# INTP, INFP, INFJ, what am I?



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

Hello personality experts. I don't have much to say in the way of introductions, so I'll start by saying I'm in the skeptic camp concerning personality typing, but at the same time I think it serves a valuable purpose in understanding a lot of people and finding those with similar attitudes. What makes the least sense to me is the whole attitude that everyone is one and only one type, which can be explained by Jungian functions. And I feel like it's all just one big theory which isn't backed up in any studies of how cognition actually works, but it still interests me, which is why I have a drive to try to figure out where I fit personally in this whole system.

I'd rather not get into a ton of personal details about myself and who I am so I'll focus more on what tests say I am.

Most of the Myers Briggs test put me at extremely strong I, N, and P, and weak F.

As a result of this, i looked at descriptions of INFP and INTP, and I think I fit more into the latter, as INFPs supposedly aren't very logical. I get really annoyed with people who don't act logical (or at least receptive to my intuitive logical conclusions), and place a very high value on logic and rationality. I also am very adept at logical studies such as math and philosophy, but at the same time constantly have emotional needs and am driven by them. And I have a very complex and always evolving personal value system which is very unconventional (a lot of folks would say strange), but also very rational, at least to me. And the way I prioritize my personal beliefs and how things make me feel is the main reason I come off as INFP on Myers Briggs tests.

I have taken three Jungian functions tests, one linked to and I presume run by Personality Cafe, and the other two on similarminds.com.

As a rule, I score very high in both Ne and Ni, and also fairly high on Ti and Fi, with lower Te and Fe, and very low Se and Si.

The PC test gave me INFJ, INTP, and ENTP as the top three possibilities. This is the first time I've ever got INFJ out of anything, which is surprising because I have scored as 100% P on MBTI tests. I'm assuming the main reason was that in this test my Ni was my highest function by far. One of the similarminds tests gave me INFP, and the other "unclear".

I assume that I should write off what these Jungian functions tests say, except for the fact that despite being most likely best described by INxP, I have a strong Ni function.

So I guess the question is, is it possible for INxP's to have strong Ni, and what's the best way to differentiate between INFP and INTP?

PS: Just came upon the What's your type Questionnaire, so I'm going to do that in another post.


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

werw


> *1. Click on this link: Flickr: Explore! Look at the random photo for about 30 seconds. Copy and paste it here, and write about your impression of it.*
> 
> I’ve always dreamt of living in very peaceful, serene surroundings in the middle of nature despite how unrealistic it may be. In particular, the mysterious fog over the middle ground could be a veil under which I could recharge and meditate while take a break from normal life. I love the sense of imperfect harmony that nature conveys like nothing else in the world.
> 2. You are with a group of people in a car, heading to a different town to see your favourite band/artist/musician. Suddenly, the car breaks down for an unknown reason in the middle of nowhere. What are your initial thoughts? What are your outward reactions?
> ...


----------



## TyranAmiros (Jul 7, 2014)

Reading your answers, I understand why the test was telling you INFJ. The Ni is off the charts: 



> I’ve noticed that one of my weaknesses is to really gain a strong belief in these gut feelings, and then shroud them in a smokescreen of logic which I use to both fool myself and others into believing. This is something I am constantly working on.


NTPs tend to have difficulty maintaining a strong belief in anything because Ne and Ti are both functions that perspectivize and subjectivize the situation--Ne perceives the world going "look at all the new approaches you could try!" then Ti evaluates according to a very individual system of logic. 

It's Ni that's the function of "just-so" approaches that require objective justification in the real world (Te/Fe). Not to mention, the strong belief in your "gut" is very Ni also--Ne generates explanations based on Ti/Fi logics; Ni creates a model for viewing the world, then looks for Fe/Te proof in the real world.



> My internal thought process is very difficult for me to externalize, especially spontaneously, so it often ends up repressed, not even by choice. I am not one to really act outwardly so there’s not much that I feel myself having to repress around others.


Ne seems random/spontaneous to the outside observer, but to the Ne user, it's actually not--there's some connection to either something going on, something that happened, or something that the Ne user has been pondering for a while. NPs tend to be rather unable to stop externalizing their internal thought processes--they "think out loud". 

Ni users, on the other hand, don't extemporize in the same way. They tend to pause to consider the complete sentence/idea, and need to be sure of what they're saying before they open their mouths. Because Ni users also have Se, their completed ideas may manifest as actions as much as or instead of words--they may find non-verbal communication more expressive.



> I think my first thought is something like “this isn’t fair, this can’t happen”, even though it did just happen. Then I try to prepare myself mentally to not be at the concert, and wait for someone to say something while I try to come up with the best possible way to proceed. If they offer a solution which seems reasonable, I will go along with it. Despite it being my favorite band, I would definitely not want to try anything risky just to make the show. And if we have to change plans, I would be sad but I’m not much into live concerts anyway so it wouldn’t be the end of the world.


All this preparation and planning speaks to Ni more than Ne--"this can't happen" in particular. Ne-Si is more, "why did this happen, and what can we do about it." Same with the level of mental preparation and running through the pathways--that speaks to high Ni to me.

I do see a lot of Ti and some Fe (9a in particular), not a lot of Te, so I can definitely see why you got INFJ. 

Don't forget that an INFJ is a perceiver--intuition is the dominant function--and INTP is actually a judging type (thinking is dominant). Also, I often find that the dichotomy tests tend to translate into P=Se user/J=Si user, which works well for the 80% of the population that are sensors, but can screw intuitives who pick the "wrong" answer to Se/Si questions like "when at a restaurant, do you try something new or get the same dish you normally do?" I was mistyped as INTJ because of that--I'm definitely a dominant judger, but that's because when I experience something new, it has to go through my Ti system before I'm confident enough to share.


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

Thanks for the explanation. This definitely explains why I score high on Ni. But I also have a tendency to do exactly what you say that you do. I hold strong beliefs but because they are tested and constantly having bullets directed at them, presumably by Ti. Even going through your post, I try to rationalize everything you say and see if it still holds up to what I believe about what my best typing would be.

I feel in my mind I shoot a lot of Ti and Fi bullets based on what I perceive using Ne and then the more rock solid but abstract ones form my core belief system. Often Ni determines which bullets to shoot if that makes any sense, or just acts on its own. Ni doesn't act on its own that often so that it's more or less an exception to the rule but when it does I really do trust where it goes a little too much I think in these cases, sometimes Ti finds fault with a sort of Ni/Fe chain of cognition.

So basically what I'm feeling like is sometimes I'm an INTP and sometimes I'm an INFJ. I may be misinterpreting some of Ti as Fi, which I probably don't have that much of, but I'm also an extreme idealist which is kind of the trademark of Fi. So I feel like I've got this INFP thing going on too.

The one thing that totally gets left behind is sensing.

One thing though - I understand that the dichotomy tests can screw around with intuitives, but I consistently score 80-100% on Perceiving. I am the exact opposite of organized or planned and am liable to take things in any direction at any point. In fact I value my freedom so much because I never want to be constrained to a schedule just in case if I feel like I'll be wanting to do something else at a given time. This is where either (choose one):
a) Myers-Briggs is a complete failure
b) I am not a J type

I'm willing to accept that MBTI can be a complete failure and think it pretty much is. I think I'm so off-balanced toward intuition that I really can't accept any of these typings because they all fail to either express the Ni, Ne, Ti, or Fi.


----------



## TyranAmiros (Jul 7, 2014)

Take a look at this post: 
Funky MBTI in Fiction • Could you explain the differences between INTP's...



Shorty Levi said:


> Thanks for the explanation. This definitely explains why I score high on Ni. But I also have a tendency to do exactly what you say that you do. I hold strong beliefs but because they are tested and constantly having bullets directed at them, presumably by Ti. Even going through your post, I try to rationalize everything you say and see if it still holds up to what I believe about what my best typing would be.
> 
> I feel in my mind I shoot a lot of Ti and Fi bullets based on what I perceive using Ne and then the more rock solid but abstract ones form my core belief system. Often Ni determines which bullets to shoot if that makes any sense, or just acts on its own. Ni doesn't act on its own that often so that it's more or less an exception to the rule but when it does I really do trust where it goes a little too much I think in these cases, sometimes Ti finds fault with a sort of Ni/Fe chain of cognition.


But what I said is that NTPs don't hold strong beliefs--we find it difficult to accept that there is a "truth" much less one particular truth. We have theories, even strongly held pet theories, but they don't get in the way advocating/considering/thinking about other possibilities. I'm not sure you are perceiving things with Ne. For example, here's what I'd expect:

INTP: I don't really know if this connection I'm making is right or wrong, because it hasn't been put out into the world to get feedback. Heck, the process of verbalizing it itself sheds light on the connection. Where does the emphasis go? Is there polysemy or ambiguity? Let me just put it out--hope someone responds! I don't even care if they think I'm totally off base, because it's really just a thought I had. I secretly hope someone likes the idea enough to force me to clarify, define, and refine, because my initial position is clearly an extreme and the idea could benefit from some more problem solving and evidence. At the end of the day, though, I don't actually believe in the position I just spent an hour arguing for--I tend to think certainty is overrated anyway--but I feel I have a better handle on the possible issues with the original position (unless we got distracted talking about one of my favorite topics).

INFJ: I have strong beliefs about how the world really is. I look to people--the way they act, respond, engage, and go about all the elements of daily life to see these beliefs in action. See, the thing is that most people see others either only at the superficial level or as faceless collectives. This is a false choice, and what I can do is understand how people function individually, socially, and collectively _simultaneously_, because these are facets of a single gem that is each person. As I interact with others, I see what they are trying to say and what they are actually saying, and understand the logic that takes them from underlying meaning to manifestation. I might enjoy hearing others' feedback, because my belief is somewhat fuzzy, and answering questions helps me to unearth the relationships in that belief. If I explain myself right, I may even persuade them that I'm right. Though I often deal in non-falsifiable hypotheses, I tend to be very good at accurately discerning processes, systems, and cycles--interrelationships within human interaction.



> So basically what I'm feeling like is sometimes I'm an INTP and sometimes I'm an INFJ. I may be misinterpreting some of Ti as Fi, which I probably don't have that much of, but I'm also an extreme idealist which is kind of the trademark of Fi. So I feel like I've got this INFP thing going on too.
> 
> The one thing that totally gets left behind is sensing.


Not sure where Fi comes from--didn't see it in your answers. Simply having idealistic views doesn't make someone an Fi user. I often think of it as Fi-Te is the "universal" judgment while Ti-Fe is the "particular/situational" judgment function pair. FPs/TJs tend to judge universally--"no one should" "it's wrong to" "people ought to" where TPs/FJs tend to judge situationally--"in this case" "for you" "people tend to". You really seem to have a strong preference for the Fe-Ti function pair.



> One thing though - I understand that the dichotomy tests can screw around with intuitives, but I consistently score 80-100% on Perceiving. I am the exact opposite of organized or planned and am liable to take things in any direction at any point. In fact I value my freedom so much because I never want to be constrained to a schedule just in case if I feel like I'll be wanting to do something else at a given time. This is where either (choose one):
> a) Myers-Briggs is a complete failure
> b) I am not a J type
> 
> I'm willing to accept that MBTI can be a complete failure and think it pretty much is. I think I'm so off-balanced toward intuition that I really can't accept any of these typings because they all fail to either express the Ni, Ne, Ti, or Fi .


I reject the false dichotomy. Getting P on a dichotomy test indicates to me that you're most likely an Se user, because the questions line up with Se/Si, which is fine for most of the population. The MBTI type descriptions are pretty good; the issue is the questions used on some of the tests, and then only for intuitives. And not to mention how easy it is to game the tests if you know anything about the letters. Is it really hard to figure out that if you keep choosing the "My room is messy/I hate schedules/I work best on the fly" options, you're going to get P? The MBTI type descriptions are pretty good; the issue is the questions used on some of the tests, and then only for intuitives.

But enough about theory--let's talk motivation. What is it you want to get out of this process? If you just want to have a type, you can simply label yourself any type and go about your life. There is no "right" or "best" type.

If you're really looking into self-growth or help, the best thing to do is to take 2-3 possible types and see if the advice fits. An INTJ dating advice tip of "make sure to express interest in the other person's ideas and opinions, even if you disagree" is useless for an ESFJ, where the ESFJ's tip of "you don't need to know their entire family history on the first date" is a poor match for the INTJ. Part of my transition from INTJ to INTP came because of this--career advice for INTPs was so much more accurate to me than INTJ; I'm a poor scientist, but I thrive in more linguistic-based environments. INFJ advice for dating tends to focus on expression and full communication, especially of problems. INTP advice tends to focus on the INTP's difficulty reading and dealing with emotion.

I think you're an INFJ--I understand why you keep getting INTP/INFP, but I think it's wrong.


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

Thanks again.


TyranAmiros said:


> But what I said is that NTPs don't hold strong beliefs--we find it difficult to accept that there is a "truth" much less one particular truth. We have theories, even strongly held pet theories, but they don't get in the way advocating/considering/thinking about other possibilities. I'm not sure you are perceiving things with Ne. For example, here's what I'd expect:


By strong beliefs, basically what I mean is that when I do reach a conclusion, while I will still question it, it is usually very strong and logical. And I like to use other people as devils advocates (you are one right now, bwahaha) and as such I sometimes present half-baked ideas conclusively just to get a counterargument.


> INTP: I don't really know if this connection I'm making is right or wrong, because it hasn't been put out into the world to get feedback. Heck, the process of verbalizing it itself sheds light on the connection. Where does the emphasis go? Is there polysemy or ambiguity? Let me just put it out--hope someone responds! I don't even care if they think I'm totally off base, because it's really just a thought I had. I secretly hope someone likes the idea enough to force me to clarify, define, and refine, because my initial position is clearly an extreme and the idea could benefit from some more problem solving and evidence. At the end of the day, though, I don't actually believe in the position I just spent an hour arguing for--I tend to think certainty is overrated anyway--but I feel I have a better handle on the possible issues with the original position (unless we got distracted talking about one of my favorite topics).
> 
> INFJ: I have strong beliefs about how the world really is. I look to people--the way they act, respond, engage, and go about all the elements of daily life to see these beliefs in action. See, the thing is that most people see others either only at the superficial level or as faceless collectives. This is a false choice, and what I can do is understand how people function individually, socially, and collectively _simultaneously_, because these are facets of a single gem that is each person. As I interact with others, I see what they are trying to say and what they are actually saying, and understand the logic that takes them from underlying meaning to manifestation. I might enjoy hearing others' feedback, because my belief is somewhat fuzzy, and answering questions helps me to unearth the relationships in that belief. If I explain myself right, I may even persuade them that I'm right. Though I often deal in non-falsifiable hypotheses, I tend to be very good at accurately discerning processes, systems, and cycles--interrelationships within human interaction.


Based on that, the INTP fits me more than INFJ, but I do the INFJ things as well to some degree.


> Not sure where Fi comes from--didn't see it in your answers. Simply having idealistic views doesn't make someone an Fi user. I often think of it as Fi-Te is the "universal" judgment while Ti-Fe is the "particular/situational" judgment function pair. FPs/TJs tend to judge universally--"no one should" "it's wrong to" "people ought to" where TPs/FJs tend to judge situationally--"in this case" "for you" "people tend to". You really seem to have a strong preference for the Fe-Ti function pair.


Well thanks, in that case I'm definitely more Ti/Fe or Fe/Ti. I look at everything more on a situational/personal basis.

But...I thought it was the opposite. This is my hangup of putting myself on the Ti/Fe axis. This explanation has me feeling more Fi/Te: http://personalitycafe.com/articles/63173-fi-vs-fe-101-a.html


> I reject the false dichotomy. Getting P on a dichotomy test indicates to me that you're most likely an Se user, because the questions line up with Se/Si, which is fine for most of the population. The MBTI type descriptions are pretty good; the issue is the questions used on some of the tests, and then only for intuitives. And not to mention how easy it is to game the tests if you know anything about the letters. Is it really hard to figure out that if you keep choosing the "My room is messy/I hate schedules/I work best on the fly" options, you're going to get P? The MBTI type descriptions are pretty good; the issue is the questions used on some of the tests, and then only for intuitives.


I don't live in the moment at all though, despite desiring to keep my options open. I just hate being constrained to a particular pathway. I live what most people would consider a pretty boring life, while valuing the freedom of choice, and not being organized whatsoever. I tend to score higher Si than Se on cognitive function tests and I relate slightly more to the concept of Si than Se, even though I don't really use either at all. I'm pretty much as un-Se as you can get.


> But enough about theory--let's talk motivation. What is it you want to get out of this process? If you just want to have a type, you can simply label yourself any type and go about your life. There is no "right" or "best" type.


I'm more interested in personality theory and feel like if these Jungian functions and MBTI can't explain myself, then the whole theory doesn't really hold up. I don't personally care what type I am, nor believe I am a particular type. I just want to be convinced that there's not much of worth to me and a lot of people in this theory, and I have trouble making that conclusion yet. I have an extremely difficult time coming to conclusions, and even when I feel like I'm coming to conclusions I still like testing my theories against someone on the other side who seems to know what they're talking about.


----------



## TyranAmiros (Jul 7, 2014)

Yeah, if you're only in this to prove that it's wrong, I'm not sure you're going to be satisfied with anything. Personally, I think there's a lot of value in systematization because I do think people are predictable. I like MBTI because a lot of the self-help stuff is useless to me, and knowing that I can find INTP resources is essential. As a teacher, knowing my students' MBTIs helps me figure out what approaches they might like--if I have more SJs, I emphasize connections throughout the course, if there are more SPs, I make sure there are more projects and presentations.

I don't think people have multiple types. I do, however, think that actually working with the MBTI requires an ability to be honest with yourself, and a lot of people struggle with that--it's why it's often easier to type others than it is to type yourself. My stereotypical ENTP roommate comes home about once a month with a new type he thinks he is--last time it was ESFP "because I like to have fun". Doesn't change the fact that reading the ENTP profile is like having him in the room. I do have problems with the tests, especially the dichotomy-based ones, because there are predictable wrong patterns in the data. 

In a web forum like this, all we have to go on are answers to a few questions. Yes, these questions can be manipulated just as much as the tests--and even when answered perfectly sincerely, often our first takes at answers are not quite accurate. I would strong warn you against generalizing from yourself; that's a Logic 101 fallacy right there. In game theoretic terms, we have to go in with "good faith"--that doesn't mean blind agreement, but if you're going to shift the ground, change the terms of the debate (i.e. the answers to the questions) as you go along, it's just not worth it.


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

Well I'm not only in it to prove its wrong. I think there's definitely some value to it but I also want to test its limitations to see just how wrong it is. The place I worked actually incorporated it into management, and I may use it when I get into a management position. I'm not anti-MBTI so much as just anti-MBTI worship if that makes any sense.

And the person who spent the most time with me the last few years is convinced that I'm INTP so taking it from a position of more or less impartiality is probably a better way to go about it. For what it's worth the people I talk to now about it think I'm more INFP.

Sorry if you think I'm wasting your time but I still find this very interesting.


----------



## finesthour (Jun 12, 2014)

*Intuition is in a relationship with ego*



Shorty Levi said:


> Hello personality experts. I don't have much to say in the way of introductions, so I'll start by saying I'm in the skeptic camp concerning personality typing, but at the same time I think it serves a valuable purpose in understanding a lot of people and finding those with similar attitudes. What makes the least sense to me is the whole attitude that everyone is one and only one type, which can be explained by Jungian functions. And I feel like it's all just one big theory which isn't backed up in any studies of how cognition actually works, but it still interests me, which is why I have a drive to try to figure out where I fit personally in this whole system.
> 
> I'd rather not get into a ton of personal details about myself and who I am so I'll focus more on what tests say I am.
> 
> ...


First of all, inxps cannot have ego driven Ni.

I know this sounds silly but,
1. Identify your Ennatype
2. If your dominant type is 5 you are probably an intp(looking around will tell you that).
3. If your dominant type is 4, you are probably infp.
4. If your dominant type is something else, then keep searching.

Also: you can't have more than one MBTI/Sociotype because each function is ego based and stands in relation to the stack and the dominant function in particular.


----------



## finesthour (Jun 12, 2014)

Shorty Levi said:


> Well I'm not only in it to prove its wrong. I think there's definitely some value to it but I also want to test its limitations to see just how wrong it is. The place I worked actually incorporated it into management, and I may use it when I get into a management position. I'm not anti-MBTI so much as just anti-MBTI worship if that makes any sense.
> 
> And the person who spent the most time with me the last few years is convinced that I'm INTP so taking it from a position of more or less impartiality is probably a better way to go about it. For what it's worth the people I talk to now about it think I'm more INFP.
> 
> Sorry if you think I'm wasting your time but I still find this very interesting.


Being treated like an intp or an infp only shows what people want from you! For example: Let's use this intp and throw him away! Let's manipulate this infp mother for giggles!


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

finesthour said:


> First of all, inxps cannot have ego driven Ni.


Yeah the great dilemma 


> I know this sounds silly but,
> 1. Identify your Ennatype
> 2. If your dominant type is 5 you are probably an intp(looking around will tell you that).
> 3. If your dominant type is 4, you are probably infp.
> ...


One test I got 4,6 (very close second),9,5 in that order. Another I got 5,6,9,4 in that order, so it's really hard to tell between 4 and 5!


----------



## finesthour (Jun 12, 2014)

Shorty Levi said:


> Yeah the great dilemma
> 
> One test I got 4,6 (very close second),9,5 in that order. Another I got 5,6,9,4 in that order, so it's really hard to tell between 4 and 5!


ask yourself what your phobias are.


----------



## 68097 (Nov 20, 2013)

You are not a Ne/Si user. Period. No Ne. NONE. You are not an NP or an SJ. 

Your dominant Ni is what is causing you to doubt this system and test it for validity. It is where all your doubts are coming from. Every Ni-dom I have ever met, dealt with, or talked to, doubts MBTI for a long time. And then if they decide to accept it, they still can find flaws in it and feel a bit "wiffly" about it. Though INTJs are much more likely to call it BS out of the gate and ask for proof than INFJs. Ti makes INFJs more accepting of theories, because Ti says that what SEEMS logical IS the answer. Te says, "Hell no it's not. Show me proof, man! Show me facts! Evidence!"

Te sets out to DO SOMETHING with its knowledge, and Ti doesn't. Ti system builds. Te does not think outside the box.

Presented with an insurmountable problem, Te gets stuck. Ti doesn't. Ti tries out 98 solutions to improve the system and "rig it" to make it work. 

You site not being able to live in the moment as an argument against INXJ. Wrong. Ni-doms have a hard time living in the moment. Their Se is unfamiliar, wonky, faulty, and out of reach. Either they ignore it completely or it overwhelms them and sends them into a sensory-spin-out that includes reckless, hedonistic behavior. But most of the time, Ni-doms live in ideas. Abstracts. Concepts. Symbols. Rarely in touch with the now, always thinking about next year. 

You are INXJ. Only the EJ types are dominant judging personalities -- INXJs are perceiving dominants, which can lead to procrastination and a disinterest in accomplishing things until your vision is ready. 

Fe/Te is debatable at this point. You could be INFJ but again, as I said, the INTJs are usually the ones that tackle topics and argue them for fun and also doubt the validity of MBTI as a theory. 

Do you system build, or do you take factual evidence and do something with it, to come up with something quantifiable in the real world?

How much do you over-analyze your own behavior, why you act the way you do, how people interact with you? How much do you pick up on others' feelings and ascribe to their behaviors to keep them at ease? How often do you keep your mouth shut just to avoid conflict? How much do other people's opinions about you matter to you? These are Fe traits. 

I care about how people see me. I want their affirmation. I need their respect. I automatically shift to make them feel comfortable. I get offended on their behalf. And worse, I can't seem to do things only for my own enjoyment all that much. I am wired in to people. That's Fe.

My INTJ friend doesn't have it. He'll tell the honest truth and be shocked if people don't want to hear it. And then he'll be sad that people don't seem to like him, but he can't figure out why -- because he has no Ti with which to analyze his problem, realize that his bluntness is the cause, and then adapt to be more accommodating -- no Fe.


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

I do agree that I'm an Ni user, but reading about Ne, I also am definitely an Ne user. I think I focused more on Ni aspects when writing about myself because I was more interested in providing evidence against INxP than for it.

Based on what you said I'm somewhat of an Fe user, because I tend to sugarcoat or skirt away from the honest truth, but I also place a strong value in honesty. I also hate chaotic situations where others feelings are butting heads with each other and my first instinct is always to try to smooth them over, which seems very Fe.

I'm also much more Ti than Te because thinking outside of the box is what I've always done no matter what the situation is. I actually think in so many directions (divergent thinking) that it becomes a weakness in that I don't reach conclusions easily at all. People consider me very indecisive but I can't bring myself to settle on something because I haven't exhausted all the possibilities. I love to suggest theories but I fine tune them based on what other people say, and may argue the theories but not because I believe them to be correct but because it's a way to keep getting valuable insight from others.

I think these last two paragraphs can comfortably eliminate *INTJ* as a possibility.

As for Se vs. Si, despite having a somewhat hedonistic value system, I don't derive much pleasure at all from your typical hedonistic behavior. I also don't really use my past experiences much at all to assess current situations, which seems to be the basis of Si. I tend to assess current situations with my self-constructed and often unorthodox belief system. I'd conclude that I don't often get into Sensor functions and am more likely to use both Ne and Ni than go into Sx. This is why Jung's cognitive functions model just doesn't do much for me.

I also will share two test results simply as evidence that I am both an Ne and Ni user. 

Using Nardi's cognitive functions test, which seems to be the best, I got (average of two results, one suggested INTP the other INFP):


> Ne - 45
> Fi - 43
> Ti - 39
> Ni - 38
> ...


SimilarMinds classic Jung:


> Ni/Ne - 90
> Fi - 85
> Ti - 70
> Fe - 45
> ...


----------



## 68097 (Nov 20, 2013)

^ 

Still Ni-ing.

No Ne.

You can't just hide Ne. It shows whether you want it to or not. Straightforward, frank opinions and no desire to banter about MBTI as a theory itself is not Ne. Ne plays with ideas on a superficial idea and then throws them aside in pursuit of new possibilities. It turns up in posts through long sentences and double-mindedness.

You ain't got it. No Ne, no Si. (You actually seem to HATE the very concept of Si, which is more like a Ni-dom. If you had Si, you would be PULLED toward routine and sameness and tradition, while you give a vibe of loathing those things. Zero Si.)

You're a Ni-dom.


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

angelcat said:


> ^
> 
> Still Ni-ing.
> 
> ...


You definitely hit one nail on the head. I will be honest and say that I do in fact actively dislike the influence of Si on society, but I also find that Si types tend to be nicer people. Also just a thought, but maybe being an Si user, you may have more of an Ni-dar cause it's the opposite of your primary perceiving function?

And I love bantering about MBTI but just not in this thread... lol I'd rather banter about my type as a microcosm of the ineffectiveness of MBTI!


----------



## 68097 (Nov 20, 2013)

Shorty Levi said:


> Also just a thought, but maybe being an Si user, you may have more of an Ni-dar cause it's the opposite of your primary perceiving function?


I would say so, yes. I have a little bit of conflict with Ni -- it's more of a communication gap than anything, with Ni-dom's Ni going to battle with my Ne ("Yeah, but what about THIS?" Ne says, and Ni says, "Nope, it's this way!"). Ha! 



> And I love bantering about MBTI but just not in this thread... lol I'd rather banter about my type as a microcosm of the ineffectiveness of MBTI!


Still Ni. 

If you find yourself system-building, or pulling apart a system to fix it or nitpick it, you are probably a Ti user as well, as opposed to Te. INTJs tend to be more accepting of a system if it helps them accomplish something with tangible results, whereas Ti users pursue knowledge for its own sake.


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

Lol I'm a new poster, you're not going to see me do much "what about this?" cause it gets on peoples nerves a lot. What I will say though is I don't see why someone can't use both Ni and Ne. I'm not saying you're doing it so much but I just get the general perception that people treat it like an either/or. I can say for near certain that my problem solving strategy is far more Ne than anything, just by reading the descriptions of the different functions.


----------



## 68097 (Nov 20, 2013)

Problem is, you haven't shown me any Ne -- inadvertently or otherwise. Until you do, Ne is off the table. 

I know what Ne looks and sounds like. I live with an ENFP dad, and have an INTP brother. I have an ENFP friend and an INFP e-mail pal. Their Ne spills out in random chunks all the time, leaving me to wonder ... um, how did we get from here to here?


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

Just imagine though, if they were posting like I am on this forum, would their Ne be "spilling out" as you say?

For my whole young life, I've been basically told that my strongest skill is Ne, obviously not in those words though. Can you see why I have trouble taking your word for "you haven't shown any so its not a possibility" when people who know me best think otherwise? Not to mention it's my top, or tied for top, function in all these cognitive function tests.

I personally feel it makes more logical sense that those who are very intuitive-driven have tend to have both strong Ne and Ni functions, and that they're actually positively correlated rather than negatively (Those who are strongly Ne tend to also be strongly Ni). Also if Jungian models were so good then why does everyone have such a hard time figuring out theirs?


----------



## Greyhart (Oct 13, 2014)

If I may butt in, original questionnaire struck me as lots of Te.

On, Ni vs Ne. It took me some time to sort through it. I mixed Ne-Ti process with Ni.

_"I personally feel it makes more logical sense that those who are very intuitive-driven have tend to have both strong Ne and Ni functions, and that they're actually positively correlated rather than negatively (Those who are strongly Ne tend to also be strongly Ni). Also if Jungian models were so good then why does everyone have such a hard time figuring out theirs?"_

Ok for the first one, as Ni or Ne dom you have _some_ access to your "reversed" dom function.

For Ne in Ni dom -> x x
For Ni in Ne aux -> x x

^ that's why reading into socionics is fun.

_"Also if Jungian models were so good then why does everyone have such a hard time figuring out theirs"_

People have hard time looking at themselves objectively and can't separate behavior and mental issues from their "personality". Personally, I freaking hate to introspect and delve into my feelings, it drain the life out of me. But I can't leave it alone because I need to figure _all_ things out.

_"For my whole young life, I've been basically told that my strongest skill is Ne, obviously not in those words though. Can you see why I have trouble taking your word for "you haven't shown any so its not a possibility" when people who know me best think otherwise? Not to mention it's my top, or tied for top, function in all these cognitive function tests."_

Did they read into differences between Ne and Ni or just told you that you have strong intuition? For INTP it will not be the strongest. Consider ENFP then.

_"Just imagine though, if they were posting like I am on this forum, would their Ne be "spilling out" as you say?"_

ENTP and ENFP forums. Yes, it's visible.


----------



## 68097 (Nov 20, 2013)

Shorty Levi said:


> Just imagine though, if they were posting like I am on this forum, would their Ne be "spilling out" as you say?
> 
> For my whole young life, I've been basically told that my strongest skill is Ne, obviously not in those words though. Can you see why I have trouble taking your word for "you haven't shown any so its not a possibility" when people who know me best think otherwise? Not to mention it's my top, or tied for top, function in all these cognitive function tests.
> 
> I personally feel it makes more logical sense that those who are very intuitive-driven have tend to have both strong Ne and Ni functions, and that they're actually positively correlated rather than negatively (Those who are strongly Ne tend to also be strongly Ni). Also if Jungian models were so good then why does everyone have such a hard time figuring out theirs?


Yes. Ne shows. It shows in conversation and in writing. It's an explosion that does not stop. It's flipping back and forth between perspectives constantly. It's arguing with itself, because Ne doesn't think any one thing is absolutely true, because there's always another possibility to consider. Trying to get Ne to decide on anything is hard -- NFPs can do it, but that's because they go to their moral center for certainty. 

There is an antagonistic relationship between Ne/Ni users, for the most part. Ne is too broad, too accepting of too many universal truths, too hard to nail down to the Ni-user, and the Ni-user is too narrow minded, too focused on one thing, too specific in its quest for deeper truth. NTJs drive NTPs nuts, and vice versa. 

Now and again, I get a flit of what could be construed as Ni, but it's probably Si-Ne working together in my case, and predicting an outcome based on former experience and pattern building (Ne-Ti).

You arguing with me is still showing me Ni, by the way, although it could be high Si too -- doubting my experiences while validating your own is a very Si-behavior.


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

Greyhart said:


> If I may butt in, original questionnaire struck me as lots of Te.


Of course, butting in is always welcome


> On, Ni vs Ne. It took me some time to sort through it. I mixed Ne-Ti process with Ni.
> 
> _"I personally feel it makes more logical sense that those who are very intuitive-driven have tend to have both strong Ne and Ni functions, and that they're actually positively correlated rather than negatively (Those who are strongly Ne tend to also be strongly Ni). Also if Jungian models were so good then why does everyone have such a hard time figuring out theirs?"_
> 
> Ok for the first one, as Ni or Ne dom you have _some_ access to your "reversed" dom function.


I guess I need to read into socionics more. Thanks for the links


> _"Also if Jungian models were so good then why does everyone have such a hard time figuring out theirs"_
> 
> People have hard time looking at themselves objectively and can't separate behavior and mental issues from their "personality". Personally, I freaking hate to introspect and delve into my feelings, it drain the life out of me. But I can't leave it alone because I need to figure _all_ things out.


Yeah I definitely have that compulsion to "figure _all_ things out" which is one of the reasons I figure I am closest to INTP.


> _"For my whole young life, I've been basically told that my strongest skill is Ne, obviously not in those words though. Can you see why I have trouble taking your word for "you haven't shown any so its not a possibility" when people who know me best think otherwise? Not to mention it's my top, or tied for top, function in all these cognitive function tests."_
> 
> Did they read into differences between Ne and Ni or just told you that you have strong intuition? For INTP it will not be the strongest. Consider ENFP then.


Basically that I have unique perspectives into various matters. I tend to get to the "root" of everything and then branch off from there using my own intuition. In social matters, I try to relate/console on a more logical wavelength, perhaps cause I have always vehemently hated when people have tried to tell me how to feel without giving a reason. I have a very personalized and unorthodox idealistic take on relationships, with the goal of reaching a symbiotic state made possible by mutual desires, rather than give and take. In work related problem solving (in a technical field), I constantly use a diverge/converge strategy of brainstorming to create efficient systems. In strategy games, I tend to independently come up with my own ways of doing things, some of which have significantly changed the global metagames. As far as my moral beliefs, I also tend to try to get to the root and diverge/converge. The issues I feel passionately about are often difficult for me to rate on a logical wavelength to other people because they tend to have a personal element to them. While I respect how issues make other people feel, I do tend to put a priority on how they make me feel, and feel that sometimes sidetracks me away from impartiality which can be a flaw. In creative pursuits, I tend to work from my innermost feelings and pour those onto different mediums in unconventional ways.


> _"Just imagine though, if they were posting like I am on this forum, would their Ne be "spilling out" as you say?"_
> 
> ENTP and ENFP forums. Yes, it's visible.


Well, I'm definitely not an extrovert. I do have ENTP and ENFP friends though, among whom I get way more extroverted and sort of take on their traits. But we live much, much different lives and at the end of the day I'm still sort of a loner who couldn't have it any other way.


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

angelcat said:


> Yes. Ne shows. It shows in conversation and in writing. It's an explosion that does not stop. It's flipping back and forth between perspectives constantly. It's arguing with itself, because Ne doesn't think any one thing is absolutely true, because there's always another possibility to consider. Trying to get Ne to decide on anything is hard -- NFPs can do it, but that's because they go to their moral center for certainty.
> 
> There is an antagonistic relationship between Ne/Ni users, for the most part. Ne is too broad, too accepting of too many universal truths, too hard to nail down to the Ni-user, and the Ni-user is too narrow minded, too focused on one thing, too specific in its quest for deeper truth. NTJs drive NTPs nuts, and vice versa.
> 
> ...


First of all I'm constantly arguing with myself internally, but generally on forums my goal is to present one or a few of many lines of thought just to put it to the test. I too get very frustrated with tunnel vision and I don't think I've ever been accused of having tunnel vision myself.

Do you also think it means something that most of my best friends are xNxP type? At least the only ones that I can really talk about deeper matters to without getting totally frustrated.

I still don't exactly understand what Si is supposed to mean but I get extremely frustrated at the mindset of "X happened in a vaguely similar situation so X is supposed to happen again", when in reality each situation should be assessed individually and there are a multitude of possibilities outside of X which can happen in the new, unique situation.


----------



## Greyhart (Oct 13, 2014)

It's worth noting that extroversion in this sort of personality systems it not about being outgoing/people/action oriented.

It's funny that you don't want to be INTJ because like 80% of INTJs on the forum are mistyped STJs, TPs and even INFPs.

For ENxPs "branching off" _is_ the point of doing anything. Not going to pretend to understand INTPs _fully_ but efficiency and narrowing your view are not something that NTPs enjoy in general. Sure we _can_ do it for work and if we have to but it's not the goal. The goal is always expansion. If anything I think INTPs are more idealistic/easily hurt by others than ENTPs since they are less likely to see it coming and more likely to ruminate on it rather than jump into next interesting thing happening.

I wish I had a good example of something from INTP perspective but alas can't remember anything concrete.


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

Greyhart said:


> It's worth noting that extroversion in this sort of personality systems it not about being outgoing/people/action oriented.
> 
> It's funny that you don't want to be INTJ because like 80% of INTJs on the forum are mistyped STJs, TPs and even INFPs.
> 
> For ENxPs "branching off" _is_ the point of doing anything. Not going to pretend to understand INTPs _fully_ but efficiency and narrowing your view are not something that NTPs enjoy in general. Sure we _can_ do it for work and if we have to but it's not the goal. The goal is always expansion. If anything I think INTPs are more idealistic/easily hurt by others than ENTPs since they are less likely to see it coming and more likely to ruminate on it rather than jump into next interesting thing happening.


It's not that I don't want to be INTJ, the description of it makes zero sense to describe myself, and on a test meant to differentiate between INTP and INTJ I got 88% INTP, 12% INTJ. INTJs are supposedly the smartest people, but I find zero reason to believe I am one. *I can't come up with any line of thought where I am an INTJ and that's why I eliminated it*. I'm willing to reconsider but as of now I just don't see it. I actually know quite a few self-identified INTJs and often I would like to be one. I think it's presumptive to think that I don't want to be a specific type as if I feel certain types are inherently superior. I think people of all different personalities have various perspectives which they excel in.

As for the work thing, in work I'm being paid to do something, and while I'm a perfectionist always striving to come with the exact optimal solution by choosing from a wide divergence of options, if I weren't to put my best foot forward, I would not be doing a good job. From when I was but a few years old, I've always been asking stuff like "Why are you doing it this way, when this way is more efficient?" And it is this which I really find interesting, but ultimately there's only so much time of your day that you can spend brainstorming.

But when you get outside of what I'm getting paid to do I'm completely directionless. In the past I have talked about strategy about games for hours at a time sometimes, but honestly have little interest in using them myself for a competitive advantage. It's just the puzzle aspect and mental exercise which I find appealing.


----------



## Greyhart (Oct 13, 2014)

Try this description. From generic descriptions at this point I should've been able to figure out cold fusion and accidentally create time machine out of the toilet. :tongue:

Note in socionics. MBTI INTJ = INTp in socionics. It's a conflict of J vs P naming. MBTI & Keirsey pick last letter based on first (out of top 2) _extroverted_ function. Socionics takes last latter based on just top function whatever it is. So N & S = P functions, F and T = J. So ENTP = Ne = P in MBTI and socionics. INTJ = Ni first,Te second, thus J in MBTI and P in socionics. In russian internets types are referred to either by 3 letters (e.g. ILI) or archetype character name (e.g. Don Quixote) which prevents this confusion and needles arguments.


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

Based on that link, all INxx describe me well except the IEI (INFJ). For now I just read over the top 2 functions in each, but my general impression is that I deal with people from an INFP perspective, but the INTx takes over in work/alone time.

Based on how "efficiency" seems to be defined for Te, I get the feeling I have a preference for Ne over Te, but a lot of the little things in the Te description are very true for me (basically with regards to low attention to the mundane). The one exception douchebaggy things. I prefer to withdraw or do a logical step-by-step explanation rather than mock other opinions. The way I take other peoples feelings into consideration is definitely more in line with the socionomics INFP description. The one thing that can put me over the edge is when someone is presenting deliberate lies/misinformation.

This whole thing is very interesting because it's a completely different perspective of INTJ vs INTP. I don't know if I've ever scored below 80% P on an MBTI test but it seems to be a different dichotomy at play when delving into socionomics.

What's also interesting is that among the functions covered in the top 2 functions of the socionomics for INTP, INFP, INTJ, and INFJ, the Te and especially the Fe descriptions are where I find the most conflict, which is right in line with the Jungian functions tests, where I consistently score high on Ne, Ni, Ti and Fi.

The Jungian functions tests seem to jive better with the socionomics descriptions than the MBTI stuff. Particularly the dichotomy tests seem to be at odds because they simply aren't as informative. There's 16 personalities but 40,320 different possible rankings of functions. And it's pretty obvious what causes the bottleneck of information - they just lump Te/Ti, Fe/Fi, and Ne/Ni together with tangential J questions determining the selection of the functions.


----------



## Greyhart (Oct 13, 2014)

Socionics descriptions incorporate how types deal with situations that are not "natural" for a type e.g. force Te situation onto Ti dom/aux. 

Cognitive test (those that actually show Fi/Fe and so on rather than simple F vs T) are kind of wonky. I have a folder called "superhuman test results" with screenshots of various posts from this forum with some craaaaaazy "developed" functions like everything is high except some one function. :laughing: These tests kinda rely on you being able to tell apart your mental processes. Like I used to score high on Ni Ti simultaneously with Ne and Te following close behind and Fi and Fe non existent or in minus. xD Problem is, by the time you are able to tell your functions apart tests are kind of redundant and are mostly to amuse you. "Oh, I'm higher on Fe today!".


_"The one exception douchebaggy things. I prefer to withdraw or do a logical step-by-step explanation rather than mock other opinions."_
Manners, restraint, learned behavior, taught in family or from an example. Enneagram type (AND health level) affect that too. Many INTJs are type 5 which on unhealthy levels can go into smarter-than-thou provocative asshole territory.

Also, as children first 2 functions are most apparent. INFP kids are withdrawn gentle dreamer kids. I've seen healthy Fi doms grow up, lose shyness, become more open and opinionated.


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

I did find the socionomics descriptions particularly interesting for how Te acts in an aux position to Ni dom. It's almost like they created an alternate version of Te which I could relate to a lot more than the typical description of Te, which is meant to apply to both Si and Ni users.

As for early age stuff:
I was overemotional as a child which led to learning to internalize all my emotions which to this day I still mostly keep to myself. (this is probably the roots of my INFP side)

However, at the same time I also made the teachers hate me because I questioned the way they made us do everything and insisted on doing things my way because nothing would be discovered just doing it like everyone else. After all I could see the result of what everyone else did, and reaching point B from point A on itself meant nothing to me. (this is the INTx in action) In the past I would've called this INTP but I'm not even sure now.


----------



## TyranAmiros (Jul 7, 2014)

Shorty Levi said:


> However, at the same time I also made the teachers hate me because I questioned the way they made us do everything and insisted on doing things my way because nothing would be discovered just doing it like everyone else. After all I could see the result of what everyone else did, and reaching point B from point A on itself meant nothing to me. (this is the INTx in action) In the past I would've called this INTP but I'm not even sure now.


Yikes, this really isn't what INTPs do. Our inferior Fe makes us reasonably conformist as children (it's the ENPs who are more likely to rebel in school, especially elementary school). I think most of us INTPs want to know exactly why going from Point A to Point B is the standard, and our challenge is going to be based on this received wisdom. That's Ne-Si at work. We do it differently after we know why the standard exists in the first place, after we've figured out the system at work. I mean, we're problem solvers, first and foremost, so we want to understand the status quo (Si) so that we can use identify the flaws (Ti) and correct them (Ne). And if we want to do it our own way, we tend to do so quietly, at least until we're older and more confident about our approach.

It sounds like you're using Te to dispute methodology and Ni to intuit what methodology should be used.


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

TyranAmiros said:


> Yikes, this really isn't what INTPs do. Our inferior Fe makes us reasonably conformist as children (it's the ENPs who are more likely to rebel in school, especially elementary school). I think most of us INTPs want to know exactly why going from Point A to Point B is the standard, and our challenge is going to be based on this received wisdom. That's Ne-Si at work. We do it differently after we know why the standard exists in the first place, after we've figured out the system at work. I mean, we're problem solvers, first and foremost, so we want to understand the status quo (Si) so that we can use identify the flaws (Ti) and correct them (Ne). And if we want to do it our own way, we tend to do so quietly, at least until we're older and more confident about our approach.
> 
> It sounds like you're using Te to dispute methodology and Ni to intuit what methodology should be used.


Yes I described what does seem more Ni/Te, now that I'm looking at it that way. I definitely was non-conformist because I questioned why everything was done the way it was, but I follow your "INTP thought process" as well. I also questioned why the standards were as they were, as the tasks themselves seemed quite pointless. In general though, I feel like I was more Ni/Te in early childhood and more Ti/Ne in adolescence, at least with regards to schooling. And I also feel the main reason behind this was not so much because I changed, but because the world changed around me. We were walked through everything step-by-step so I naturally questioned the steps more in early schooling, but in later schooling it was more "Here's point B, you get their how you choose", and why we were supposed to get there was what I focused my attention on. I don't think that this is so much of an INTJ turning into an INTP as an INTx finding himself in different surroundings. Today I have strong political beliefs in changing the education system toward developing critical thinking and original thought rather than moving toward an even stricter standardized testing system, which I feel is killing societal innovation.

Also took another dichotomy test, mainly just to post elsewhere but I got INTP for the first time in a while:


----------



## Greyhart (Oct 13, 2014)

Shorty Levi said:


> Yes I described what does seem more Ni/Te, now that I'm looking at it that way. I definitely was non-conformist because I questioned why everything was done the way it was, but I follow your "INTP thought process" as well. I also questioned why the standards were as they were, as the tasks themselves seemed quite pointless. In general though, I feel like I was more Ni/Te in early childhood and more Ti/Ne in adolescence, at least with regards to schooling. And I also feel the main reason behind this was not so much because I changed, but because the world changed around me. We were walked through everything step-by-step so I naturally questioned the steps more in early schooling, but in later schooling it was more "Here's point B, you get their how you choose", and why we were supposed to get there was what I focused my attention on. I don't think that this is so much of an INTJ turning into an INTP as an INTx finding himself in different surroundings. Today I have strong political beliefs in changing the education system toward developing critical thinking and original thought rather than moving toward an even stricter standardized testing system, which I feel is killing societal innovation.
> 
> Also took another dichotomy test, mainly just to post elsewhere but I got INTP for the first time in a while:


I keep meaning to read those threads from start to finish but keep getting distracted. INTP kid. INTJ kid.

For that test, I've had account in there for at least 7 years I think. IIRC I had INTP, INFP, ISTJ, INTJ results. The last one for a while. Currently have ENTP results but that's because I knew what it wants from me and that answers influenced by my social anxiety and phobia will pass as introversion and judging. :crazy:


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

Greyhart said:


> I keep meaning to read those threads from start to finish but keep getting distracted. INTP kid. INTJ kid.
> 
> For that test, I've had account in there for at least 7 years I think. IIRC I had INTP, INFP, ISTJ, INTJ results. The last one for a while. Currently have ENTP results but that's because I knew what it wants from me and that answers influenced by my social anxiety and phobia will pass as introversion and judging. :crazy:


Yeah I've definitely fluctuated on introversion but never to the point where I ended up as an E. Still I think I was at like 60/40 at some point. Same with T vs F which I usually come out as F, but the T-types tend to describe me more completely.

By the way, those links were great. As far as the Young Levi childhood descriptions go, INTP > INTJ > INFP without a doubt. However, the INFP one does hit in certain areas which the other two don't. Mainly sensitivity, attachment, and the want for harmony. Aren't personalities subject to change though, as people age?


----------



## Greyhart (Oct 13, 2014)

Shorty Levi said:


> Aren't personalities subject to change though, as people age?


Of course. It's just baseline description. Helped me figure out that I was not any kind of introverted kid. There's also enneagram type that develops along that to consider.

_"Mainly sensitivity, attachment, and the want for harmony."_ Personally, I think those are more of universal children description. I was sensitive to atmosphere in my house, had attachment to books and toys and _really_ wanted harmony in family. Children have easier access to all functions. Likely to help them learn, adapt and survive until adulthood. Oh, God, I forgot my tea.

The way I understand it, "Thinking" type kids start off having relatively harder time to express their emotions and connecting to people but, if all goes well, age into becoming more open. While "Feelers" age in reverse i.e. people-oriented kids become more assertive and opinionated. At least this is what I'm getting from various articles, posts and some asking around irl. Well, and myself.


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

Greyhart said:


> The way I understand it, "Thinking" type kids start off having relatively harder time to express their emotions and connecting to people but, if all goes well, age into becoming more open. While "Feelers" age in reverse i.e. people-oriented kids become more assertive and opinionated. At least this is what I'm getting from various articles, posts and some asking around irl. Well, and myself.


Well in my very early years (like baby to toddler stage), I was very outward emotional and couldn't stop crying. Also I cried a lot the first few years of school but I guess a lot could have been a scheme to try to get my way.


----------



## Greyhart (Oct 13, 2014)

Shorty Levi said:


> Well in my very early years (like baby to toddler stage), I was very outward emotional and couldn't stop crying. Also I cried a lot the first few years of school but I guess a lot could have been a scheme to try to get my way.


Nah, all kids cry. :tongue: Don't focus on kids' profiles that much. It just _can_ help if you are stuck between 2 similar but different types but otherwise just look at functions.


----------



## TyranAmiros (Jul 7, 2014)

Shorty Levi said:


> Yeah I've definitely fluctuated on introversion but never to the point where I ended up as an E. Still I think I was at like 60/40 at some point. Same with T vs F which I usually come out as F, but the T-types tend to describe me more completely.
> 
> By the way, those links were great. As far as the Young Levi childhood descriptions go, INTP > INTJ > INFP without a doubt. However, the INFP one does hit in certain areas which the other two don't. Mainly sensitivity, attachment, and the want for harmony. Aren't personalities subject to change though, as people age?


To me, the faith in tests is indicative of Te--my Ti rejects the likelihood that a test can't be gamed if you know what the answers correspond to. That's how I kept getting INTJ in my late teens/early 20s--I'd just pick the answers I knew would give me INTJ. This is doubly true since we've already covered the problems with the dichotomy-based tests for intuitives (P/J=Se/Si) on page 1.

About personality changing as we age, this is what I love about cognitive function theory. Yes, we grow into our functions as we age. As a young child, our dominant function (along with our weak, uncontrolled inferior function) dominate our behavior. As we age, we begin to develop our auxiliary function around puberty, but it continues developing into our early 20s, so the quiet, focused INFJ suddenly blossoms into the center of a social circle. The distractible ENTP discovers subjects that make him think rather than act out. As we get even older, into our 20s, we gain more control over our tertiary function, because that's what helps us achieve integration between our dominant and auxiliary functions. The INTP learns to step out of the clouds and deal with practical matters (Si), the INTJ learns that science must be balanced by ethics (Fi). The ISFP learns that he needs to consider the future, not only the moment (Ni). 

This isn't so much that our personalities _change_ so much as _grow_. Loud in childhood, gets quieter/more thoughtful in adolescence points to extraversion, no matter how much social anxiety a person has these days. Many IFJs, who are highly sensitive to emotional states as children, learn to turn that around on the other person by leading as their Fe-Ti process develops. They might "seem like a different person"--but they're not. I'm 30. I'm often mistaken for an extravert these days because I've developed Ne through acting, debate, teaching, presenting. Doesn't change the fact that nothing leaves my lips without getting through Ti. Doesn't change the fact that I explode at people from time to time because I struggle in social settings (inferior Fe). But I'm not the same person I was at 13--I use more Ne and Si now, which mean I'm not in my head quite so much.


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

TyranAmiros said:


> To me, the faith in tests is indicative of Te


Wait, I have faith in tests? If I had any faith in tests I wouldn't even consider INTJ (ILI socionics type). The only questions which I have difficulty with are the Thinking vs Feeling ones because I usually value both to a very high degree. The rest are usually fairly black and white. I simply don't plan or organize, and hold myself down to things. This is part of my relationship with the world, and a weakness at that. It also drives people crazy, and I know I'll never come up as J in these kinds of tests. In a more ideal form I'd have more of these "J" traits. I simply posted that test because I just took it even though I wasn't using it as evidence of anything except that it's the first time in ages that I've come out as INTP rather than INFP, which is quite significant I thought.


----------



## Greyhart (Oct 13, 2014)

This thread is diamonds. :laughing: For "faith in tests", I believe OP simply shows results that contradict opinions presented in this thread.

To the OP, don't get hung up on J vs P. As you see, socionics and MBTI/Keirsey don't even agree on it for introverts. It's just terminology simplified to explanation the system. Think ILI, EII or LII. Or better yet, archetypical names. Those are fun.

The Je (extroverted judging) function in INxJs simply implies that they are likely to execute/use/act upon their Ni view/vision in the reality. Well, eventually since inferior Se can slow that down.

Ti can be content with amassing knowledge for knowledge sake. Today I've spent hours on i09, read lengthy articles about roombas and Gorillaz history, random threads on this forum. Also compilation of links with sketchbook ideas and plot of the game along with all cinematic videos from it. Well, that's more of Ne thing, but overall = useless knowledge and yet I am happy because I have lots of new things to ponder on. Getter than any energy drink.

Also, I think aux function does show up before 10, I was _madly_ into understanding how things worked, after all while still being _very_ extroverted child.


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

Greyhart said:


> This thread is diamonds. :laughing: For "faith in tests", I believe OP simply shows results that contradict opinions presented in this thread.


Glad you find some value in the ramblethons! For the most part, yes that's why I showed it, but also because Myers herself seems to have believed in that dichotomy. I believe it's theoretically possible to be an INTP according to Myers and an INTJ(ILI) according to socionics/Jung functions.


> Myers and Briggs added another dimension to Jung's typological model by identifying that people also have a preference for using either the judging function (thinking or feeling) or their perceiving function (sensing or intuition) when relating to the outside world (extraversion).
> 
> Myers and Briggs held that types with a preference for judging show the world their preferred judging function (thinking or feeling). So TJ types tend to appear to the world as logical, and FJ types as empathetic. According to Myers, judging types like to "have matters settled".
> 
> Those types who prefer perception show the world their preferred perceiving function (sensing or intuition). So SP types tend to appear to the world as concrete and NP types as abstract. According to Myers, perceptive types prefer to "keep decisions open".





> To the OP, don't get hung up on J vs P. As you see, socionics and MBTI/Keirsey don't even agree on it for introverts. It's just terminology simplified to explanation the system. Think ILI, EII or LII. Or better yet, archetypical names. Those are fun.
> 
> The Je (extroverted judging) function in INxJs simply implies that they are likely to execute/use/act upon their Ni view/vision in the reality. Well, eventually since inferior Se can slow that down.


It depends on what experts you are listening to. It seems like there are multiple different schools of thought on this. I've taken MBTI before I knew what MBTI was and always came out as strong P. That doesn't mean I am a EII or LII, but rather it means that Myers would have considered me a P. Now this socionics stuff seems more advanced, and I like that people are trying to further expand on what Jung did. I guess there's also this typical pop psychology view of MBTI based on everyone taking these Myers-Briggs tests, and determining their type based off of that. From that viewpoint, I am definitely INxP and always have been. But of course that's just one way of looking at it.

You can't do a brain scan or some kind of scientific test to determine use of these different Ni, Ne, Te, Ti etc, at least none that I know of. So they're all abstractions used to approximate human cognition which definitely have their uses as well as boundaries. This is such an inexact science but based on reading them I've found that I use varying degrees of what people have called Ne, Ni, Ti, Fi, and some Te, and less Fe. Not much Si or Se. But yes, everyone has different definitions of what exactly constitutes an INTP or INTJ or INFP. I'm a bit hesitant to use socionics thought to define MBTI because as its used today MBTI types usually are determined based on tests. If I take tests I'll end up as one of two MBTI types regardless of what socionics says.

There's so many different ways of explaining personality in these abstract ways and in each system I don't see why you can't end up with a type that doesn't necessarily parallel with its supposed twin in a different system. (Can INTJ really be used interchangeably with INTp/IEI? Both are usually determined in different ways. Unless it can be proven that they are the same thing, which probably will never happen)


> Ti can be content with amassing knowledge for knowledge sake. Today I've spent hours on i09, read lengthy articles about roombas and Gorillaz history, random threads on this forum. Also compilation of links with sketchbook ideas and plot of the game along with all cinematic videos from it. Well, that's more of Ne thing, but overall = useless knowledge and yet I am happy because I have lots of new things to ponder on. Getter than any energy drink.


I do a lot of that because I enjoy the mental exercise of figuring what things are all about. I came here originally to type anime characters, just shows how focused I am! Plus I always have boundless theories of what's going to happen next in fictional stories and just enjoy getting to know the characters and stuff. Useful? Not at all I guess, but it's something I do.


> Also, I think aux function does show up before 10, I was _madly_ into understanding how things worked, after all while still being _very_ extroverted child.


Not an extrovert, but same here. But I think understanding how things work can be both Ti/Ne and Ni/Te. The two pairs share a lot in common based on what I'm reading, and I feel like I use both.


----------



## Greyhart (Oct 13, 2014)

For "different theories", yeah, some one these forums hold to one theory but most (including myself) seem to be into mixing and matching and basically just relying on functions rather than letter dichotomy. 

I've actually seen a video of some woman "scanning" brain of kids to see differences between sensors, Ne and Ni users. I don't know how reliable her research is, though.



> I do a lot of that because I enjoy the mental exercise of figuring what things are all about. I came here originally to type anime characters, just shows how focused I am! Plus I always have boundless theories of what's going to happen next in fictional stories and just enjoy getting to know the characters and stuff. Useful? Not at all I guess, but it's something I do.


It's _my life_. :laughing: All types do enjoy it to a different extent.



> Not an extrovert, but same here. But I think understanding how things work can be both Ti/Ne and Ni/Te. The two pairs share a lot in common based on what I'm reading, and I feel like I use both.


Probably xxTx type kids will be more attracted to knowing how things work. More than F types. Kids still like to ask "Why?" regardless. That being said, my ISTP as a kid was more into immediate experiences than knowledge or puzzles. Again, I didn't study into kids much yet just some ideas I got from my long-time friends and some info I did read.


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

Greyhart said:


> For "different theories", yeah, some one these forums hold to one theory but most (including myself) seem to be into mixing and matching and basically just relying on functions rather than letter dichotomy.


I'm starting to think though, that it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to be using letter dichotomies when you're talking functions. The letter dichotomies are MBTI which is the theories of Myers and Briggs. Myers, in her explanations, used the letters and seems to believe in dichotomy theory. So it would seem reasonable to use dichotomies to figure out your 4 letter MBTI.

I think clarity and precision is lost when you mix and match, which hurts our understanding and particularly communication. Thankfully the socionics types give a three letter code which is based off functions rather than dichotomies.


> I've actually seen a video of some woman "scanning" brain of kids to see differences between sensors, Ne and Ni users. I don't know how reliable her research is, though.


That would be very interesting. Would be interesting if actual medical tests could confirm/reject personality theory as we know it. Maybe the next big development.


> It's _my life_. :laughing: All types do enjoy it to a different extent.


I can see it. Of course all types do it, but one thing I've noticed that I share with NTPs is the careful impartial analysis of every strategy in a game. Most people don't do it to an obnoxious degree.


> Probably xxTx type kids will be more attracted to knowing how things work. More than F types. Kids still like to ask "Why?" regardless. That being said, my ISTP as a kid was more into immediate experiences than knowledge or puzzles. Again, I didn't study into kids much yet just some ideas I got from my long-time friends and some info I did read.


I would literally throw fits if someone didn't explain why though. Just couldn't let it go. At some point I started to develop a stronger Fe just so I wouldn't be bugging people as much with my inquisitiveness.


----------



## Greyhart (Oct 13, 2014)

there found it

As for MBTI & such, all of these are based on _interpretations_ of Jung's functions work.


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

Greyhart said:


> there found it
> 
> As for MBTI & such, all of these are based on _interpretations_ of Jung's functions work.


Thanks, the scanning thing came from Dario Nardi's work, some of which is explained here: http://www.pdx.edu/sysc/sites/www.pdx.edu.sysc/files/neuro-systems.pdf

Had to read that to figure out what was meant by extroverted intuitives vs introverted intuitives. The process presumably involved them taking a standard Myers-Briggs test based off dichotomies and then translating that into Jung's functions.

I think the two things I found most interesting in the video were:
1) She's obviously a leading expert and like myself looks at the different personalities as "preferences". This opposes some peoples' interpretations which like to pigeonhole people into one cognitive stack and then try to explain all actions through that lens.
2) I'm fairly certain I would have showed up as external intuition based on how the kids went about math problems because my problem solving approach was extremely improvised (Ne) and then filtered with rational judgment (Ti).


----------



## Greyhart (Oct 13, 2014)

From what I get she only brought up Sensing in general but 2 different Ns. As a kids (and still tbh) I figured out things by pocking from different points and seeing which one makes them most sense/works at all.

I've only read _a bit_ into Nardi's work _yesterday_. :laughing:


----------



## Levitar (Jan 24, 2015)

Greyhart said:


> From what I get she only brought up Sensing in general but 2 different Ns. As a kids (and still tbh) I figured out things by pocking from different points and seeing which one makes them most sense/works at all.


Yes that is what she did. I think the intuitives are more interested in their own kind  Plus introverted sensing doesn't seem to be highly understood, nor very defined. Right now _in my understanding_, the key to understanding preference of Ni/Te vs Ti/Ne is thinking about what you have most developed in your mind - a web of logically-connected personalized logic or a web of systems which you are adept at choosing between more intuitively. I've always been sort of a logic builder internally while looking for pieces to add to that web externally. So if I'm stuck I'll go all "christmas tree" mode and try to connect pieces to my web rationally. I think that also may be why I'm closer to INTP rather than ENTP and it makes sense for Jungian functions - accessing the logic web is where I go to first, but then the auxiliary Ne lights up when I don't have a solution there. I do use Ni in a lot of areas and at times have an overactive Ni, but it doesn't show up in logical pursuits like math probably cause it isn't all that well connected to Te.


----------

