# Types that don't like MBTI typeology



## Recon777 (May 24, 2013)

I'm thinking ESFJs really don't seem to like this stuff. Has anyone noticed that certain types really get into the study of MBTI and other types really don't?

If you could, what would you guess are the rankings of most interested and least interested in MBTI - per type?

I'm guessing INTJs are near the top of the list. After all, we're what 2% of the population and clearly a LOT more than 2% of the population in this forum.

I know its no definite indication, but here are the number of topics in each type's section of this forum, sorted by quantity.


INTP8060ENFP6463INTJ5533ENTP4848ISTP2622ENFJ2499ISTJ2371ISFP2141ENTJ1979ISFJ1712ESTP1071INFP732ESFJ702ESFP694ESTJ629INFJ581

Interestingly, SJs make up 45% of the human population, but only 13% of the forum posts. INTJs by themselves also have 13% of the forum posts.

I was genuinely surprised to see INFJ in last place. Odd, that. This type loves to discover what makes people tick.


----------



## I Kant (Jan 19, 2013)

I think some individuals with types with heavy reliance on introverted rational functions, or heavy reliance on sensing.

The first because some of them react to the perceived threat of systematized exposure (and thus diminishing personal dignity and freedom) with an attitude akin to "I'm a special snowflake who can't be figured out because people cannot rationally comprehend every aspect of the objective world in perfect detail simultaneously and this is the only thing that matters in this issue like absolute certainty and other things that can actually exist! Fight the system!"

The second because MBTI may seem like a fad to them if only a few randoms are talking about this wonder theory.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

The most significant MBTI factor associated with a lack of interest in personality types — and it isn't even a close call — is an S preference. Extraversion is a relatively distant runner-up.

June 2013 membership stats for PersonalityCafe:

INFP	3723 — 21%
INFJ	2580 — 15%
INTP	2228 — 13%
INTJ	1876 — 11%
ENFP	1352 — 8%
ENTP	1112 — 6%
ENFJ	514 — 3%
ISTP	527 — 3%
ISFP	506 — 3%
ISTJ	437 — 2%
ENTJ	401 — 2%
ISFJ	314 — 2%
ESTP	159 — 1%
ESFJ	102 — 1%
ESFP	117 — 1%
ESTJ	97 — 1%

August 2012 membership stats for TypologyCentral:

INTP 17%
INFP 17%
INFJ 16%
INTJ 12%
ENFP 10%
ENTP 8%
ISTP 4%
ENFJ 3%
ENTJ 3%
ISFP 3%
ISTJ 2%
ISFJ 1%
ESTP 1%
ESFP 1%
ESTJ 1%
ESFJ 1%


----------



## athenian200 (Oct 13, 2008)

I knew an ISTP girl once that was interested at first, but came to hate it. She got upset with this weird idea that people are individuals and couldn't stand being labeled or categorized. It apparently freaked her out too much that someone might understand her or be able to predict her, and she couldn't have that.

Let's just say she managed to get to me so badly, that I've come to resent anyone who stubbornly thinks of themselves as an individual and can't respect their connection to humanity as a whole, even in a small way.

Irony is, she apparently insisted on nicknaming all her friends after elements on the periodic table... so what, just because it isn't descriptive to anyone but you, that makes it better?


----------



## WinterFox (Sep 19, 2013)

reckful said:


> The most significant MBTI factor associated with a lack of interest in personality types — and it isn't even a close call — is an S preference. Extraversion is a relatively distant runner-up.
> 
> June 2013 membership stats for PersonalityCafe:
> 
> ...



This is interesting, I was looking at the stats results for both TypologyCentral and PersonalityCafe and I just noticed that INxx are always ranked on the top while ESxx are always ranked on the bottom. So from these stats results, we can conclude that INxx types tend to like MBTI typeology the most while ESxx types tend to distrust MBTI typeology the most.


----------



## square0 (Jan 1, 2014)

delphi367 said:


> I knew an ISTP girl once that was interested at first, but came to hate it. She got upset with this weird idea that people are individuals and couldn't stand being labeled or categorized. It apparently freaked her out too much that someone might understand her or be able to predict her, and she couldn't have that.
> 
> Let's just say she managed to get to me so badly, that I've come to resent anyone who stubbornly thinks of themselves as an individual and can't respect their connection to humanity as a whole, even in a small way.
> 
> Irony is, she apparently insisted on nicknaming all her friends after elements on the periodic table... so what, just because it isn't descriptive to anyone but you, that makes it better?


Reminds me of me, which--given what I'm about to say--is mildly ironic.

I believe labels and categorizations are prone to inciting misconceptions, and are generally best avoided. That's not that I have anything wrong with this system inherently, just the way I believe most people are going to end up using it.

I know it's an intelligent system that promotes understanding, and on a personal level I have no problem with that, but I see so much potential for segregation and rejection where labels are concerned.


----------



## I Kant (Jan 19, 2013)

WinterFox said:


> So from these stats results, we can conclude that INxx types tend to like MBTI typeology the most while ESxx types tend to distrust MBTI typeology the most.


And if someone likes typology but has better things to do than hang around internet forums?


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

WinterFox said:


> This is interesting, I was looking at the stats results for both TypologyCentral and PersonalityCafe and I just noticed that INxx are always ranked on the top while ESxx are always ranked on the bottom. So from these stats results, we can conclude that INxx types tend to like MBTI typeology the most while ESxx types tend to distrust MBTI typeology the most.


Really what we can deduce from this is that those types are the most and least likely to enjoy discussing typology at length on an internet forum. 

Rather, that those are the type labels that people who like discussing typology on an internet forum most/least tend to apply to themselves. 

I think a greater ratio of S (and E) types are interested in typology, but aren't huge on chatting about it on a forum. 

I know several ESFJs who just LOVE typology, and apply it in their lives all the time. They just wouldn't come on a forum to talk about it. The discussions here are not intriguing to them probably because they aren't seen as useful. Every ESFJ I've introduced typology to has just thought it was great, and many went out, bought a book, and got into it... many have stuck with it.

All that being said, I'd agree that ESxx is probably are indeed the least interested, with ESFJ (in my experience) being the most likely to get into it of that group. Of course, INxx would also be the most likely to be interested... I think all that should be pretty obvious. I am sure the skew is a stark one. However, given the sheer ratio of S to N, that skew would have to be incredible to produce the numbers that have been offered. I am sure that a somewhat less stark spread is probably the ultimately accurate one, but still with a strong N leaning.

----

But, it seems the question @_Recon777_ is asking is which types don't LIKE it. We can read that as 'are not interested in it' or those, regardless of interest, who judge it as bad for some reason. 

On that subject, I'd say that Ni and Se types are the most likely to NOT LIKE typology. I think that this comes from Se aversion to labels, and the intensely high standards of Ni. They are not drawn to labels, and not inclined to easily induct new ways of viewing the world. I have found that especially the Te and Fi variety (SFP and NTJ) are the most likely to voice their dislike of typology. But, really, and SP and NJ is the most likely to see it as somehow negative. This is, of course, of the group interested enough in typology to have a strong opinion about it. 

That's just my two cents on that. Take it with a grain of salt.


----------



## Recon777 (May 24, 2013)

Um... well I have Ni, Te, Fi and Se and I like it. So I dunno. A lot of INTJs seem to really get into this, so I'm not so sure about your theory there.

As for my original question, I was thinking about how this friend of mine took near-offense at the idea that I was labeling people in what she referred to as a horoscope level manner. I thought that was extremely short sighted. She claimed to test as an ENFJ and I figured she was right. But now I think she's very likely an ESFJ, as sooooo many things which annoy me about that type seem to manifest in our discussions. I was thinking about how ESFJs are so.. um, well, resistant to anything theoretical or abstract or cerebral or well anything at all that's not shallow and practical, that maybe there was some kind of consistency to certain types not liking the study of MBTI.


----------



## Tonality (Jan 31, 2012)

I think it's interesting that the INFJs make up such a significant segment yet have so few posts in their forum.

It could be that we don't post often. I've been here a while and have only managed 70-some posts. It could also be that the sub-forum has several central topics where most INFJs post/read. There's a venting thread, a relationship thread, etc. I rarely see a new relationship thread started by an INFJ when they can just post in the stickied thread.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

WinterFox said:


> This is interesting, I was looking at the stats results for both TypologyCentral and PersonalityCafe and I just noticed that INxx are always ranked on the top while ESxx are always ranked on the bottom. So from these stats results, we can conclude that INxx types tend to like MBTI typeology the most while ESxx types tend to distrust MBTI typeology the most.


I don't think the main factor is that ESs "distrust" the MBTI. Consistent with boatloads of statistics on which types tend to study psychology and/or end up choosing psychology-related occupations, I think ESs, on average, are just significantly less interested in the subject of "personality."



Recon777 said:


> As for my original question, I was thinking about how this friend of mine took near-offense at the idea that I was labeling people in what she referred to as a horoscope level manner. I thought that was extremely short sighted. She claimed to test as an ENFJ and I figured she was right. But now I think she's very likely an ESFJ, as sooooo many things which annoy me about that type seem to manifest in our discussions.


My sense is that, if you're talking about somebody who's interested in psychology/personality but whose objection to the MBTI — quite possibly based on a superficial familiarity with it — is that it "puts people in boxes," and/or who'll tell you that everybody can become whatever they like (personality-wise), and/or that the most interesting things about most people are the things that make them _unique individuals_, and so on and so forth, it's actually reasonably likely that you're dealing with an NF.


----------



## Recon777 (May 24, 2013)

That doesn't sound like her. Its more that she didn't like the idea of putting someone in a "box" of defined traits. To stereotype someone seemed to offend her, mostly because she viewed MBTI as a "horoscope" type of thing, where people write descriptions that can really apply to anyone. This is rather short sighted since the traits listed by MBTI are quite distinct and not ambiguous like horoscopes at all. Its also highly accurate and consistent. But she wouldn't hear any of my logic (which is something I simply can't tolerate).

She isn't really interested in psychology at all. She says her greatest desire is to help people reach their highest potential. But also to lead a simple family life at some point. We share almost no common interests, except our faith and desire to have a family. Really, almost every "thing" I've brought up as an interest, she's said that it does not interest her at all. She seems to enjoy taking long walks, and just "living life" without "doing" anything really, or especially talking about ideas. I don't see much Ni at all in there, so despite her saying she's an ENFJ I am really thinking ESFJ now. Some of the questionnaire traits probably are common to both types. I'd say she's definitely Fe-dominant. That by itself makes me uncomfortable. But having Si as auxiliary definitely crosses the line. We've had some crazy irrational arguments about the dumbest petty things. That boggles my mind. I simply can't understand it. My lack of experience with any real ENFJ caused me to not have anything to compare her to, so for most of the year I didn't question it. But now looking back at the arguments we've had, I really don't see Ni in there. One of the first clues I had that something was fairly off about the claim of ENFJ is that she has a degree in economics and experience as a tax accountant. What ENFJ would do this? She said she was quite satisfied in the career of accounting/bookkeeping. Wow ok. I suggested maybe she'd be happier in a field where she was able to help people directly. She thought that would be ok - either way. I don't see much for ambition there. ENFJs usually have a "cause" if I recall. So from the clues I have so far, I'm still betting on ESFJ.


----------



## WinterFox (Sep 19, 2013)

Recon777 said:


> That doesn't sound like her. Its more that she didn't like the idea of putting someone in a "box" of defined traits. To stereotype someone seemed to offend her, mostly because she viewed MBTI as a "horoscope" type of thing, where people write descriptions that can really apply to anyone. This is rather short sighted since the traits listed by MBTI are quite distinct and not ambiguous like horoscopes at all. Its also highly accurate and consistent. But she wouldn't hear any of my logic (which is something I simply can't tolerate).
> 
> She isn't really interested in psychology at all. She says her greatest desire is to help people reach their highest potential. But also to lead a simple family life at some point. We share almost no common interests, except our faith and desire to have a family. Really, almost every "thing" I've brought up as an interest, she's said that it does not interest her at all. She seems to enjoy taking long walks, and just "living life" without "doing" anything really, or especially talking about ideas. I don't see much Ni at all in there, so despite her saying she's an ENFJ I am really thinking ESFJ now. Some of the questionnaire traits probably are common to both types. I'd say she's definitely Fe-dominant. That by itself makes me uncomfortable. But having Si as auxiliary definitely crosses the line. We've had some crazy irrational arguments about the dumbest petty things. That boggles my mind. I simply can't understand it. My lack of experience with any real ENFJ caused me to not have anything to compare her to, so for most of the year I didn't question it. But now looking back at the arguments we've had, I really don't see Ni in there. One of the first clues I had that something was fairly off about the claim of ENFJ is that she has a degree in economics and experience as a tax accountant. What ENFJ would do this? She said she was quite satisfied in the career of accounting/bookkeeping. Wow ok. I suggested maybe she'd be happier in a field where she was able to help people directly. She thought that would be ok - either way. I don't see much for ambition there. ENFJs usually have a "cause" if I recall. So from the clues I have so far, I'm still betting on ESFJ.



Lol she does sound like an ESFJ, or possibly ISFJ.
By the way, I happened to know a few ENFJs in real life. One of the ENFJs actually played with tarot cards and she believes in fortune telling etc. She is very humanitarian and she believes in things like world peace. She would often do volunteering work in her spare time, and she has a large circle of friends. Then another one likes analyzing people's body language, she would always try to figure out who like who just by observing their body language, she has a deep curiosity toward people to the extent that she will google me up on the internet just to look for more information about me (you can imagine how shocked I am when she told me that she found my personal blog by googling me, I didn't expect her that she will go google me up), and in terms of conversations she is very deep and I can easily discuss with her spiritual things like past lives and reincarnation (she can talk a lot about this topic) 
Oh and there was once when she told me that she has a neighbor who knows how to cast black magic on people. 
ENFJs can be very dark at times lol. That Ni and Fe combination in a person can make a person very dark. 
If you want to spot an ENFJ, just observe the contents they talk about in their conversations.
They can talk about extremely dark things at times.
If she lack this darkness in her, then she probably isn't ENFJ.


----------



## Sabrah (Aug 6, 2013)

I do not think INTJs, INFPS, INFJs, INTPs, ENFPs or any other of those "rare" types are really rare. I think they may seem rare because they are "less out there" than other types but that is about it. 

As for types least interested in MBTI - the population on this forum makes it pretty self evident.


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

I'd say ESTJs and ESFJs.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Tonality said:


> I think it's interesting that the INFJs make up such a significant segment yet have so few posts in their forum.
> 
> It could be that we don't post often. I've been here a while and have only managed 70-some posts. It could also be that the sub-forum has several central topics where most INFJs post/read. There's a venting thread, a relationship thread, etc. I rarely see a new relationship thread started by an INFJ when they can just post in the stickied thread.


I've noticed most of the new topics posted on the ESTP forum aren't ESTP's posting. Usually people asking us how to deal with ESTP's. So odd.


----------



## Recon777 (May 24, 2013)

WinterFox said:


> Lol she does sound like an ESFJ, or possibly ISFJ.
> By the way, I happened to know a few ENFJs in real life. One of the ENFJs actually played with tarot cards and she believes in fortune telling etc. She is very humanitarian and she believes in things like world peace. She would often do volunteering work in her spare time, and she has a large circle of friends. Then another one likes analyzing people's body language, she would always try to figure out who like who just by observing their body language, she has a deep curiosity toward people to the extent that she will google me up on the internet just to look for more information about me (you can imagine how shocked I am when she told me that she found my personal blog by googling me, I didn't expect her that she will go google me up), and in terms of conversations she is very deep and I can easily discuss with her spiritual things like past lives and reincarnation (she can talk a lot about this topic)
> Oh and there was once when she told me that she has a neighbor who knows how to cast black magic on people.
> ENFJs can be very dark at times lol. That Ni and Fe combination in a person can make a person very dark.
> ...


Ah, well darkness, etc is a lot more to do with spiritual state combined with personality than just personality. Being Christians, I wouldn't expect an ENFJ to have any darkness in there but true love and caring for fellow human beings. 

But I think the lack of curiosity and complete lack of Ni connection with her has really tipped me off that she's not likely an ENFJ. If she was an ENFJ, our Ni should have linked up somehow. Yeah she started the relationship by asking me some curious analytical questions about my dating profile. She's definitely got the ability to spot a contradiction. I wouldn't call her "dumb" by any means. She's just soooo irrational when we get into disagreements. And I was surprised how often I heard the words "I wont" when talking about the future. Sometimes the "I won't" statements didn't even follow through. Like she once told me that she would not stick around for a long time dating only online, and wanted to meet in person quickly. Well, it ended up not working that way and several of our attempts to meet in person fell through. Yet she carried on as if she never said that statement. Also we talked for a long time about her coming to Australia to visit, and then later it was like she expected all along that I would be going to Europe where she lived to visit her first! Well my life is hugely complicated with my family court battle going on, and the legal matters have me very tied down. And yet she said she thought the man needs to be the one to go visit the woman. She complained about how if she came to visit and we liked each other, that she would also have to fly again to come out for courtship (if we decided to pursue it). She did not like the idea of being the only one doing the flying. I thought this was rather petty considering the fact that her life is rather simple at the moment and mine is complex, and it would be 100x more difficult for me to fly than for her. Yet she made a huge deal of it and kept vacillating on whether she was coming to see me or vice versa. The bizarre arguments and difficulties were very frustrating for me, as it seemed to be like pulling teeth to get any actual plans made with her.

Further oddities revolved around the difficulty in meeting in person. Like she found tickets fairly cheap if she came out on Christmas day. I asked her a simple question about if she's still interested in a relationship since we seem to have so many arguments. She said "What arguments?" She honestly doesn't view our arguments as arguments. But she took my statement as me disagreeing to have her come out and then from that point said we could not agree on the visit. Well I told her literally that I thought the timing would be just fine. There are so many things that make me think she's speaking another language or from another planet or something, I just can't figure it out. A lot of times in our skype conversations she would quote things we said in the past during our arguments, to "prove" her point. She would put an amazing amount of effort into digging up quotes. Even when I said it was not a big deal and we should just move on, she'd still quote mine from our chat history. That seemed a bit unstable and obsessive to me. But I just figured this is one thing ENFJs do. Maybe not.

Also some things I tried walking her through took absolutely forever. Like setting up btsync so we could share some files. btsync is idiot proof and sets up in one minute with the wizard. It took me over an HOUR to walk her through it. One time she got all quiet and I asked what she was doing. She was reading the friggin LICENSE AGREEMENT!! Seriously?! Who does that? Turns out she's never installed software in her life. Was worried about all the stuff she's agreeing to legally if she continued. <facepalm>

Oh, and she does do volunteer work every week. And is extremely generous and giving and caring. And she supported me through one of the toughest crises in my life for many months. She's not a bad person by any means and I've been VERY torn on whether I should pursue her for a real relationship or not. Some times I was absolutely convinced I should marry her. Other times it was quite the opposite. I was SO frustrated by my own ambivalence about her, that I just could not figure out what to do.


----------



## Watercolourful (Jan 12, 2013)

My ESFJ sister /loves/ it. She's just shy about posting on the forums because she doesn't think she knows enough to offer anything useful.

My (probably ISTP) friend hates it, though. ("WHY ARE YOU CATEGORIZING YOURSELF????")


----------



## Raawx (Oct 9, 2013)

WinterFox said:


> This is interesting, I was looking at the stats results for both TypologyCentral and PersonalityCafe and I just noticed that INxx are always ranked on the top while ESxx are always ranked on the bottom. So from these stats results, we can conclude that INxx types tend to like MBTI typeology the most while ESxx types tend to distrust MBTI typeology the most.


I wouldn't say distrust, more so ES's are disinterested to the point where they don't derive pleasure from joining and talking on forums.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

monemi said:


> I've noticed most of the new topics posted on the ESTP forum aren't ESTP's posting. Usually people asking us how to deal with ESTP's. So odd.


Evidence that ESTPs are hard to deal with??

*ducks*


----------

