# E or I, F or T?



## bombshellex (Dec 23, 2009)

Functianalyst said:


> At the risk of sounding redundant, I have continued to say these types of assessments only measure the cognitive functions that you are currently using. There are perfectly good explanations for this: We use all eight functions, not just four as implied by Briggs-Myers; We develop functions as we get older and adapt to our environment, thus our experiences dictates which functions may be used.
> 
> Someone working in an environment that calls for Fe behavior will show some usage of that function regardless of whether they are dominantly a thinking type. A good example would be professional athletes that must use their Se. I took a cognitive function test last week which resulted in Te being one of my higher functions being used currently. I was not surprised since currently I am working on a project at work that calls for me to review a lot of empirical evidence.



Interesting. That makes complete sense. I am now almost convinced that I will never determine a definite personality type for myself lol. And this is only because I am that much of a perfectionist. None of the descriptions will ever fit me "perfectly" enough. Oh well. I guess it's best to just let it go then for now unless I want to drive myself crazy (which I do not). There are far more important things in life lol. The only reason I've been so rigorously pursuing my MBTI typing is because I didn't want to stick around on this forum as an "Unknown Personality." Ah, what I will do for appearances lol.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

Despite the fact that we all use all eight functions, determining the functions that are most natural for you is very useful in determining your MBTI type. Your functions are very interesting, but from them, it doesn't seem that you are an INTJ at all. The absolute opposite of the Ni function is Se, and for an INTJ, as they lead with Ni, it is very unlikely an INTJ will develop their inferior function, Se, unless placed into a situation where they are forced to do so or choose to improve on their own. Have you looked into the descriptions of each of the functions? If you've done that (or if you have not, you may wish to do so), try to think of how you've been for most of your life, and it would be best if you tried to determine what functions you have 'learned' and which ones truly come naturally.


----------



## jlynnr (Dec 27, 2009)

I tend to find that the functions I understand the best are the FiNeSiTe ones for the INFP, even though according to the test I use Ni, Ti, and Fe more than I use Si or Te. 

Does that resonate with anyone else?


----------



## bombshellex (Dec 23, 2009)

jlynnr said:


> I tend to find that the functions I understand the best are the FiNeSiTe ones for the INFP, even though according to the test I use Ni, Ti, and Fe more than I use Si or Te.
> 
> Does that resonate with anyone else?


 
Yes, I'm not sure I understand functions fully. I'm going to keep researching about them and see if I can figure some things out on my own.

In the meantime, I can give you more information about myself in attempt to possibly gain more insight on my type:

- I am extremely organized and disorganization of any kind is very annoying to me.

- I like to be in control. In all forms.

- Depending on where I am and who I am around, I can come off as distant and aloof, but it's really only because I am thinking about (what I consider) important things in my head. And everything I think about is important to me. I also don't feel the need to speak unless what I am about to say is necessary.

- When I do speak, however, I am not quiet. My tone of voice is moderate to loud. I speak clearly, concisely, eloquently, and articulately.

- I go out of my way to be polite to people. I want to appear happy as well, which in turn makes others feel good. I am very formal in my interactions, though. To some people, it may seem like I am faking my politeness/kindness because it appears so "professional" (especially for a 17 year old).

- If I have a goal, I become obsessed with it. I make sure that I reach my goal no matter what.

- I don't tolerate disrespect from people. Depending on the type of disrespect someone is showing, I may or may not call them out on it, but I most definitely will remove them from my life if it becomes a pattern. It is not unusual for me to hear, "you dropped off the face of the earth!" from people I have cut out of my life. I need to do what's right for me at all times.


Thanks guys... I'd love to know if you have any "type diagnoses" based upon the facts I have provided about myself, both in this post and my previous ones!


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

In my own personal opinion, I agree that you're an ENTJ, through both functions, letter preferences, and comparison to the other types you believe you are. If you're going to research functions, I would urge you to research both Introverted Intuition (Ni) and Extraverted Thinking (Te). The function list for an ENTJ is Te-Ni-Se-Fi, so you may wish to look at those functions as well. If you do, however, don't expect to relate to all of them - as Se is the tertiary function, it may seem quite foreign to you, and since Fi is the inferior function, you may find it's very awkward for you to use or you may not even use it at all.


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

Grey said:


> Despite the fact that we all use all eight functions, determining the functions that are most natural for you is very useful in determining your MBTI type. Your functions are very interesting, but from them, it doesn't seem that you are an INTJ at all. The absolute opposite of the Ni function is Se, and for an INTJ, as they lead with Ni, it is very unlikely an INTJ will develop their inferior function, Se, unless placed into a situation where they are forced to do so or choose to improve on their own. Have you looked into the descriptions of each of the functions? If you've done that (or if you have not, you may wish to do so), try to think of how you've been for most of your life, and it would be best if you tried to determine what functions you have 'learned' and which ones truly come naturally.


I agree with this somewhat, but she can have a developed Ni. I do question whether Ni/Se, Ti/Fe, etc… are absolute opposites. Again at the risk of sounding redundant, we know that Jung, MB and others dealing with cognitive functions, follow Jung’s principle that two functions of the same traits (J/P) cannot support one another. However based on the laws of physics, two attitudes cannot occupy the same space simultaneously. Thus Ni/Se, Ti/Fe can work in tandem, but not Ni/Se, Ti, Fi, etc. In fact Dario Nardi has written a book on cognitive tandems: 


> We can get powerful results using extraverted Sensing in tandem with introverted Intuiting. We can be very tuned in to the surrounding environment, with anticipation of what’s coming next. We may constantly read our industry’s current news to be sure to catch the next wave of innovations. Or we can engage people in fun activities, drawing them out and helping them transform themselves. We might pull a shy person onto the dance floor, convinced that there is an inner dancer waiting to be released; that person experiences his or her potential firsthand. Or we might shape the current context to what we envision it can be, like a sculptor who can “see” the final statue within a chunk of marble and sculpts everything else away to get to it.





> We can get impressive results using introverted Intuiting in tandem with extraverted Sensing. We might try out various tangible experiences and activities to catalyze realizations for growth. The more varied and undigested experiences one has, the more material there is for the unconscious to draw upon. We might look inward to envision how we can transform something, then gather data and take actions to realize that goal—to make real what is envisioned. For example, we might visualize how people will one day journey into space, and then take the actions necessary to design and build a spaceship to accomplish that goal. This might take many years of action, including activities to sustain the vision. Another tandem relationship involves engaging in a physical activity so that body, mind, and environment merge to become one, perhaps experiencing a great sense of calm or energy.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

Although it may not be so nice in practice, the system is the system. Others can manipulate the system to their own understanding and practice if they so wish, but I would encourage a base understanding of the standard system first, which operates in the limited way you're describing.


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

jlynnr said:


> I tend to find that the functions I understand the best are the FiNeSiTe ones for the INFP, even though according to the test I use Ni, Ti, and Fe more than I use Si or Te. Does that resonate with anyone else?


Absolutely and in my own experience this generally indicates strong attitudes (E/I) in individuals. As a dominant Ti type with a strong preference for introversion, I can use my auxiliary function (Se) defensively for no other reason except that because my preference for introversion is very high.  What this means for me is that I skip over my natural cognitive function of Se because I feel more comfortable with my next introverted cognitive function (Ni).


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

Grey said:


> Although it may not be so nice in practice, the system is the system. Others can manipulate the system to their own understanding and practice if they so wish, but I would encourage a base understanding of the standard system first, which operates in the limited way you're describing.


Actually this boils down to whose system you prescribe to, don't you think? Anytime you speak of cognitive functions, are you really talking about Briggs-Myers? I think not. She merely references to cognitive functions with very vague definitions that oppose oppose one another based on attitude (i.e. Ne vs Ni, Se vs Si, etc). MB bases her system on dichtomous functions (E/I, S/N, T/F, J/P) which are the result of taking a forced choice assessment. To the contrary I don't see a manipulating of systems since Dario Nardi's work is based on Jung's cognitive functions, not MB. I think we all have an understanding of Briggs-Myers and can appreciate that it is inherently different that Jung's theory.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

Getting off topic here - if you'd like to continue this discussion, we can take it to PM. However, semantics aside, knowing the most commonly used system can be key to then devising your own modified system.


----------



## bombshellex (Dec 23, 2009)

Grey said:


> In my own personal opinion, I agree that you're an ENTJ, through both functions, letter preferences, and comparison to the other types you believe you are. If you're going to research functions, I would urge you to research both Introverted Intuition (Ni) and Extraverted Thinking (Te). The function list for an ENTJ is Te-Ni-Se-Fi, so you may wish to look at those functions as well. If you do, however, don't expect to relate to all of them - as Se is the tertiary function, it may seem quite foreign to you, and since Fi is the inferior function, you may find it's very awkward for you to use or you may not even use it at all.


I agree; I feel like an ENTJ in a lot of ways. I am still not completely sold, but you have provided me with an immense amount of information to look into. I can take it from here; I now know that I can determine my type through the processes you've described. I love to research anyway :happy:

Thanks for the input, everyone!


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

bombshellex said:


> I agree; I feel like an ENTJ in a lot of ways. I am still not completely sold, but you have provided me with an immense amount of information to look into. I can take it from here; I now know that I can determine my type through the processes you've described. I love to research anyway :happy: Thanks for the input, everyone!


Except that as I alluded to in post #20, you stated that you prefer tactical which implies you could be SP. In that case the information below may be worth reading:


> *When does an **ESTP** look like an **ENTJ**? When does an **ENTJ** look like an **ESTP**?.*
> 
> These two types can often look very much like each other.
> 
> ...


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

Grey said:


> Getting off topic here - if you'd like to continue this discussion, we can take it to PM. However, semantics aside, knowing the most commonly used system can be key to then devising your own modified system.


Agreed, and as I agreed to earlier, everyone has their system of preference. The key is to understand they're all different. I would argue whether MBTI is the most commonly used since generally what I observe from is a reference to MB when posters are actually discussing another system such as Keirsey, or temperament in general, the Tiegers, Socionics etc. Bombshellex will have to decide which system works best for her. What we have done is provide our input based on the systems that we find most useful. 

I will have to take you up on the invite of debating the systems:wink:.


----------



## Karen (Jul 17, 2009)

bombshellex said:


> ...you have provided me with an immense amount of information...


I agree, thanks everyone for the information. :happy: Let us know what you decide, bombshellex.

It took me months of study to decide on my type, and it truly did drive me crazy since I could type others in RL but not myself. As you can read in my signature line, it wasn't an easy fit, but I'm very satisfied that it describes who I am. If you continue to have problems and haven't seen MBTI Step II, look on page 4 for variations from type. https://www.cpp.com/Pdfs/smp267147.pdf


----------



## bombshellex (Dec 23, 2009)

Functianalyst said:


> Except that as I alluded to in post #20, you stated that you prefer tactical which implies you could be SP. In that case the information below may be worth reading:


 
Great. That makes things even more difficult to determine lol. The information you provided sounds like I could definitely be an ESTP as well, except for the fact that any time I've ever taken a test, I have gotten the result of an NJ rather than an SP. Let me post something here for you and see what you think:



How relevant are the "Multiple Intelligences" results in determining type? What do you think about my ENTJ result? How does this conflict with my tactical results in previous tests?


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

bombshellex said:


> Great. That makes things even more difficult to determine lol. The information you provided sounds like I could definitely be an ESTP as well, except for the fact that any time I've ever taken a test, I have gotten the result of an NJ rather than an SP. Let me post something here for you and see what you think:
> 
> 
> 
> How relevant are the "Multiple Intelligences" results in determining type? What do you think about my ENTJ result? How does this conflict with my tactical results in previous tests?


Oh no young lady, this is your journey. I never tell a person there type, even if I lived with them and knew them intimately. This is one of those life lessons that I believe we must complete individually. 

I will tell people to keep searching when they claim to be a certain type, but provide examples that prove otherwise. I will say that Kinesthetic can correlate with Se, but for the most part they are two separate systems and not everything correlates with MBTI. As for your example of NJ/SP. In particularly Ni-Te and Ti-Se (and vice-versa) look-a-like. I don't have Berens' book with me, but they give a table of all the functions that look-a-like. 

From recall, Ni-Ti share a need for the complex. The difference is Ti look at the basic principles of something and Ni does not. Te-Se both look at information empirically. Te will not take action until they have all the information, whereas Se is comfortable taking action and learning as they go. 

Some


----------



## bombshellex (Dec 23, 2009)

Functianalyst, I know you previously expressed your thoughts about taking and re-taking the MBTI test ("it's insanity"), and I fully agree with you. However, I am finding myself behaving in an irrational way and doing just that! I feel as though I cannot rest until I have a conclusive view of "who I am." With that being said, here's one last bit of information that I've gathered through the similarminds.com Jung + Enneagram Test. I found it to be one of the most thorough tests that I've taken, which is why I am inclined to believe that its results are "correct." And also, while I respect your Linda V. Berens' typology theory, it doesn't necessarily work for me.

*Extroverted (E) 53.13%*
Introverted (I) 46.88%

*Intuitive (N) 54.76%*
Sensing (S) 45.24%

*Thinking (T) 50%*
*Feeling (F) 50%*

^ This is where I am getting tripped up... I cannot effectively assess my more dominant trait out of the above two.

*Judging (J) 79.41%*
Perceiving (P) 20.59%

Your type is: *ENFJ*

*ENFJ* - "Persuader". Outstanding leader of groups. Can be aggressive at helping others to be the best that they can be. 2.5% of total population.

I'm guessing the system just chooses the trait that it wants to choose when there is a tie?

I am going to do some more investigation on ENTJ and ENFJ.



Also, my Enneagram result was Type 1, which is the same result I have always gotten. Is there ever any correlation between MBTI types and Enneagram types?


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

bombshellex said:


> Functianalyst, I know you previously expressed your thoughts about taking and re-taking the MBTI test ("it's insanity"), and I fully agree with you. However, I am finding myself behaving in an irrational way and doing just that! I feel as though I cannot rest until I have a conclusive view of "who I am." With that being said, here's one last bit of information that I've gathered through the similarminds.com Jung + Enneagram Test. I found it to be one of the most thorough tests that I've taken, which is why I am inclined to believe that its results are "correct." And also, while I respect your Linda V. Berens' typology theory, it doesn't necessarily work for me.
> 
> *Extroverted (E) 53.13%*
> Introverted (I) 46.88%
> ...


I will PM you.


----------



## Karen (Jul 17, 2009)

bombshellex said:


> I'm guessing the system just chooses the trait that it wants to choose when there is a tie?....
> 
> Also, my Enneagram result was Type 1, which is the same result I have always gotten. Is there ever any correlation between MBTI types and Enneagram types?


Likely Functianalyst will clear this up in a PM, but if not... In the booklet I received when I took the Myers-Briggs test, if there is a tie, I, N, F and P win. Also, there is a correlation between MBTI and Enneagram types, but it's not exact, and, depending on which expert you consult, any MBTI type can be any Enneagram type.

This is what I was thinking before I read your post about ENFJ... Assuming you're not an SP (from your comment about being a singer, dancer, etc.), if I had to guess, I'd say you're ENFJ with a strong J. I realized you sound just like my brother, an ENFJ with a somewhat weaker J. But as I just said on another thread, I'm good at typing people in real life, not as good on the Internet.


----------



## bombshellex (Dec 23, 2009)

Karen said:


> Likely Functianalyst will clear this up in a PM, but if not... In the booklet I received when I took the Myers-Briggs test, if there is a tie, I, N, F and P win. Also, there is a correlation between MBTI and Enneagram types, but it's not exact, and, depending on which expert you consult, any MBTI type can be any Enneagram type.
> 
> This is what I was thinking before I read your post about ENFJ... Assuming you're not an SP (from your comment about being a singer, dancer, etc.), if I had to guess, I'd say you're ENFJ with a strong J. I realized you sound just like my brother, an ENFJ with a somewhat weaker J. But as I just said on another thread, I'm good at typing people in real life, not as good on the Internet.


Excellent information Karen, thanks so much. I am especially happy to now know what occurs when there is a tie. I found that F and T are always extremely close for me and typically do result in a tie. Knowing that I, N, F, and P win in these situations is immensely helpful in determining my type. 

I'd be interested in talking with your brother and seeing how we are similar. What personality traits does he have that makes his J appear weak(er)? If not for any other reason, I like to know things like this because I am fascinated with people and how we differ from one another.


I am going to continue analyzing myself in an effort to find my type, but I am not going to push as hard. There is no rush, and this is supposed to be fun. I've had to remind myself of that :wink: I do think you are right in saying that I am probably an ENFJ, though. That was my result the very, very first time I took an MBTI test, which was when I was about 13 -- so 4 and a half years ago, I would say. I don't think I took another test until I was 15, and at that time, I was characterized as an INFJ. However, I do believe that has a lot to do with maturation, adolescence, and the continuous evolution that each of us experiences. Between the ages of 15 and 16, I took the test sporadically, and most of the time, ended up with either INFJ or INTJ. Now, at 17, my revisitation of the test has resulted in (as I said previously) INFJ, INTJ, ENFJ, and ENTJ - as well as the more recent SP results in the last few days. The first result means a lot though, does it not? Especially at 13, when one does not really censor one's answers. And now I've come full circle, actually, and embraced who I truly am. Ages 13 - 15 were pretty rough, and that could explain the sudden Introversion.

But, time will tell. I am open to the journey of self-discovery in whatever form it takes :laughing:


----------



## firedell (Aug 5, 2009)

Arioche said:


> Now what did we learn today class?


That you are a whore.
Grey's whore.


----------



## Iapetus (Dec 14, 2009)

Arioche:

I think you made that all up out of your evil mind. There's a difference between creativity and fermentation!

Proof. Proof. Proof. I want the Proof. Preferably 100 Proof.


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

Arioche said:


> Here is all you need to know to type yourself:
> 
> Are you a total whore? If so you're an E! There is a positive correlation between Extroverts and professional womanizers, exotic dancers, and high class socialites, this is probably due to extrovert's burning desire to gain energy via outside means! Newton's Law of Conservation of Hanky Panky Energy states that more time you spend in smexy positions, more energy you gain from external means! Also, wearing a glasses doubles your introverted point, unless you're into sexy secretaries.
> 
> ...


I am not sure of which I am more incensed about, the overall context of this post or the fact that someone would give you kudos. I am not sure where to start, but no place like the first paragraph. I that dominant Fe types EFJs would take complete offense to claiming all extraverts are whores. Fe would be the cognitive function that would yell for social morality. I am a sensor and have never watched a NASCAR race in my life. So which types of sensors are you referring to, Se or Si? Finally, to correlate feeling with emotions is something that anyone should have learned in basics. Type is about cognition, not emotions. This thread has become unproductive.


----------



## Karen (Jul 17, 2009)

Arioche said:


> Now what did we learn today class?


That I'm an exotic dancer who watches NASCAR when I'm feeling especially creative, which makes me cry but not daily?

Now we're getting somewhere! But we need bombshellex to weigh in on this new information. 

Edit: Well now I feel stupid, but I think it's just a joke, Functianalyst. Maybe we should all start over, lol.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

Functianalyst, Arioche's post was made with humour in mind - she was not serious in the least. It may have derailed the thread a bit, but Bombshell is still welcome to discuss her type here.


----------



## Arioche (Aug 5, 2009)

To Functionanalyst: It's called Satire sir. :wink:
I was making fun of the fact that people were trying to type her as being one thing or another because of some "defining factors which definitely makes her (enter type)" Like being creative.


----------



## iceman44 (Nov 11, 2009)

It sounds like from what you desribe, you're an ENTJ.:wink:


----------



## bombshellex (Dec 23, 2009)

Ooookay. It seems a lot of "stuff" has gone down during my absence lol. Here are my opinions:

Although I am less experienced in MBTI study, I don't agree that any one attribute can be defined by typology. In this case, creativity _should_ not be defined by whether or not one is a P or a J, but I guess some people would disagree. I believe I am a J because I need to be in a highly organized, structured environment and living situation; I need to know what I am planning to do, and I don't work well with chaos. This does not mean, however, that I don't have spontaneous, creative ideas- I do, and I act upon them. I am also open to infinite possibilities at all times; I don't close myself off to anything, but I absolutely like to have decisions made and concepts mapped out. I'd actually say I am extremely creative but that I am persistent in following through with my creative projects.

Oh, and by the way Iapetus, I do write my own material. And I'm quite good at it. Just because I function best without chaos does not mean that I can't/don't want to be creative. I'm still not really sure why P vs. J has become a matter of creativity.


----------



## Iapetus (Dec 14, 2009)

This chart illustrates why J and P are significant to creativity. Compare enfp to enfj. Compare entp to entj. Compare intp to intj. Compare infj to infp. In each case P makes a significant difference over J.

You write songs? Excellent. All the more reason you are more likely P than J.

And what's this talk about chaos? Creativity takes place at the boundary between order and chaos. Life itself emerges between order and chaos. Chaos is the great void that needs to be organized. You don't deal with chaos by stepping into the ocean of chaos. You deal with chaos by proceeding in an orderly manner. Creativity is the ordering of chaos. If your life is chaotic you may not even have time to be creative. Too much order can put you in a straight jacket. Too much chaos will swallow you up. Chaos can best be dealt with by maintaining a certain amount of order. But if you seek the security of "order" you will lose touch with the materials of creativity.

You are very young. Integration of your personality can take a long time if you don't have the right paradigm.


----------



## Marco Antonio (Nov 25, 2008)

This thread has gone wild.
Btw. i need someone to explain what was trying to be proofed with the graph above (and what the hell everything in it means and how reliable it is).
Order doesn't neglect creativity, i don't mean to be rude, but i do wtf?! LOL
INFJ's are incredible creative, come again?? what so ISTP's are very creative??
i believe this is slowly becoming dysfunctional. One thing is to joke around about generalizations, and other to create some and adjust so it seems accurate.

@bombshellex, i believe some attributes have a tendency to be displayed by certain types, by the way cognitive functions interact, but as you said, it is not absolutely dependant to certain dichotomies.


----------



## bombshellex (Dec 23, 2009)

I apologize for my total lack of communication within recent weeks! I just wanted to update everyone who contributed to this thread on my final type decision; I've decided I am an ENTJ.

Thanks for all of your insights, opinions, and information- this thread has been very helpful to me


----------

