretty black-white in things, well, whatever this means by it (it was too general), the rest of inferior Fi I do not relate to at all.


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Maker of helmets said:


> to me, what you described does sound like it could be what we think of as extroverted Thinking


But I said I don't relate to primarily seeing effects..?

Can you check my post #36 to Kitty23, the one below your post?


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

@Pinina I see you are an ESTJ enjoying typing people here so would you be able to chime in as to whether you see me as I or E, that is, more ESTJ or more ISTJ as those are the two options left. You can just read from post #31 if you don't have time for the rest. Thanks.


----------



## Maker of helmets (Sep 8, 2014)

grumpytiger said:


> But I said I don't relate to primarily seeing effects..?
> 
> Can you check my post #36 to Kitty23, the one below your post?


I mean extroverted Thinking as your primary judging function, though not necessarily as your primary function ...

I am thinking ISTJ seems like best fit to me


----------



## Pinina (Jan 6, 2015)

grumpytiger said:


> @Pinina I see you are an ESTJ enjoying typing people here so would you be able to chime in as to whether you see me as I or E, that is, more ESTJ or more ISTJ as those are the two options left. You can just read from post #31 if you don't have time for the rest. Thanks.


Will do. I don't have the time to do it right now, but I'll look it through.


----------



## Tyche (May 12, 2011)

grumpytiger said:


> @*SirCanSir* @*Etherea*
> 
> I looked at what I said originally about others typing me, and yeah, sure I said it's fine, but I notice also now hints from SirCanSir about Etherea having voiced some opinion about my type in private msg'ing
> 
> ...


Probably because I'm an ISTJ that he knows and thinks I can weigh in on whether or not you are too.


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

SirCanSir said:


> The way i see it socionics and MBTI use the same functions, the only difference is that introverts got it in reverse when it comes to judging / perceiving, like Aiwass said, you are Ti-Se there, istead of Si-Te. So there is nothing much to say more, *you can use both methods and the outcome is the same*.


The outcome is clearly not the same. The description she linked is ISTJ. Rules oriented, controlling, not like any kind of xxTP.


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Etherea said:


> Probably because I'm an ISTJ that he knows and thinks I can weigh in on whether or not you are too.


Why you, why not any other ISTJ? Be honest. Like you said I'm not the paranoid type, but these hints are a bit much for me to ignore them.


----------



## Tyche (May 12, 2011)

grumpytiger said:


> Why you, why not any other ISTJ? Be honest. Like you said I'm not the paranoid type, but these hints are a bit much for me to ignore them.


If I wanted to talk about you and your type, I would do so openly. As I said in the other thread, directness is recommended.

As for why me, probably because we like bonded or something in a thread in the entp section wherein Sircansir figured out I'm married to Arrogantly Grateful.


----------



## Aiwass (Jul 28, 2014)

grumpytiger said:


> Thanks for the input. Interesting observations. I'm not really aware of this um, emotional energy for the most part, but yeah it makes sense too.
> 
> I looked at the linked description. It seems pretty much ISTJ for the most part. It does fit me well, though this thing about being a "hard-line military officer" is maybe a tiny little bit exaggerated. :laughing:


Hahaha some LSIs can def be this way (hard-line military officers), but many (if not most) are more patient and soft. One of the reasons for this is that LSIs have Fi as their role function - meaning, with time they tend to learn how to "open exceptions to their rules" and perhaps avoid doing things that would hurt their relationships with people.

I plan to create a thread about the Beta quadra (EIE, LSI, SLE and IEI) on the Socionics forum soon. Well, at least to talk about how *I* see the quadra.

Pages that might interest you:
Logical Sensing Introtim - Wikisocion (of course, some descriptions are better than others, in my opinion - but I think you will probably make your own mind up, critically, about this)

My favorite Model A description:
https://www.techhouse.org/socionics/model_a.html

I think Socionics is much more interesting in terms of individual development and transformational psychology than MBTI. Hope you like it.


----------



## SirCanSir (Mar 21, 2018)

Etherea said:


> If I wanted to talk about you and your type, I would do so openly. As I said in the other thread, directness is recommended.
> 
> As for why me, probably because we like bonded or something in a thread in the entp section wherein Sircansir figured out I'm married to Arrogantly Grateful.


You were in that thread too, so i knew you were reading. Anyway why do we continue this? 
Are you trying to make me feel bad? because its working.


----------



## SirCanSir (Mar 21, 2018)

Aiwass said:


> Hahaha some LSIs can def be this way (hard-line military officers), but many (if not most) are more patient and soft. One of the reasons for this is that LSIs have Fi as their role function - meaning, with time they tend to learn how to "open exceptions to their rules" and perhaps avoid doing things that would hurt their relationships with people.
> 
> I plan to create a thread about the Beta quadra (EIE, LSI, SLE and IEI) on the Socionics forum soon. Well, at least to talk about how *I* see the quadra.
> 
> ...


Though when it comes to sociotype tests... its kind of random.
Still i prefer the definition of the functions as described by socionics. Its more clear to see.


----------



## Tyche (May 12, 2011)

SirCanSir said:


> You were in that thread too, so i knew you were reading. Anyway why do we continue this?
> Are you trying to make me feel bad? because its working.


I know that's why. You mentioned me right after I thanked Geonerds post. And you should feel bad lmao. You got me into this situation and now I'm being called a liar.


----------



## Aiwass (Jul 28, 2014)

SirCanSir said:


> Though when it comes to sociotype tests... its kind of random.
> Still i prefer the definition of the functions as described by socionics. Its more clear to see.


True, but I never thought tests were helpful to begin with, not even MBTI tests.


----------



## SirCanSir (Mar 21, 2018)

Etherea said:


> I know that's why. You mentioned me right after I thanked Geonerds post. And you should feel bad lmao. You got me into this situation and now I'm being called a liar.


How should i feel when you manage to expose every single thought process of mine one after the other lol?


----------



## SirCanSir (Mar 21, 2018)

Aiwass said:


> True, but I never thought tests were helpful to begin with, not even MBTI tests.


Ironically i found the 16 types one to be the most accurate, even though its the first to do.


----------



## Tyche (May 12, 2011)

SirCanSir said:


> How should i feel when you manage to expose every single thought process of mine one after the other lol?


Sorry, bad habit. No hard feelings?


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Etherea said:


> If I wanted to talk about you and your type, I would do so openly. As I said in the other thread, directness is recommended.
> 
> As for why me, probably because we like bonded or something in a thread in the entp section wherein Sircansir figured out I'm married to Arrogantly Grateful.


Okay.


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

SirCanSir said:


> Still i prefer the definition of the functions as described by socionics. Its more clear to see.


Seems like you either skipped my post #82 or the information noted in it didn't get registered.


----------



## SirCanSir (Mar 21, 2018)

grumpytiger said:


> Seems like you either skipped my post #82 or the information noted in it didn't get registered.


Sorry too busy defending myself in that corner you ve put me.


----------



## SirCanSir (Mar 21, 2018)

grumpytiger said:


> Seems like you either skipped my post #82 or the information noted in it didn't get registered.


I thought you were TP, because you seemed to be manipulative lol. Like prolonging this whole thing to debate and then accepting other arguments and using them again to prolong the thread, is like "Ah a good debate, im gonna have fun here"
I stil believe an ISTJ wouldnt have gone that far to play there when the post lost its value and take so many opinions only to use them to punch back in another way. Seemed like Ne/Ti, Se/Ti to me. 
It just seemed so playfull.

I havent read this whole thread here yet so i cant make a judgement lol.


----------



## Zeri (Jan 23, 2018)

I didnt read this thread, but to me your first post screams istp. The 'grumpy tiger' bit, too.


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

SirCanSir said:


> I thought you were TP, because you seemed to be manipulative lol. Like prolonging this whole thing to debate and then accepting other arguments and using them again to prolong the thread, is like "Ah a good debate, im gonna have fun here"
> I stil believe an ISTJ wouldnt have gone that far to play there when the post lost its value and take so many opinions only to use them to punch back in another way. Seemed like Ne/Ti, Se/Ti to me.
> It just seemed so playfull.
> 
> I havent read this whole thread here yet so i cant make a judgement lol.


Manipulative? Wtf?

No, I responded to posts because they were 1) unfair 2) bullshit.

I'm usually seen just as pushy or as a know-it-all with this, it's rare that anyone would see me as playful. o_o Not that I have a problem with you wanting to see me as playful. But I definitely did not have manipulation on my mind.

And yes I am argumentative easily but it's for the above stated reasons.

It's true that some ISTJs I know are calmer than me, more withdrawn, more cautious, or more conflict avoidant, but I do know ISTJs that are more like me. Also all this means that I'm an ambivert rather than a very strong introvert and due to all this, ESTJ was brought up as an option for me but that take-charge mode is not my primary mode, it's only my secondary mode, so I excluded ESTJ.




Zeri said:


> I didnt read this thread, but to me your first post screams istp. The 'grumpy tiger' bit, too.


That's funny because someone else in this thread at post #62 said my nick instantly had him think ISTJ. Different typing criteria, clearly.


----------



## Northern Lights (Mar 25, 2016)

Because the other type in question is ISTP:



grumpytiger said:


> The outcome is clearly not the same. The description she linked is ISTJ. Rules oriented, controlling, not like any kind of xxTP.


I have no idea about socionics (and don't care, either), but just from glancing at that profile, it's about as far from how I am (heavy MBTI-style P) as is possibly ... er, possible. My type description in that linked wiki is very clearly this one -- SLI.

I think that solves this issue.


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Northern Lights said:


> Because the other type in question is ISTP:
> 
> I have no idea about socionics (and don't care, either), but just from glancing at that profile, it's about as far from how I am (heavy MBTI-style P) as is possibly ... er, possible. My type description in that linked wiki is very clearly this one -- SLI.
> 
> I think that solves this issue.


Yeah, I don't relate too much to the one you linked. So we are the opposite types here, yes. Thanks for your input btw.


----------



## SirCanSir (Mar 21, 2018)

grumpytiger said:


> Manipulative? Wtf?
> 
> No, I responded to posts because they were 1) unfair 2) bullshit.
> 
> ...


Wait so you saw all our posts as unfair and bullshit? :shocked: Because you kept the whole thread running around hahaha


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

SirCanSir said:


> Wait so you saw all our posts as unfair and bullshit? :shocked: Because you kept the whole thread running around hahaha


Not all posts, just wherever I said so. And I did not have a problem with the people in there in general. (Just the one asshole that got told off by OP too.) And lol really? I was simply hoping some of the input from me and of course input from others helped some people to get to some good conclusions.


----------



## SirCanSir (Mar 21, 2018)

grumpytiger said:


> Not all posts, just wherever I said so. And I did not have a problem with the people in there in general. (Just the one asshole that got told off by OP too.) And lol really? I was simply hoping some of the input from me and of course input from others helped some people to get to some good conclusions.


I ve read half the thread i cant decide Ti/Te, you are in between lol. But i get you are a Si dom overall (at least more possible than any other according to what you said about yourself) and the low Ne could indicate your behavior here, by creating a chaos in the previous thread. A Ni user, if his/her approach failed wouldnt much care to try other possible methods probably. 
Fi is something hard to see so ll let it pass. 
Actually there is a possibility you using Ti/Te over Si and clouding my judgement now, but meh im not gonna get into that. If that is the case i could see ISTP, but you said you relate to Si a lot, so fuck it.

I guess i also aprove of the ISTJ. Hope others are going to phrase their opinions too.


----------



## Elwinz (Jan 30, 2018)

grumpytiger said:


> o_o How old did you think I was, 40? 50? Heh


Yeah like 40 LOL. Agreeableness of 1 which you get on big 5 is quite visible in your posts, and it come across as dominant thinking type i think. Could see that as a reason why people see you as ISTP/ESTJ/mistyped.


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

Elwinz said:


> Yeah like 40 LOL. Agreeableness of 1 which you get on big 5 is quite visible in your posts, and it come across as dominant thinking type i think. Could see that as a reason why people see you as ISTP/ESTJ/mistyped.


40... o_o Thanks for the input btw.




SirCanSir said:


> I ve read half the thread i cant decide Ti/Te, you are in between lol. But i get you are a Si dom overall (at least more possible than any other according to what you said about yourself) and the low Ne could indicate your behavior here, by creating a chaos in the previous thread. A Ni user, if his/her approach failed wouldnt much care to try other possible methods probably.
> Fi is something hard to see so ll let it pass.
> Actually there is a possibility you using Ti/Te over Si and clouding my judgement now, but meh im not gonna get into that. If that is the case i could see ISTP, but you said you relate to Si a lot, so fuck it.
> 
> I guess i also aprove of the ISTJ. Hope others are going to phrase their opinions too.


Ti/Te over Si... I guess you also see the disagreeableness. Thanks for this input too.


----------



## SirCanSir (Mar 21, 2018)

grumpytiger said:


> 40... o_o Thanks for the input btw.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Its confusing. You dont agree but you keep searching for possible reasons and scenarios. Thats Ne confusing here. 
i honestly cant tell. You take way too many opinions to not be using Ne the way i see it.
ISTJ or ESTJ i guess. No idea which.


----------



## grumpytiger (Feb 23, 2016)

SirCanSir said:


> Its confusing. You dont agree but you keep searching for possible reasons and scenarios. Thats Ne confusing here.
> i honestly cant tell. You take way too many opinions to not be using Ne the way i see it.
> ISTJ or ESTJ i guess. No idea which.


I'm not sure if that's the best way to put it, as in, directly searching for possible scenarios. Maybe in the background that's also going on but in my conscious perception it's more like... I take the details of the opinions and build it all in gradually if I can. Unless I do make a judgment and stop taking in more details and from then on I just apply the snap judgment. But first and foremost, I do look at things closely with taking in details and that final judgment arrives later but then it tends to be final. At that point whatever else I am hearing out, it may still add some additional details to what I think and see, but to update the entire framework to a new level with them, it would have to be something very profound. Otoh, if it's very very clear bullshit/plain wrong/incorrect, I am not taking in anything more, no hearing out anything even. Then I pull up a wall to further input.

Such as with my type overall, I was taking my time originally with considering it all but then I was clear on it in the end. Here I'm just hearing you (or others) out, to see what else you (or others) can add to my knowledge on how I am seen by others and that can and will add to my own perceptions, and that may go beyond just the MBTI actually so I wouldn't say it's just bullshit stuff - and this way I can even update some other frameworks of mine - but MBTI-wise I'm not changing my typing, I pull up a wall on that, but not on how others may see me, that is where I may still learn something new; also, I'm just happy to explain to anyone (if they have good intentions) if something is confusing about my MBTI typing, you could say I do this out of principle. I hope this helps some.


----------

