# ENTJ; ESFP; ISTP; What do you think?



## chwoey (Mar 29, 2012)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/edgarandron/8550316362/in/explore-2013-03-11

That is all for now, I've ended up a little inebriated. But, I think this video should give a pretty good impression of my type? I think I was pretty honest and natural.
@_LeaT_ @_Einstein_ @Acerbusvenator
:sad:


----------



## Einstein (Aug 10, 2011)

chwoey said:


> "Hey...there are cats in that house!" (Blanche, the White Squirrel 11 March 2013) 3335b 90 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
> 
> That is all for now, I've ended up a little inebriated. But, I think this video should give a pretty good impression of my type? I think I was pretty honest and natural.
> @_LeaT_ @_Einstein_ @Acerbusvenator
> :sad:


Awesome video 

I definitely think you're an ENTJ. The way you speak even reminds my of an ENTJ friend of mine. And the way you said that you feel really energized after coming home from work at 11pm and being really engaged during class also indicates ENTJ. Reminds me of myself too.

I can see how your hyperness and enthusiasm could come of as a bit ENFP-ish, but your thought processes seem much more logical than "feely" and you don't have the same goofiness or randomness that an ENFP does. And the way you described your work and "bossiness" certainly points to Te.

Hope this helps


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Einstein said:


> Awesome video
> 
> I definitely think you're an ENTJ. The way you speak even reminds my of an ENTJ friend of mine. And the way you said that you feel really energized after coming home from work at 11pm and being really engaged during class also indicates ENTJ. Reminds me of myself too.
> 
> ...


LOL, I disagree with this analysis, as most of all, what I see is enneagram 3 coming across like Te dominance. I'm a 5 too so I'm very logical even though I'm most likely more of an INFP than INTP. An enneagram 3 ENFP is not going to come across as a hyper and stereotype 7. I think many people make this mistake. 

She's snarky and sarcastic as I am. I think I'm more willing to guess EII-Ne at this point. A lot of what she said was something I could say. I'm fairly sure I'm not an ENTJ. In terms of VI, EII-Ne vaguely fits too in my opinion.


----------



## StephMC (Jan 25, 2011)

*ESTP, 9w8.* I'm pretty confidant about this.

I'm gonna be honest, I was really confused after your first post. I thought I saw a lot of Ti, Se, inferior Fe in you before in your other posts, and my first thought was "ISTP." Now, I think I was mistaking your E9 tendencies with inferior Fe. It's easy for me to mistake E9 type tendencies with inferior Fe because I experience both very personally. After reading your OP here, it didn't sound ISTP anymore. In fact, I saw almost anything but ISTP, and started thinking you were right that you may be an NTJ, even though something just wasn't quite lining up with the full picture. 

After watching your video, however, I'm pretty convinced you're an ESTP. I didn't guess this when I read your original post, because I really was convinced you were not an ISTP, and I can sometimes forget how different ISTPs and ESTPs can be.

It seemed fairly apparent you were displaying some sort of extraverted function in your video right off the bat. Which? I couldn't tell at first. All I could see is you weren't withdrawing into yourself in quite the same way an introverted dominant person would when really trying to answer a question accurately. You seemed more focused on the external than the internal.

Then, you alluded to having an introverted judging function towards the end (to me, at least). My impression of introverted judging functions are that they sometimes have difficulty explaining themselves, and often appear as if they're stumbling over their words trying to get their reasoning across. Fe and Te pulls their reasoning externally, so it's a lot less difficult for them to convey their reasoning back to where it came from: the external -- they sometimes appear to not think much about whether or not it makes sense, even if it _doesn't_ make sense. The internal reasoning is much more difficult to emit into the external. Ti in particular can really stumble over their words because trying to get _just_ the right meaning across with _just_ the right words holds a high value. 

So, extraverted perceiver dom, introverted judger aux. That leaves ENTP, ENFP, ESTP, and ESFP. But I still thought you were onto something when you said you thought you were an ENTJ. So here's the thing. There's a particular type of ESTP that can be easily mistaken as an ENTJ, yet there's just a few key things that are difficult for me to explain that make them very unlikely to be an NTJ, really. That particular type of ESTP can be energized by getting things done, kicking ass, and taking names. To me, there's something about Se + Ti that can come across as Te when Se is overwhelmingly dominant. You'll notice younger ESTPs can come across this way, since Ti is likely less developed and/or tertiary Fe is nearly absent, and this may be why you said you felt like you were a more confident, strong-willed adolescent. So my guess is, this changed pretty much immediately when either Ti started kicking in more or Fe started having a presence. 

I have a whole lot of thoughts about some other really interesting things you said. Let me know if you'd like to hear more reasoning, but I'm going to stop now since I already got a little carried away roud:

Disclaimer: My approach to typing can be a little different sometimes -- it is a pretty varying mix of observations and logic, so take some of my logic here with a grain of salt. I think @LeaT was on to something when he said E9s have a tendency to ascribe behavior to traits, so my logic may be built on some incorrectly ascribed behavior, and therefore not entirely stable.


----------



## chwoey (Mar 29, 2012)

StephMC said:


> *ESTP, 9w8.* I'm pretty confidant about this.
> 
> I'm gonna be honest, I was really confused after your first post. I thought I saw a lot of Ti, Se, inferior Fe in you before in your other posts, and my first thought was "ISTP." Now, I think I was mistaking your E9 tendencies with inferior Fe. It's easy for me to mistake E9 type tendencies with inferior Fe because I experience both very personally. After reading your OP here, it didn't sound ISTP anymore. In fact, I saw almost anything but ISTP, and started thinking you were right that you may be an NTJ, even though something just wasn't quite lining up with the full picture.
> 
> ...


I promise i will eventually get to replying to the posts in a more proper manner, but I simply don't have my thoughts neatly collected about what has been said thus far in this thread. I'm still digesting this post, but at the end you offered me more thoughts.

I DEFINITELY WOULD LIKE MORE OF YOUR THOUGHTS! That goes to all of you! The more information I receive the more I have to think about and run through my understandings.


----------



## Ellis Bell (Mar 16, 2012)

chwoey said:


> "Hey...there are cats in that house!" (Blanche, the White Squirrel 11 March 2013) 3335b 90 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
> 
> That is all for now, I've ended up a little inebriated. But, I think this video should give a pretty good impression of my type? I think I was pretty honest and natural.
> @_LeaT_ @_Einstein_ @Acerbusvenator
> :sad:


I have to say, I rarely sit all the way through one of these videos, but I enjoyed this. I can definitely see where @StephMC gets Se dominance; you say at one point that you became very introverted socially, which I think might be why you thought you were an ISTP for a while.


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

Take the following with a grain of salt, please. I enjoyed your video and think you sound like a nice person. I usually am muscling through videos—yours was unusually engaging. 

===========================

Shallow† critical observations/judgment of everything and everything times 1000. 'Te' ad infinitum et ultra. The car scenario is a great example of this.

Strong Se as well... obviously, not as visible but I think in a stronger position. 

Fi is boiling beneath the surface, being held down by Te. However, I do not believe that Te is the higher function. I rather think Fi is the more central and definitive to you. (A little after 10 minutes, 10:15? You talk of values and lay down the Fi but quickly revert to Te observation and pulpit pounding (literally) decisiveness). 

So, if I were going by the rules here... I might be forced to jack up your Ni and say xNTJ to justify the strong Te, boiling Fi, and Se. ENTJ, presumably. However, I don't see almost any Ni... I see it as a strongly mitigated influence that you are not engaging on any level, really.

I rather believe that you are an ESFP who is in a cognitive loop. The loop is simply this: the psyche pushes Fi into subconscious (lower position, in a sense) due to some crisis... usually a psychological survival crisis that Fi could not solve. That or it's overwhelming you. Te pushes it aside takes over the role Fi should be filling, creating an extraverted loop. Critical observation + Action/engaging/reperceiving + Critical observation + Action/engaging/reperceiving + Critical observation + Action/engaging/reperceiving + Critical observation + Action/engaging/reperceiving. Endlessly. Now, the fact that Te is handling Fi's job is not a sign of a loop, it's a sign of a Te! You can tell it's a loop mostly because the person doesn't put Te up against Pi, rather Pe. The result of THAT is a loop.

ENTJ can do this too, and I said that was still possible... However, I very much envision Fi licking it's wounds behind Te... rather than Ni behind Se. I am not certain I can strongly argue this distinction without putting a bit more contemplation into it but I feel that this is the case. I feel as if you WOULD be an Fi if you thought for a moment it could work or that it was safe. 

17:43 - 19:04ish just absolutely nails this. 

Regardless of the theorycraft... you are Se/Te and their pairs are getting the shaft - at least in this video. I vote ESFP but still leave ENTJ for whatever consideration it is due.

NOT an ESTP. I many would see Se... see that you are a T, obviously, and are left with no other choice. The T you are using is, to me, clearly Te. I could be wrong but I don't think I am. 

Not ENFP either because your loop didn't generate endless new abstract conceptual perspectives from your observation. I've seen it, and it's not what you are doing. Also, definitely using strong Se and not Ne. Not Ne at all. 

† Your observations aren't bad or stupid at all. I rather enjoyed your thoughts, but they do avoid rumination (probably at all costs, due to the (edit) abyssal or 'rut' feeling of it. Rather than deepen your observations, you jump to a new Se perspective and make another judgment.


----------



## StephMC (Jan 25, 2011)

@arkigos could be right. All I'm really set on is Pe dom, Ji aux, and very likely not Ne dom. So Se + Fi or Ti. I still believe a "typical" ESTP is the most likely to be mistaken for an ENTJ than a typical ESFP, ENTP, or ENFP, but that (along with a few other things) is a pretty soft reason. After all, you allude to feeling not like your normal or true self right now. And truth be told, I don't know many ESFPs, especially ones with more dominating Te.


----------



## voicetrocity (Mar 31, 2012)

I'm really glad @arkigos stopped by and offered some good analysis here. It's funny because we both seem to have the same diagnosis of being ESFP's with high Te. Even if you can't see it, what he said about Fi being pushed into the subconscious made a heck of a lot of sense to me and... blah. 

I really don't have much more to add, other than we should talk. In all seriousness; even if I'm not much of a conversation carrier, I'm going to find a way to make it work, because I *know* we have a heck of a lot to talk about.


----------



## chwoey (Mar 29, 2012)

arkigos said:


> Take the following with a grain of salt, please. I enjoyed your video and think you sound like a nice person. I usually am muscling through videos—yours was unusually engaging.
> 
> ===========================
> 
> ...


Very interesting, gave me something to think about. But, I feel like you were off base. The big problem with this analysis was that you made the conclusion based only on my video, and I'm not the most comfortable recording a video. I can understand how I look like I have absolutely no use of Ni, but when you're recording a video it seems inappropriate to be sitting there digging within myself. 

I think it is understandable for someone to be using their extroverted functions a lot when they are doing such an extroverted activity. Trust me, I'm not used to talking so much for so long. I'm extremely introverted when in public, and even around others I am often found exploring the contours of my mind rather than interacting with them. 

One of the big problems I have with this theory is, that based on what I've learned, I would have either had to JUST started developing my Te, or I have been unhealthy since (pretty much) birth. I suppose, if being bipolar is something that can develop as a small child then it could make sense that I've always been extremely fucked up and I suppressed my aux function. Anyone who knows me can look at this article
http://personalitycafe.com/entj-articles/15174-development-entj-children.html
and quickly see that I was exactly the same as a child. Not to say that I am an entj because I relate so strongly to a single article, but I'd draw from it that it doesn't (to me) sound like how I would imagine a ESFP child. 

But, to go against the whole Te-Se loop theory, I've actually been /too/ introverted. I feel as if I have indulged and hidden away in the introverted aspects of my personality, holding my harsh Te down, and rather indulging in my Ni and Fi. Last year I had deeply believed that I was an ISFP, but after lots of introspection, I really realized that in such an unhealthy state I may feel like I am living based off my feelings and emotions but when I look at my thought patterns when I am truly at my happiest and healthiest there is no trace of emotions or feelings. I would assume that a Te-Se loop would show up with someone always being more extroverted then normal, and ignoring their internal world; while I am quite the opposite. I just let my extroverted functions show in the video, because well I was recording a video. 

In actuality, I nearly never talk for such a long period of time and when having real conversations I retract into myself a lot more than visible in this video. I would say, the video more represented me expressing ideas that I have already thought about. Me jumping from idea to idea was more recalling a specific thought and then trying to move on to a new thought. I was purposely trying to not ruminate as to keep the video from getting too long (while I still wanted to get my main thoughts out). 

I promise you, if I have time to actually reflect on my thoughts, they are very far from shallow.


----------



## chwoey (Mar 29, 2012)

Ellis Bell said:


> I have to say, I rarely sit all the way through one of these videos, but I enjoyed this. I can definitely see where @_StephMC_ gets Se dominance; you say at one point that you became very introverted socially, which I think might be why you thought you were an ISTP for a while.


I don't really see the Se-dom. Would you or someone else perhaps be able to explain how you see Se in it? I am often told that I use Se greatly, (though some argue I use Si) but I don't really know how you guys are able to see it.

I was basically a HUGE extrovert up until second year of high school. Then I lost all my self-confidence and quickly fell into a deep depression and became very introverted. So for a good 5 years now I've been very introverted, people actually laugh at the idea of me being an extrovert. But I can tell that I am truly energized by the external world, thus though I still feel like I use my introverted functions over my extroverted, I am truly an extrovert in a bit of a funk.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

chwoey said:


> Very interesting, gave me something to think about. But, I feel like you were off base. The big problem with this analysis was that you made the conclusion based only on my video, and I'm not the most comfortable recording a video. I can understand how I look like I have absolutely no use of Ni, but when you're recording a video it seems inappropriate to be sitting there digging within myself.
> 
> I think it is understandable for someone to be using their extroverted functions a lot when they are doing such an extroverted activity. Trust me, I'm not used to talking so much for so long. I'm extremely introverted when in public, and even around others I am often found exploring the contours of my mind rather than interacting with them.
> 
> ...


I don't see you as an intuitive. You do however have a strong bias for NTJ (I'd say INTJ especially).
Truth is that this thread seems more like "confirm my bias" than "help me find my type". You use stereotypical articles about how NTJs are supposed to stereotypically be as supporting evidence.

Also, the video makes ESFP top on my list of probable types.

Your body movement is that of an ESFP.
Your reaction to question 2 seems very much like inferior Ni when you seem to get agitated about how it was the driver's or the owner's fault. Ni tries to dig into the core of things, the original source and you do that in an unhealthy way in question 2 when you are trying to find the person to blame.

Question 3 is pumped with Se. Your choice of words is a real giveaway.

Also, I doubt you are a TJ based on question 4.
The answer is simple, normal is being abnormal. Like my INTP friend says, "you are unique, just like everyone else"
However it's more about how you seemed so passionate about the whole thing.
Also, you made the answer to "what is normal?" more complex than it had to be. :tongue:

At question 5 (I believe it was) you contradicted yourself. First you said you didn't have any real values and then you started to talk passionately about abortion. Which seems like a deeply rooted internal value based on how you talked about it.

Question 6 also contradicts itself. Also a lot of Fi in this one.

Didn't have patience to watch more of the video.


----------



## StephMC (Jan 25, 2011)

chwoey said:


> I don't really see the Se-dom. Would you or someone else perhaps be able to explain how you see Se in it? I am often told that I use Se greatly, (though some argue I use Si) but I don't really know how you guys are able to see it.
> 
> I was basically a HUGE extrovert up until second year of high school. Then I lost all my self-confidence and quickly fell into a deep depression and became very introverted. So for a good 5 years now I've been very introverted, people actually laugh at the idea of me being an extrovert. But I can tell that I am truly energized by the external world, thus though I still feel like I use my introverted functions over my extroverted, I am truly an extrovert in a bit of a funk.


A good friend of mine has typed himself as an ISTP for years. When we first met, however, I was convinced he was an ESTP, and he started to recognize that there indeed was a major difference between our Se and Ti was displayed. He acknowledged he was much more extraverted than I am, in terms that he was more engaged in the physical world, not in terms of being social (he was generally a loner). His issue with being typed as an ESTP was the implication that he wasn't as analytical as me or didn't think as much as me. But here's the thing, I don't think that implication is valid at all. I think there are ESTPs out there that find themselves in periods of their lives where they Ti more than they Se. I believe your function order = energy levels, not actual usage -- though generally, in a healthy setting, the use of your functions will directly correlate to how much energy you are able expend on it.

Has anyone called you intense or overwhelming, or at least appeared to be overwhelmed by you? I'm sure everyone has at some point in their life. Since I believe energy levels determine function order, I have a tentative theory that most of your "intense" moments occur when you're using your dominant function in an overbearing way. Most of us just learn really quickly on to keep that dominant in check unless we want to constantly be overwhelming to people -- I mean, is it possible you lost your self-confidence in high school because people were reacting negatively to your dominant extraverted function, and to correct that you withdrew it into yourself? If so, what did that dominant function look like? Did it look like Te or Se (keeping in mind, I still believe Se, especially Se - Ti, can look like Te  )? 

I first started noticing the above theory during my conversations with my ESTP friend I mentioned earlier. We would go hiking, hike for 7 miles, I'd be thoroughly exhausted, and he'd be bounding around like a leprechaun -- just so energized by his surroundings, and all the rocks he could climb. My best friend who is another ESTP, and female, overwhelms with her Se in a different way. She gets lost in her surroundings. For instance, we'll be sitting in a restaurant, and I'll be carrying on whatever conversation we have, and suddenly, without warning, her eyes just start flitting rapidly around the room. After a few minutes, I feel like she's just absorbed herself in her surroundings and I'm absent to her. I can't quite explain why, but it's really uncomfortable and overwhelming for me to keep talking to her like that. As for me, I'm told I'm intense when I get carried away and start sharing my hyper-analyses -- which I usually only reserve for my ENTP boyfriend or INTP best friend (he shares the same over-bearing dom Ti, so we'll spend endless hours rambling without draining each other).

One other thought to consider: it seems pretty apparent you are at the very least a "withdrawn" enneagram type (4, 5, or 9 -- I see 9). In other words, these types tend to solve their inner conflicts by withdrawing. Being a withdrawn type would be a pretty decent explanation to your introvertedness, if you were indeed an extraverted dominant.


----------



## chwoey (Mar 29, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> I don't see you as an intuitive. You do however have a strong bias for NTJ (I'd say INTJ especially).
> Truth is that this thread seems more like "confirm my bias" than "help me find my type". You use stereotypical articles about how NTJs are supposed to stereotypically be as supporting evidence.
> 
> Also, the video makes ESFP top on my list of probable types.
> ...


It seems, Acer, that you will simply never be happy with me unless I simply disregard all I have read and just accept everything other people tell me about my type. You know, I have had people tell me with utmost confidence that I am: ENTP, ENFP, INFP, ISFP, ESFP, ISFJ. I think it is quite understandable that I don't just accept what other people say about me. Especially considering I think know myself best. 

And this might come as a shock to you, but I think questioning somebody helps me get a better grasp on their opinions than just blindly accepting what they say. I found the previous post the most relevant to me, thus the reason why I replied to it fairly quickly. 

It feels almost pointless replying to this post, because if I try to defend my thoughts I could easily see you saying "Oh you are just going by stereotypes", but SERIOUSLY THIS IS MBTI! HOW ELSE CAN YOU LOOK AT IT?
Without using stereotypes, we can all easily interpret any of our thoughts as any function.

I just find this all so ironic, how you were so forceful with the articles about the inferior function... Those are stereotypes just as much as the thread I posted. For all you know, I could EASILY be a INTP who expresses themselves in a manner similar to ESFPs, and you're looking at the stereotypes of ESFPs and applying my behaviour to it. 

Just at your comment to Question 5 (though, I would love to argue against each of your points, I am already putting off a large project that I need to get back to), I acknowledge that it was contradictory, but I still hold both facts as true. I may have not been able to explain myself well in the video, as I did find trying to record the video somewhat overwhelming. 
I was _trying_ to explain that, I generally don't have strong values (ie: I don't really think child pornography is bad to look at, I don't really think murder and death is that bad, I don't feel especially strongly about homelessness or the problems in the world; I basically feel "_Thats life, fucking deal with it" _about most things), there are some things that I have definite opinions on that mostly come from my philosophical beliefs (such as not hurting others, accepting others for their flaws, having as little of a negative impact on others as possible, etc.) that seem extremely logical and intuitive (or rather, a "no-brainer") and don't seem like things that other people would be able to sway my opinion on. 

My "what is normal" argument was complicated because I had just been debating my best friend a few hours before the topic and his opinion was VERY different from mine so, though I found my position very straightforward, I had to explain it in a way that is more than simply one statement. I may have not been able to express myself very accurately, but the idea is very well formed in my own head and makes a lot of sense to myself. 

I'm not going to say that I am convinced I am ENTJ, I think I could just as easily be a ISTP or ENTP. Simply my understanding of the functions is a little convoluted due to all the different (and often contradictory) descriptions I have read and my difficultly accurately applying these concepts to my own thought patterns. 

To be honest, my ideas on type often have more to do with the set up of cognitive functions (in this case, I relate a lot to the ideas behind Te, and my initial feeling would be that I have some sort of feeling function in the inferior position due to my incredible weakness in terms of emotions and relating to others), and less to do with the stereotypes behind the type. I simply cannot see myself as being a Fi type when I am in a healthy state. The only examples I have ever seen of anything close to Fi in myself is when I am under great amounts of stress. 

Maybe, if you are all correct in saying that my functions are Se-Te-Fi-Ni, I wouldn't classify myself as a ESFP, because I truly don't relate to the other ESFPs I have talked to, nor feel any connection with the idea of being a Fi user. I am perfectly happy to listen to and contemplate other's ideas of me being a Fi-aux or Fi-dom user, but not when they use a dismissive tone like you have. And not when they talk down to me in the ways that you have.


----------



## chwoey (Mar 29, 2012)

StephMC said:


> A good friend of mine has typed himself as an ISTP for years. When we first met, however, I was convinced he was an ESTP, and he started to recognize that there indeed was a major difference between our Se and Ti was displayed. He acknowledged he was much more extraverted than I am, in terms that he was more engaged in the physical world, not in terms of being social (he was generally a loner). His issue with being typed as an ESTP was the implication that he wasn't as analytical as me or didn't think as much as me. But here's the thing, I don't think that implication is valid at all. I think there are ESTPs out there that find themselves in periods of their lives where they Ti more than they Se. I believe your function order = energy levels, not actual usage -- though generally, in a healthy setting, the use of your functions will directly correlate to how much energy you are able expend on it.
> 
> Has anyone called you intense or overwhelming, or at least appeared to be overwhelmed by you? I'm sure everyone has at some point in their life. Since I believe energy levels determine function order, I have a tentative theory that most of your "intense" moments occur when you're using your dominant function in an overbearing way. Most of us just learn really quickly on to keep that dominant in check unless we want to constantly be overwhelming to people -- I mean, is it possible you lost your self-confidence in high school because people were reacting negatively to your dominant extraverted function, and to correct that you withdrew it into yourself? If so, what did that dominant function look like? Did it look like Te or Se (keeping in mind, I still believe Se, especially Se - Ti, can look like Te  )?
> 
> ...


Honestly, I'm VERY often called intense and intimidating. I previously was calling myself bossy. The fact is, I didn't realize I was bossy for a long time. When in private, my friends would confide that they didn't understand why I always called the shots, why I was the "leader" of my group of friends. I actually got suspended from school because I "forced" my friend to copy out of the dictionary for me when I was in trouble. The fact of the matter was, I didn't even realize I was being bad, I didn't realize I was hurting my friend. I just figured she would be better and faster than me, and hell I had better things to do then copy pages from the dictionary. 

I got my first job when I was in grade 10, and not too long after I started getting lots of hate from my co-workers. They described me as bossy and a know-it-all. I thought I was just being helpful. I figured out fast ways of doing things, and I would explain to my co-workers how to become more efficient by following my methods.. I thought I was being helpful, not a over-bearing bother. 

Your story about Se really makes me turn to Te even more. I am EXACTLY the same when it comes to working. When I go to work I'm not there to socialize, I'm there to get work done efficiently. I worked at Subway and I was someone who worked very hard to make exactly the sub the customer was looking for. I had systems for doing everything as fast as possible, and after a day of work I would go home literally bouncing off the walls. I'm never higher energy than at work or after coming home from work. It takes me hours to wind down after 8 hours of running around. I would like to clarify, I don't deny this could be a sign of Se-dom either, it just seems to me to be Te dom based on the fact I am literally constantly trying to be efficient.
For example, my current job I have to bring change orders to the different cashiers (we have over 20 cashiers, and they are often all being used) the cashiers will put in orders for certain amounts of change. Some of my co-workers (with the same position as me) will bring ONLY the change that the cashiers order. I on the otherhand will take into count all the possible amounts of change that the cashier(s) may need. So if two cashiers both order change, I will make sure to have doubles of the change they actually ordered, as well as a set of everything else (including $5 and $10) they could possibly need to ensure I don't have to return to them with any other change later. 

I 100% agree with the withdrawn enneagram type. I find if I don't withdraw with my problems then I will explode and I ALWAYS regret it after I explode. I hate letting my emotions get out of hand, and it happens so quickly if I don't keep my conflicts within. I know, as long as I keep my problems inside, I can move past them and eventually accept them rather than having to deal with them directly.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

chwoey said:


> It seems, Acer, that you will simply never be happy with me unless I simply disregard all I have read *and just accept everything other people tell me about my type*. You know, I have had people tell me with utmost confidence that I am: ENTP, ENFP, INFP, ISFP, ESFP, ISFJ. I think it is quite understandable that I don't just accept what other people say about me. Especially considering I think know myself best.


What is your type?
It is reasonable that you don't just accept whatever people say, but it is ironic that you often seem to use internet sites that base all their information on "all people of the type XXXX are like this..." since they aren't especially credible.

That you know yourself wouldn't matter if you weren't sure about the functions. Right?



> And this might come as a shock to you, but I think questioning somebody helps me get a better grasp on their opinions than just blindly accepting what they say. I found the previous post the most relevant to me, thus the reason why I replied to it fairly quickly.


Why would it come as a shock to me?
Sure, questioning someone is less effective than asking questions because people get defensive when you question them and they are more likely to explain what they mean if you just ask. That was something someone told me once at least and after having thought about it then it is likely true.



> It feels almost pointless replying to this post, because if I try to defend my thoughts I could easily see you saying "Oh you are just going by stereotypes", but SERIOUSLY THIS IS MBTI! HOW ELSE CAN YOU LOOK AT IT?
> Without using stereotypes, we can all easily interpret any of our thoughts as any function.


Stereotypes are things such as "XXXX do this", "XXXX are good at this" etc. they aren't based on the actual system because most of them don't know much about MBTI.
True that MBTI is hard to go some fact road on. It is psychology and thus there is more assumptions than facts.
You could however just read some books on MBTI and then you would have actual knowledge of MBTI.



> I just find this all so ironic, how you were so forceful with the articles about the inferior function... Those are stereotypes just as much as the thread I posted.


No, the inferior function thing comes from Carl Jung and was developed as an idea in MBTI by Naomi Quenk. It is a part of MBTI and not a stereotype. A stereotype isn't founded on anything. Like "INJs like music" well, who doesn't like music? Many stereotypes are based on the barnum effect.



> For all you know, I could EASILY be a INTP who expresses themselves in a manner similar to ESFPs, and you're looking at the stereotypes of ESFPs and applying my behaviour to it.


True, you got a point. I could just believe I am going by something solid, but really just following a stereotype, or I might be correct.
There is always a discussion of perspective, someone might see something where another one sees something else.


----------



## Einstein (Aug 10, 2011)

chwoey said:


> Honestly, I'm VERY often called intense and intimidating. I previously was calling myself bossy. The fact is, I didn't realize I was bossy for a long time. When in private, my friends would confide that they didn't understand why I always called the shots, why I was the "leader" of my group of friends. I actually got suspended from school because I "forced" my friend to copy out of the dictionary for me when I was in trouble. The fact of the matter was, I didn't even realize I was being bad, I didn't realize I was hurting my friend. I just figured she would be better and faster than me, and hell I had better things to do then copy pages from the dictionary.
> 
> I got my first job when I was in grade 10, and not too long after I started getting lots of hate from my co-workers. They described me as bossy and a know-it-all. I thought I was just being helpful. I figured out fast ways of doing things, and I would explain to my co-workers how to become more efficient by following my methods.. I thought I was being helpful, not a over-bearing bother.


This has ENTJ written all over it.

Also I want to add that I am quite certain that you are not ENTP. ENTP's are much more interested in being competitive and pushing people to get a reaction whereas you are more interested in efficiency and getting stuff done. You're way too mature to be an ENTP, lol.


----------



## Planisphere (Apr 24, 2012)

One thing I've noticed after perusing a lot of these types of threads: when in doubt, you're an ISTP.

Funny thing is, I'm not here to make that suggestion. I agree with Acerbusvenator, but mainly because I've had quite a few experiences with INTJs playing up their inferior functions (and vice-versa: ESFPs trying to play the role of an INTJ). I'll probably come back and analyze your posts more carefully, but I also tend to believe like NightTi : you could be unconsciously playing up the role due to a desire. Most types are drawn by their inferior functions when stressed or bored, as suggested by PersonalityJunkie. This may be a good read, if you haven't looked through it already: Understanding the Inferior Function - Personality Junkie


----------



## StephMC (Jan 25, 2011)

chwoey said:


> Honestly, I'm VERY often called intense and intimidating. I previously was calling myself bossy. The fact is, I didn't realize I was bossy for a long time. When in private, my friends would confide that they didn't understand why I always called the shots, why I was the "leader" of my group of friends. I actually got suspended from school because I "forced" my friend to copy out of the dictionary for me when I was in trouble. The fact of the matter was, I didn't even realize I was being bad, I didn't realize I was hurting my friend. I just figured she would be better and faster than me, and hell I had better things to do then copy pages from the dictionary.


I can't deny this sounds more Te than Ti. Te has no problem doling out tasks, whereas Ti will have a tendency to get frustrated trying to dole out tasks and would rather just do it themselves if they determine it will take less time for them to do so than it would be to explain the task. What function order this Te is, I couldn't say.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

StephMC said:


> I can't deny this sounds more Te than Ti. Te has no problem doling out tasks, whereas Ti will have a tendency to get frustrated trying to dole out tasks and would rather just do it themselves if they determine it will take less time for them to do so than it would be to explain the task. What function order this Te is, I couldn't say.


Just to make a point from my experience then I seldom/never bother explaining things when I would likely do the task faster and better myself since I know what I am doing. The time it would take to explain something to someone would slow down the speed at which the task is being done.

I just don't think there's a connection between Te and delegating tasks.

When I get an idea to do something I find that it would take too much energy to try and explain it so I just do it on my own. Unless I know that the person is better and faster than me ofc in which case I could just tell them what needs to be done without explaining.

Could it rather be connected to extraversion rather than the orientation of your thinking function?
I haven't met many introverts that are good at assigning tasks to others. Most introverts seem to go "I'll do this myself" instead of bothering with involving other people.
When I was younger especially I wouldn't even ask for help even if I needed it because I wanted to do things on my own or not at all.


----------

