# Could I be ISFJ, or just a maturing INTP? Something else? Help!



## spiderfrommars (Feb 22, 2012)

I've had doubts about my type for a while. There's something about N that never felt quite right, and I keep considering the possibility that I'm actually mistyped. As I've been getting into socionics, and not relating at all to LII (which is also Ti-Ne) and in particular not relating at all to Ne, I began considering that I was mistyped more in earnest. So here we are.

Honestly right now I think I could be anything, but I am considering that I'm actually ISFJ, because I seem to like Si and Fe way more than a INTP should. On the other hand, maybe I'm just maturing and learning to use my lower functions? But...I really am not feeling the Ne. I have considered the possibility of ISTP in the past, but while I identify with the Keirsey "artisan temperament" description, I actually don't think I use Se. However, I'm open to any suggestions right now.
*　

**1. 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.*
Female, 23, I've had depression for years. I'm a sx (sx/so?) 5w4 2w3 1.

*2. What type(s) do you usually score as on tests?*
Usually INTP, with especially strong I and P. The question is, does this truly indicate IxxP, or does it actually indicate leading with a percieving function, and therefore IxxJ? Or does it indicate nothing, because the J/P questions on tests are absolutely ridiculous?

*3. Click on this link: **Flickr: Explore!** Choose 2 photos and look at each for as long as you feel that you need. Copy and paste the photos here (or write the link like example: www[dot]flickr[dot]com/photos/jacoboson/8697480741/in/explore-2013-05-01), and write your impression of each of them.*
Georgia White Out | Flickr - Photo Sharing! This picture caught my eye immediately. I love bare trees covered in snow, fading into the sky. In winter the sky is white, too, and there's sort of a grey filter over everything. The snow, the trees, the house, everything is muted and grey. It's not much snow, only enough to dust the ground. I wonder who lives in that little house. Why do they live so far away from everybody else? It must be nice, sitting all alone in that house, walking around that field without a soul in sight. What did they think when they opened the door and saw this? Do they love snow? Maybe it was the first snowfall. Or maybe they hate snow, because they know they'll have to trudge through it every day for the rest of the winter, and they groaned and went back to bed.

Searching | Flickr - Photo Sharing! They're looking for Standing Guy's sister. She went missing. He enlisted the help of Squatting Guy, who is a crackerjack detective but lost his job because he was a loose cannon and also kind of a pain in the ass so his boss was glad to get rid of him. Also, he kept stealing the office paper clips. They needed those. Standing Guy has no idea what he's doing and is just a nuisance, and Squatting Guy is getting incresingly annoyed at him. It's getting dark. They have to rest. Squatting Guy tells Standing Guy so, but Standing Guy insists they must press on. They don't.

*4. 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?*
Hmm, at different times I've had different reactions to this. In most cases, I get completely distracted by my friend's input, drop what I'm doing and start chatting with them (or start multitasking), figuring I'll just put in the extra time after my friend leaves. It's hard for me to resist a good idea, and my friends seem to have worse memories than me, so if I don't talk to them now, they'll forget the idea.

But if I'm really immersed in working on something, sometimes I find this kind of input really overwhelming. I can only take so many new things in at once. (If my friend was instead, say, trying to show me a TV show, I'd be kicking him out of the room.) I guess this happens more if I'm on the clock to do something that was my idea, as opposed to something I "have" to do.

*5a. What are some of your most important values? *
Honesty, truth-seeking, and "doing no harm." I really want to not impact the world as much as possible. (I've recently--oh this is so embarrassing to talk about--decided to try not to buy anything made in factories with poor conditions.) Also, populism and feminism.

*5b. Can they change? What would be the reason if they changed?
*Yes, they can. I'm always learning, and nothing I believe is set in stone. It would take some pretty good evidence/reasoning, but it is certainly possible. If I directly saw something that clashed with the way I saw the world, or was convinced one of my values wasn't good, or more importantly that two of my values clashed with one another, then my values would have to change.

*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?*
This is basically the same as a question on the socionics questionnaire, so I'm going to just copy my answer from there.


spiderfrommars said:


> At first, I think, my internal and external reaction would be about the same: I want to know more about why they think what they do. Internally, I might be feeling more angry than I show externally, but I'm still curious about why they're thinking what they are. Externally, I try to play it cool, and ask them why. It's possible my beliefs are wrong, and I'd like to hear more of their perspective. Or it's possible what they said is BS, and I'll show that by asking them to elaborate. I continue to ask them questions, not sharing my own perspective, until I've made up my mind about whether they have a valid point or not.
> 
> Once I've made up my mind, I'll start sharing my opinion, as it might be something they haven't considered. I'm making myself sound all reasonable, but honestly, I might get a little shouty here. If it becomes clear that they can't convince me, and I can't convince them, I try to shut down the conversation with some sort of vague statement like, "Oh, well, that's interesting." I see no point in arguing if we're both totally convinced of our own beliefs. If I'm arguing, I want both of us to be learning.


*7. a) What activities energizes you the most? Why?
*Playing D&D--it's a combination of writing and acting. Playing just one character in a story means you're very restricted in what you can do. I like being creative within restrictions, and figuring out what to do with them. And I'm a character-focused writer, so I love completely inhabiting one character and thinking what they think/seeing what they see, etc. It happens so quickly that I don't really make decisions conciously. It's a great feeling of letting my unconcious come out to play, and do whatever it wants. 

Actually, I love to write like that as well--writing my first draft rapidly, without editing as I go, and seeing what I end up with. It's messy, but I get a lot of great ideas that way. Writing also energizes me in a similar way, especially writing all day. If I can just get up, sit there and write all day, that's a good day.

*7. b) What activities drains you the most? Why?*
- Paperwork (forms, bills, all that kind of stuff) hurts my head and it's really hard to do or remember.
- Maps or directions, especially when somebody gives me verbal directions that I'm supposed to remember. They're telling me how to get to the grocery store and it's like they're speaking Thai. I guess they're saying some stuff, but I'm not processing it. I get so stressed. 
- Watching TV/movies. I do sometimes, because I like to "have" the characters (add them to my mental store for future reference and analysis), but it's really hard for me. It's so bright and loud and I don't know what to focus on. I find it exhausting.

*8. Do you believe you are introverted or extraverted? Why do you believe that? (Please be as detailed as possible)
*Introverted. I'm easily overstimulated, but barely ever bored, I have never had the feeling that I have "nothing to do." I'm more interested in my stories/fantasies than in reality or interacting with it. Not to say I "daydream," because I never fantasize about stuff that might happen to me, but rather think about things that are entirely made up. Also, I'm most interested in how things relate to me, and this is how I learn. I guess that sounds self-centered, but it's more that I figure out what things are in relationship to each other--if somebody tells me that person A is passive-aggressive, but I'm not, it's because they have more of those qualities than me. I don't know what qualities anybody/anything has in a vacuum. A is more passive-aggressive than B, but less passive-aggressive than C. And so on. This might have drifted off topic.

*9. Please describe yourself, what do you see as your greatest strengths and what do you see as your greatest weaknesses?*
I'm good at explaining ideas simply, very devoted to my (few) loved ones, great at salvaging a bad idea and turning it into something cool, and confident in my ideas. I'm also overly emotional/short-tempered, unable to slog through the hard parts of something without quietly slipping away into the shadows and giving up on the whole thing, and way more interested in the lives of my characters than I am in my own life.

*10. Please describe yourself when you are feeling stressed. How do you act and why? Real life experiences are welcome.*
Honestly, I don't get stressed all that often. But when I am, I get really snappy and tell people to stop talking, stop making noise, etc and everything seems so loud. I get frustrated more often than stressed. And in that case I yell, a lot. (Or I get depressed...trying to filter out my depression behaviors that aren't stress related.)

*11. What is your "soft spot" (the area that makes you upset if people mess with)?*
I can't take in too much information at once, at least, not information that doesn't seem to "have a purpose." If somebody's telling me stuff and not saying why, it drives me crazy! Especially if it's just a bunch of random facts not strung together. My best friend is forever saying, "Fun fact!" and sharing something about Chinese history, or something. And it is interesting, but the way he's just hollering out random facts without any connective tissue drives me crazy. It's like he keeps giving me random objects, some useful and some not, but either way I have to find a place to store them all, and I can't keep up with how fast he goes. 

What's even worse is that this same friend loves to show me movies. He loves it. As previously mentioned, movies are hard. So, okay, I'll watch one episode of this new show with him, I can handle that. I start analyzing the character, discussing it with him, and I'm getting very interested, now. I like this show. But way before I'm done processing it, he's loading up the next video! I need more time than that. And besides, half an hour of bright shiny zingy things was way too much, and I am done for the day.

Or when it comes to random facts, other people will tell me random things about their day or their past with no provocation and not giving any indication of what emotional response they want. My favorite is my roommate who likes to tell horrifying, but boring, stories with a big grin on her face. Normally if somebody told a boring story I'd say, "Oh, okay, cool," but these are not cool things. And normally if somebody told a horrifying story, I'd say, "Oh, I'm so sorry," but she's using a tone like she's telling me a funny story from her day at work. I don't get it, roommate. Tell me what to feel!

*12. What are most of the ideas/thoughts you get generally centered around (try to expand your answers as much as possible)?*
Characters. Usually my own, but also other peoples'. I analyze them, their relationships, their behavior etc. I also think a lot about people, in similar ways. I often use personality types as a way to analyze characters and people--thinking about who's what type, what groups of people are the same type and what do they have in common, what relationships do we see between people of various types. And then I reevaluate old typings as I gain more information.

And I guess writing in general. Most of my ideas about my writing are character-centric, though. But I also work on the other aspects of the story. (I have recently discovered that I really enjoy world-building! It's just like the social sciences except I get to make stuff up.)

Also...this is dorky...knitting. I spend a surprising amount of time thinking about knitting. I love to look at the yarn I have and try to think of a project for it. Especially the "problem" yarns that are in weird quantities or whatever. I like to find solutions for those. And I love to learn new techniques. I have to try it out for myself, though. Can't learn it by just watching/reading about it.

*13. 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 love it in areas where I'm comfortable, and there's really no limit there--love feedback on my writing, my ideas and opinions, that kind of stuff. I'm always quick to implement feedback and I really enjoy it, because I love improving those things and constantly working on them. Sometimes I feel like I get stuck in a rut and I don't know what's good and not. Actually that's why I'm starting a typing thread: I really want feedback on my type because I'm starting to turn into an Ourobos of typing and going craaaaaaazy.

But I hate feedback on stuff I feel insecure about, because it makes me feel so terrible and criticized. Especially because I may already know I suck. It makes me feel very uncomfortable if somebody criticizes my method of doing a particular chore, or something like that. I feel embarrassed and humiliated.
*
14. Anything beyond what has been discussed that you would like to add?* 
I filled out a socionics questionnaire recently, so if you want more information, you can check that out.
http://personalitycafe.com/whats-my...longest-socionics-questionnaire-all-land.html


----------



## randomshoes (Dec 11, 2013)

No love for the spider from mars? You're just gonna let her munch on her own tail? 

C'mon! Ride up on your white steed and rescue her from type confusion hell.


----------



## redneck15 (Mar 21, 2011)

Someone should answer her; she really deserves an answer. Whatever she is, it's beyond my skill to type.


----------



## athenian200 (Oct 13, 2008)

From what I've read, you sound like an INFJ to me. I don't see Sensing at all. You focus on feelings, abstractions, world-building, worried about what you're supposed to feel, etc...

Another factor is that no one so far has been able to type you, yet they all think you deserve to be typed. INFJs are some of the most difficult people to type, because they can seem like INTPs one day, ISFJs on another day, ENTPs the third day, ENFPs when trying too hard to be sociable, and an INTJ next week on Monday. We have a tendency to "break" temperament theory, which a lot of people rely on.

I could almost see you as INFP if you were typed solely by dichotomies, but I can't see you as an Fi user at all. I think the J/P thing is often thrown off by depression/stress, which you said you've been going through. Another important factor is that depressed INFJs are known to test INTP, while depressed INTJs are known to test INFP. That's because they're aware of their world being consumed by the tertiary function, so much so that they begin to believe it's their normal mode of operation. 

The Ni-Ti loop can look a lot like an INTPs Ti-Si loop, or an ISTPs Ti-Ni loop. Depressed people and extreme Introverts are extremely hard to type for this reason.


----------



## Raawx (Oct 9, 2013)

@spiderfrommars 

I certainly can see the INTP, and it seems to me to be a fairly accurate typing. I saw a good amount of Ne, Ni, Ti some amounts of Fe, Fi, and little Se, Si, and Te.

Still, delphi367 is more experienced than I, so I would also heavily respect her typing.


----------



## athenian200 (Oct 13, 2008)

Raawx said:


> @spiderfrommars
> 
> I certainly can see the INTP, and it seems to me to be a fairly accurate typing. I saw a good amount of Ne, Ni, Ti some amounts of Fe, Fi, and little Se, Si, and Te.
> 
> Still, delphi367 is more experienced than I, so I would also heavily respect her typing.


Yeah, INTP would be my second choice if she doesn't identify with INFJ at all after looking into it. It's honestly a lot harder than you'd think to tell them apart. Both INTP and INFJ can come off as imaginative, polite people who analyze others a lot...

I'm not sure I would have gone so far if she weren't already considering ISFJ, but given that she was, I just saw it as more likely that she's another INFJ that mistyped as INTP due to seeing themselves as a Ti-favoring intellectual and/or being depressed.

Also, I'm not sure how accurate her Enneagram type is, but if she's really an INFJ 5, that would definitely exacerbate any tendency to mistype as INTP. However, INFJs usually have 5 as a wing via 4w5 or 6w5, rather than as a core type.


----------



## Rafiki (Mar 11, 2012)

i thought "maturing INTP" was "masturbating INTP"

what should be the name of the thread i start to deal with that


----------



## spiderfrommars (Feb 22, 2012)

delphi367 said:


> From what I've read, you sound like an INFJ to me. I don't see Sensing at all. You focus on feelings, abstractions, world-building, worried about what you're supposed to feel, etc...


This is really interesting. Can you see Ni in me? Honestly, I've never felt I was able to fully grasp that function, so I always assumed it was because I didn't have it. Would you tell me a little more about how it feels from your perspective? That might help me know if I can relate. It may be that I'm mushing together my ideas of what Ni and Si are because they're both introverted percieving functions and therefore all squishy.

Same question to @Raawx, since you said you could see a good amount of Ni in my post. What makes you say that?



> The Ni-Ti loop can look a lot like an INTPs Ti-Si loop, or an ISTPs Ti-Ni loop. Depressed people and extreme Introverts are extremely hard to type for this reason.


Yeah, I could definitely see myself being in a loop due to depression. One reason I started considering ISFJ was because I'm getting better, and I seem to be suddenly growing a Fe. @randomshoes says it's very noticable and unexpected.

I just went and took another look at the Ni-Ti loop. Yes, it sounds good. I remember when I first found those descriptions, I thought it sounded a bit more like me than the Ti-Si loop (they both sound somewhat like me). I definitely spend a lot of time building up solutions to abstract problems then shooting myself down. I've been this way with typing lately. I know it doesn't actually matter, in reality. But I just can't let it go. I have to make the system work. It's what I kind of meant when I called myself an Ourobos. 

Is it worth considering that I could be a Ti-Ni ISTP?


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

spiderfrommars said:


> This is really interesting. Can you see Ni in me? Honestly, I've never felt I was able to fully grasp that function, so I always assumed it was because I didn't have it. Would you tell me a little more about how it feels from your perspective? That might help me know if I can relate. It may be that I'm mushing together my ideas of what Ni and Si are because they're both introverted percieving functions and therefore all squishy.
> 
> Same question to @_Raawx_, since you said you could see a good amount of Ni in my post. What makes you say that?
> 
> ...


I think INFJ is a safer bet, in all honesty. You are more imaginative and writerly than an ISTP would be. My SO could be an ISTP, or an INFJ, but I would lean ISTP for him (Thusfar)... You do not strike me as a Ti dominant, but rather, an Ni-- You share a similar Ni tendency as my lovely dearest: Needing to take time to process the random ideas other people throw out, one at a time, thoroughly.

He is certainly imaginative, and writerly, but isn't driven to be so.

But, I would be dubious about loops. I tentatively postulate that the auxiliary function is simply muted in at least half the population of types. :tongue: This is not necessarily unhealthy-- It could be underdeveloped, or due to certain occurrences.


----------



## athenian200 (Oct 13, 2008)

spiderfrommars said:


> This is really interesting. Can you see Ni in me? Honestly, I've never felt I was able to fully grasp that function, so I always assumed it was because I didn't have it. Would you tell me a little more about how it feels from your perspective? That might help me know if I can relate. It may be that I'm mushing together my ideas of what Ni and Si are because they're both introverted percieving functions and therefore all squishy.


Yes, I can see Ni. What you said about world-building, writing as a way of unleashing the subconscious, thinking about things that are entirely made up, thinking about implications of actions, and curiosity about other perspectives all sounds like Ni. Also, mentioning an Ourobos sounds like a very Ni kind of mental image. Ni users are often obsessed with the concept of infinity.

Another important factor is the amount of inferior Se you show. You said you don't like random facts being tossed at you out of nowhere and you're easily overstimulated by noise and light. An Ne or Se using type would generally be more comfortable with that. Ni users tend to "resist" the data a bit more and are made uncomfortable by it, it takes them longer to work and process it internally. In general, your post suggests that you're far more exhausted by Sensing than by Feeling. 




> Yeah, I could definitely see myself being in a loop due to depression. One reason I started considering ISFJ was because I'm getting better, and I seem to be suddenly growing a Fe. @randomshoes says it's very noticable and unexpected.
> 
> I just went and took another look at the Ni-Ti loop. Yes, it sounds good. I remember when I first found those descriptions, I thought it sounded a bit more like me than the Ti-Si loop (they both sound somewhat like me). I definitely spend a lot of time building up solutions to abstract problems then shooting myself down. I've been this way with typing lately. I know it doesn't actually matter, in reality. But I just can't let it go. I have to make the system work. It's what I kind of meant when I called myself an Ourobos.
> 
> Is it worth considering that I could be a Ti-Ni ISTP?


Well, the reason I say INFJ over ISTP is because you're showing Fe at a decent level of competence, and you seem totally exhausted by Se-like situations that involve dealing with details or being stimulated. The fact that you're showing the Fe more in a HEALTHY state, rather than an unhealthy one, seems especially significant.


----------



## tylook (May 10, 2013)

You are a quite Ne-Si user.

INTP fosho


----------



## spiderfrommars (Feb 22, 2012)

Word Dispenser said:


> You do not strike me as a Ti dominant, but rather, an Ni-- You share a similar Ni tendency as my lovely dearest: Needing to take time to process the random ideas other people throw out, one at a time, thoroughly.


Yeah, that's very true. I like when people give me ideas, but I need to take them one at a time, and explore them. 



> But, I would be dubious about loops. I tentatively postulate that the auxiliary function is simply muted in at least half the population of types. This is not necessarily unhealthy-- It could be underdeveloped, or due to certain occurrences.


That's really interesting. Half of all types? Does that mean those people have a really diminished capability to introvert/to extravert? And how does that play out? I know in your typing thread it was clear you have strong Ne and strong Fe, so do you consider yourself one of those types? In that, you'd have a muted Ti, but it's not a Ne-Fe loop but rather your normal functioning.



delphi367 said:


> Yes, I can see Ni. What you said about world-building, writing as a way of unleashing the subconscious, thinking about things that are entirely made up, thinking about implications of actions, and curiosity about other perspectives all sounds like Ni. Also, mentioning an Ourobos sounds like a very Ni kind of mental image. Ni users are often obsessed with the concept of infinity.


Hmm, that makes sense. In that case I can really see myself with Ni. In the past, I've also heard Si linked to the subconcious. That's part of what confused me, the definitions seem to bleed into each other. 



> Another important factor is the amount of inferior Se you show. You said you don't like random facts being tossed at you out of nowhere and you're easily overstimulated by noise and light. An Ne or Se using type would generally be more comfortable with that. Ni users tend to "resist" the data a bit more and are made uncomfortable by it, it takes them longer to work and process it internally.


Ah! This makes sense. Yes, I take a long time to process things internally. When I come to something new, it kind of has to be my idea. I frustrate my friends, because I'll come to very definite conclusions that I think are out of nowhere, and they'll say, "Yes, I've said that to you 5 times already." Or I'll like something new and they'll say, "I tried to show that to you a year ago and you wouldn't look at it." I recently started learning socionics and one of my friends reminded me that she tried to show me the system four years ago. Oops!

I guess when I come to something, a conclusion or a new thing, I have to be "ready." I'm not sure what ready means, exactly. I feel like I'm in the right state to accept something new, but I don't really know why. It has to flow naturally from a question I'm trying to answer or something like that. I guess I'm pretty bad at accepting new stuff from other people. I love other peoples' input, and I need it, but only if I asked a question first.



> In general, your post suggests that you're far more exhausted by Sensing than by Feeling.


Yeah, almost definitely. I used to think I was more exhausted by feeling because I get so drained from peoples' expectations and demands on me, and showing emotions can be hard for me. But I don't think that's inferior F. (I think it may be 5, actually.) I'm not uncomfortable thinking about emotions, values, or my personal preferences. Nothing like that.

On the other hand, too much noise can make me literally have a meltdown.



> Well, the reason I say INFJ over ISTP is because you're showing Fe at a decent level of competence, and you seem totally exhausted by Se-like situations that involve dealing with details or being stimulated. The fact that you're showing the Fe more in a HEALTHY state, rather than an unhealthy one, seems especially significant.


Yeah, that makes sense. I felt I should consider all the options, especially since I've typed as Ti-dom in the past. But I do think I'm starting to show a lot more Fe now, and that really suggests IxFJ, not Fe-inferior.



tylook said:


> You are a quite Ne-Si user.


Why?


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

spiderfrommars said:


> Yeah, that's very true. I like when people give me ideas, but I need to take them one at a time, and explore them.
> 
> That's really interesting. Half of all types? Does that mean those people have a really diminished capability to introvert/to extravert? And how does that play out? I know in your typing thread it was clear you have strong Ne and strong Fe, so do you consider yourself one of those types? In that, you'd have a muted Ti, but it's not a Ne-Fe loop but rather your normal functioning.


Ooo, I likes them journalists what do their researches. :kitteh:

As said-- Tentatively postulating. Meaning that... It's my own personal observation, and it may have no valid basis.

I've just noticed this tendency in a lot of people on the forum, at the very least, and tendency of expression in observed individuals in action as well. My huzfiend is a prime example, an exaggerated one, mayhaps, but his circumstances are far from usual, and quite unique. 

As for me? Hm. Hard to say. _Could_ be. I feel that my Ti has been more activated and bringing my Ne down to earth more now that I've had treatment for ADHD-passive. But, that could be due to a number of things. I try not to pin it on type, since I might have myself pinned wrong... 

In my case, I'd say my auxiliary was muted until it was given a means to better process and make use of information, when prior to treatment, it was very weak. 

I tried to compensate for this by extroverting with Fe, I think-- I suspect this is because of a lack of metacognition. ADHD makes it very difficult to think before acting, to introspect and see one's own thought process.

Even so, a tertiary Fe is still a tertiary Fe. Even though I was using it more than Ti, it was still awkward and not with the ease of Ne. (If, in fact, I have this correct and I _am _the type I say I am.)

But, perhaps when one is extroverted... That is-- A dominant extroverted function attitude makes it easier to express another extroverted function, over an introverted one? 

And similarly, perhaps a dominant introverted function attitude makes it easier to express another introverted function?

So, for INFJ, that would be.. Ni skips straight to Ti, because Fe isn't 'easy'. I know that the functions aren't necessarily 'introverted', or 'extroverted', by classic meaning of the word, but for lack of a better term.

Just some conjectures. I wrote a post about this-- The auxiliary and its role. I'm curious as to whether my hypothesis has any merit whatsoever, though.

I just think that one needs to think critically about loops, because there is only one written article on it, by a PerC member, who I assume was attempting to rationalize their own cognitive behaviour, rather than expressing any interest in following the context of theories.


----------



## athenian200 (Oct 13, 2008)

Word Dispenser said:


> I just think that one needs to think critically about loops, because there is only one written article on it, by a PerC member, who I assume was attempting to rationalize their own cognitive behaviour, rather than expressing any interest in following the context of theories.


Actually, that person wasn't the first to postulate the idea. They're just the most well-known around here. Many people have come up with this idea on their own, it's not like they're all just copying a single source. I had a very similar idea before people ever started calling it a loop.

Also, I read this a long time ago:

Myers Briggs Personality Types

If the idea of a "loop" seems too far-fetched, this might make more sense.


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

delphi367 said:


> Actually, that person wasn't the first to postulate the idea. They're just the most well-known around here. Many people have come up with this idea on their own, it's not like they're all just copying a single source. I had a very similar idea before people ever started calling it a loop.
> 
> Also, I read this a long time ago:
> 
> ...


I'm not sure if it's far-fetched or not. To me, I am merely skeptical, and I think it's important to think critically and not embrace a topic wholeheartedly without due consideration of its core ideas.

And that site seems a bit 'loopy' to me, bwa ha, pardon the pun. :kitteh: 

In any case, clearly there is a small minority building which is thinking critically about the auxiliary and its role. Whether it's loops or not. Behaviour is simply cognitive causation, so we look to the source. And if the source seems odd, we ask questions and try to discern why.

Since there is an oddly large proportion of individuals that seem to share this phenomenon, I would hesitate to call it unhealthy, at the very least.


----------



## spiderfrommars (Feb 22, 2012)

Word Dispenser said:


> But, perhaps when one is extroverted... That is-- A dominant extroverted function attitude makes it easier to express another extroverted function, over an introverted one?
> 
> And similarly, perhaps a dominant introverted function attitude makes it easier to express another introverted function?


If I'm understanding you right, I think this pretty much is the theory of how dominant-tertiary loops work. It seems like these might just be different ways of saying the same thing. The only real point of contention seems to be the question of whether using two intro/extraverted functions is unhealthy or not.

I will say that I wouldn't consider myself (or another person) "unhealthy" simply because I realized I (they) exhibited two introverted functions highest, or two extraverted functions. The reason I can easily believe I may be in a loop is because I already know I am unhealthy.



> In my case, I'd say my auxiliary was muted until it was given a means to better process and make use of information, when prior to treatment, it was very weak.


I suspect loops (if they happen--go with me here!) are often caused by mental disorders and other extreme circumstances. Mental disorders screw with how your brain is supposed to function. So it would make sense they make it hard to access your auxiliary, which is already a little less comfy (because it requires you to extravert/to introvert). This could certainly be the case for me: depression made it hard for me to engage with the outside world, making it hard to use any extraverted function.

Interesting to note, @randomshoes has anxiety and is finding it very difficult to figure out her introverted function. I know she was talking to you about that before. Ne is obvious in her, but Ti/Fi isn't.



> I just think that one needs to think critically about loops, because there is only one written article on it, by a PerC member, who I assume was attempting to rationalize their own cognitive behaviour, rather than expressing any interest in following the context of theories.


Thinking critically is good. I see plenty of articles on PerC that don't make sense to me. The reason I do keep referring back to the concept of loops (and do suspect I may be in one) is because it's always made intuitive sense to me. I agree with delphi367 here:



delphi367 said:


> Actually, that person wasn't the first to postulate the idea. They're just the most well-known around here. Many people have come up with this idea on their own, it's not like they're all just copying a single source. I had a very similar idea before people ever started calling it a loop.


I didn't come up with the idea on my own, but when I found it it was a bit of a "lightbulb moment." It helped me understand how certain types can externally resemble each other, and how types can look different from the stereotype. I think the concept adds a certain dimension to the types, because I don't see "loops" as static states, but as patterns that every person of the type will have some tendency to fall in. A person with a great tendency to fall into them might be described as "in a loop."

It's helped me type some people who I couldn't make sense of, because externally they didn't look like anything normal to me. The thing with typing people by loops is that their type almost always becomes clear to me, if only by looking at the inferior function, and I start to understand the type more holistically. So it is often a good starting point for me with typing.

On another note, @Word Dispenser, I'd really appreciate your input on my socionics type, too. (Here or in my other thread.) Do you think I'm IEI?


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

spiderfrommars said:


> If I'm understanding you right, I think this pretty much is the theory of how dominant-tertiary loops work. It seems like these might just be different ways of saying the same thing. The only real point of contention seems to be the question of whether using two intro/extraverted functions is unhealthy or not.
> 
> I will say that I wouldn't consider myself (or another person) "unhealthy" simply because I realized I (they) exhibited two introverted functions highest, or two extraverted functions. The reason I can easily believe I may be in a loop is because I already know I am unhealthy.
> 
> ...


Nothing sticks out yet that would allow me to type you properly at this time. LII is actually more than possible, the more I'm reading your posts.

I won't stick any labels on you just yet, though.

I think you should consider: Socionics Dichotomies

Look at all of the dichotomies, except what might be the most obvious to you, and list out your dichotomies. You can do that here, or somewhere else, if you wish.

I found this is the way I was able to finally decide on ILE for almost certainty.


----------



## athenian200 (Oct 13, 2008)

spiderfrommars said:


> I didn't come up with the idea on my own, but when I found it it was a bit of a "lightbulb moment." It helped me understand how certain types can externally resemble each other, and how types can look different from the stereotype. I think the concept adds a certain dimension to the types, because I don't see "loops" as static states, but as patterns that every person of the type will have some tendency to fall in. A person with a great tendency to fall into them might be described as "in a loop."
> 
> It's helped me type some people who I couldn't make sense of, because externally they didn't look like anything normal to me. The thing with typing people by loops is that their type almost always becomes clear to me, if only by looking at the inferior function, and I start to understand the type more holistically. So it is often a good starting point for me with typing.


Yeah, that's how I think of it as well. Something that helps me see type more holistically. I was an unusual case myself... someone wrote the following about me, way back in 2007 before anyone had a theory of loops:



> To me it sounds like you aren't using any developed extraverted function (except for maybe Fe). It sounds like you are using Si or Ni to perceive a situation and then it is being processed by Ti which spits the info back at Si/Ni and *you are basically caught in one big loop in your head. *Your only possible extraverted function is Fe, but if you are caught in a situation that violates etiquette or protocol then you are stuck.
> 
> Your mind seems to work a lot like a computer. Your data is internal (Si or Ni) and your processing is internal (Ti) and you have syntax and other rules that you must logically follow (Fe working with Ti). But a computer doesn't have any perception (Se or Ne) of the outside world, so often times it will spit back an error that will seem obvious to a user. Also it has no judgments about the outside world (Te) other than the program rules that the programmer allowed it to follow (Fe).


Note that this context explains why it's called a loop. It's a concept from computer programing, it describes what happens when a program develops issues and keeps feeding back on itself, never terminating or finishing. Before it was popularized, people with background in programming often used this analogy to describe a similar idea.




> On another note, @Word Dispenser, I'd really appreciate your input on my socionics type, too. (Here or in my other thread.) Do you think I'm IEI?


I actually can't get anyone to type me in Socionics, either. There don't seem to be many here who specialize in that system at all. The few times I HAVE managed to get myself typed, people come to the conclusion that I'm Alpha or Delta, probably LII or EII. They can never tell which.

I honestly think there's just not enough English-language Socionics information, or enough interested parties, for anyone to actually type themselves in Socionics. We'll probably have to learn Russian if we want to be typed reliably in it, LOL.


----------



## spiderfrommars (Feb 22, 2012)

Word Dispenser said:


> Look at all of the dichotomies, except what might be the most obvious to you, and list out your dichotomies. You can do that here, or somewhere else, if you wish.


I've been thinking a lot about the dichotomies recently. It's very difficult to decide on many of them, because they seem to have some contradictions. (By which I mean, I will identify with one side on way X, and one side in way Y.) 

The ones I feel almost sure about are Result-oriented, Introverted and Dynamic. I also think I am probably Asking and Yielding. Maybe Tactical? Not super convinced I am totally clear on Tactical/Strategic, but on a gut level I want to say Tactical.

When I showed these dichotomies to my best friend, he was convinced I am Farsighted, but I'm not positive that's so. I don't like to think about the future, at least not in a mundane sense--making plans and stuff. I can see his point, though. When people are trying something, I feel like I can tell when it's not gonna work. I don't like to try something "just to try" when it's failed in the past. As in "The internet's not connecting? Oh, well, why don't you just try turning off your computer and see if that helps?" Because it won't. I've done this before. I liked the example on the wikisocion page of "I know this button won't work; I have the same remote." "Oh, but just let me try it!!!" Actually I have that conversation with randomshoes a lot.

So...I guess that means I am probably Farsighted, right? Can you be Farsighted if you don't like to make plans?


----------



## spiderfrommars (Feb 22, 2012)

delphi367 said:


> Yeah, that's how I think of it as well. Something that helps me see type more holistically. I was an unusual case myself... someone wrote the following about me, way back in 2007 before anyone had a theory of loops:


Interesting! I like this programming analogy. Especially with introverts, the image of just sitting there with ideas endlessly spitting back and forth in your head, getting built up and torn down but never actually recieving external input to stop them from going to the crazy place...it makes sense.



> I actually can't get anyone to type me in Socionics, either. There don't seem to be many here who specialize in that system at all. The few times I HAVE managed to get myself typed, people come to the conclusion that I'm Alpha or Delta, probably LII or EII. They can never tell which.


Haha! Yeah, it's a really small group of people. What's weird is socionics really does click for me with some specific people--I know their type almost immediately and it fits way better than MBTI equivilant (or any other MBTI type). But I don't feel like I understand it overall yet, and I'm having a lot of trouble learning because so few people do the system. And because I can't even begin to know what my type is. I know my D&D character is an obvious SLE, I know her love interest is an obvious ILI, but who knows what I am? LSE? IEE? Sure! LOL. And when I can't type myself in a system, I feel like I'm on shaky ground.


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

spiderfrommars said:


> As I was reading, I thought more about my understanding of Fe and Fi, though. It seems like Fi valuing types really want to open up, right? To that special someone (especially IxTJ types). So, they are more emotionally closed off, but paradoxically want to be more open and share all their...is emotions the right word? Their self with someone else. Am I right in this understanding? It seemed to show up a lot in the descriptions.
> 
> And that was kind of my problem in the first place.
> 
> ...


Hmmm... When discussing functions, I forget to emphasize at times that emotions, emotional processing, and emotional expression, aren't necessarily indicative of ethical cognition alone. (At least, this is what I think.)

But, in general-- Fi-users seem to be more attached to their views. Their external logical understanding becomes internalized, and Fi finds a place for it. Even in lower-order Fi users, like IxTJs and even ExTJs (to a lesser extent). 

It may make a great deal of sense for you to be IEI, INFp_, _because you naturally see ethics separated from thought, but not the other way around. With Fi, it appears to be all-inclusive.

Obviously, I wouldn't have as much emphasis on emotions and emotional understanding as an ENTp, ILE, but INFp IEIs are well-known for emotional exploration.


----------

