# Untypable function preferences in general; INTJ-INTP-INFP specifically



## ManWithoutHats (Jun 2, 2012)

Sorry if the title is confusing (i know, it is). This post is about MB types and cognitive function hierarchies, how they correspond and more importantly how they can contradict each other. In this context, this is also somewhat of a "what type am I?" thread: this is the jumping off point for the broader topic. Now I will elaborate.

Well about a year ago I stumbled on to the MBTI and read up on it and started spending lots of time on this site (a familiar story I am sure). I quickly pegged myself an INTP, first by a test and then confirmed it from descriptions, and it seemed to fit me perfectly (though I tested INFP 8ish years ago, but didn't look into it). Although I could relate to INTJs and INFPs as well, they didn't seem as fitting. Anyway, I haven't given much thought to the MBTI lately but I took a Jungian function quiz a while back and Ni showed up as my dominant function. Not just slightly, but by almost 2x more than any other; 4x more average than the others on avg. While I wouldn't take this test as authoritative in itself, it made me realize that Ni is much more in line with my thinking/temperament than Ti or any other function. But then the interesting thing is that I'm definitely not an INTJ; in fact, my results weren't consistent with any type– *Ni* 11.6, *Ti* 6.6, *Ne* 6.1, *Fi* 5.9, *Te* 2.8, *Si* 1.3, *Se* 0.43,* Fe *0.09 . 

Ignoring Ni, this is a good INTP fit, but otherwise you would have to say INxJ– but then Te and Fe are way too low to be a J. I'm not really that concerned about which type I really am, but rather I'm curious about how this would fit into Jung/M.B.'s framework, if at all. Does anyone else have results or type themselves like this? Has anyone read anything relevant? The only thing that comes to mind for me is the idea of tertiary loops: an INTJ who neglects their auxilary function might come off as Ni with Fi, and an inferior Se, but that still barely seems to apply, though I hardly know anything about that concept, yet it always seemed a little iffy to boot.

In my own opinion, I've come to see the MBTI as rather flawed. I always thought INTP fit me, and maybe it does, but I realized that it only really fits (me in my own view) with a bit of cognitive bias– accepting the description that fits and ignoring what doesn't. Since I started reading about it again, now more detached (before I took this other quiz), I've realized that, by my own judgement, INTP hardly fits me more than INFP, if at all (in fact, I swing back and forth between F & T on the MBTI), and many traits of INTJs ring truer than any other type minus the Te (I'm incredibly disorganized and spontaneous, though I do make to-do lists and enjoy planning, I usually get side tracked or just neglect to follow up on plans completely). For this reason, MBTI always places me at least 70% perceiving, making it impossible for my results to include an Ni. Yet all of the questions related to this test for the direction of the extroverted function, and Ne is obviously my highest in that regard. 

I could go into details, but I am starting to feel like I'd rather be doing something else right now so I'll just get back to this after it's simmered a little. Any relevant thoughts, info, questions, etc.: post away.


----------



## Pirate (Jan 2, 2013)

The functions and their strength are whats important. Just because your Ni may be very developed, doesn't actually mean anything about where is is in your function order, and online tests generally fail completely to account for variables. They focus on the what, not the why or how (which is terrible when trying to determine function preferences, as they're all about why and how.) Type is just a generalization of people who use the functions in whichever order. The flaw is that people put to much stock in it in an effort to discover or define themselves, and worse, they do so without properly understanding the subject. It can be used as a starting point for such endevors, but its not the whole. I'll leave you with a somewhat relevant link, it deals with a similar concept. 



 hope I've helped.


----------



## ManWithoutHats (Jun 2, 2012)

Pirate said:


> Snip


Well you pretty much said it all. Most of that actually seems so obvious and straightforward that I'm surprised, or rather embarrassed, that I asked in such a long post ha. Thanks!


----------



## Pirate (Jan 2, 2013)

Everybody misses the obvious sometimes. Don't sweat it.


----------

