# High (Ti Ne) and (Te Ni). Am I more INTP or INTJ? Help appreciated.



## Lady Phoenix (Mar 13, 2013)

Upon reading about the functions and taking cognitive functions quizzes and Socionics, I am always placed as an INTP and INTJ. It's such a conundrum trying to decide if I'm INTP or INTJ as I relate so well to both of the descriptions, but not the descriptions of the other types, except ENTP a little. My (Ti Ne) and (Te Ni) are all quite high.

I would like to describe some of my behaviors and processes, and I do hope those with more expertise on the cognitive functions and the MBTI Socionics type can shed some clarity on it. This will be a bit of a long post, but I think the details will makes things clearer for others to judge or provide feedback.



*Perfectionism - *I am a perfectionist when it comes to my work, to expressing my thoughts or ideas and even with cleaning my apartment. It can be counter productive as the apartment will be very messy, but one area that I clean like the bathroom or kitchen will be spotless. I find that my perfectionism causes me to procrastinate in my not productive periods as I will spend weeks researching something before acting. Past mistakes haunt me and prevent me from achieving my present goals and future goals. 
 

*Procrastination & Productivity -* My process generally is: research something for weeks, get started and work obsessively for a week or so and then loose steam. I'm more of a doer in spurts of energy rather than a doer in a consistent, steady manner. So, once I get that energy to do, I have to impose strict structure or discipline or else I loose steam in terms of my energy, focus and motivation. I've jumped from job to job at the previous area of work because I felt uninspired and mentally under-stimulated and stressed by the demands of micromanaging bosses, which is why I want to go back to school to change careers. I often bite off more than I can chew, which leaves me feeling overwhelmed when I have to catch up fast, so I have to be militant with myself for short periods of time. Old habits are very hard for me to break, but I'm trying to force myself to rather than be lazy and settle on a comfort zone that just makes me feel half-dead inside. If I don't impose strict structure on myself for some periods at a time, So, for my mental health and peace, I must try to get things done. 
 

While I do not like excessive structure too much, I like results and achieving goals, though more so for knowledge and self worth, rather than for money. I act more in long extended bursts of inspiration rather than following a strict schedule. I'm very particular about things also, such as ambiance and food preferences, but it is the HSP trait at work. I do procrastinate when things are not enjoyable or I'm not inspired. I go through periods of intense productivity (the extended bursts of inspiration/energy that I mentioned in my post), then periods of doing the wrong thing. Wikipedia, Google, documentaries, self help books and novels become the source of my wasting months getting nothing accomplished. This results in feeling down from nothing getting done, and makes me feel less like doing.I take a long time to make a decision because I've changed my mind after the fact in the past, and have regretted it. However, I also realize that when too much goes unfinished that I become highly stressed and anxious. When I was younger and lived my life much simpler in terms of hobbies, interests and people, I felt more natural keeping options open and having more than one project. In my unmotivated periods, I can get carried away invite hobbies and personal interests. However, after a while, I reel myself in by trying to accomplish goals. I have found that unless I focus on just a few things in my life, I have the tendency to waste a lot of time as I need some structure to be disciplined for some periods of time or I get nothing done. 
 

*Alternate messiness and minimalism - *Though I'm not naturally organized in terms of my home, I like to be and try to be as it helps reduce anxiety/overwhelm and helps me stay focused. I am only very messy and procrastinate when my mild anxiety and depression are at high levels, and I become overwhelmed or unmotivated, respectively, especially since I'm also a HSP (Google Elaine Aaron). My husband says I become negative and a bit of a control freak when I'm anxious. I am a collector, but I used to have less stuff. Now, my small apartment is so cluttered, and it bothers me because I can't stay focused to do hard things when things are messy. So, I have been researching minimalism and trying to figure the best way to de-clutter. I tend to keep a lot of stuff because I feel really guilty wasting money on them or thinking my family spent money on it and I'm wasting it, thinking I will need it one day or that I can do some DIY with it as I have in the past, but no longer have time for. 
 

*Social - * I also am a HSP (Highly Sensitive Person - google Elaine Aaron) and am also considerate and tolerant of others. I don't care about if random people don't like me, but I do care if those in my life or who I like also approve of me. The moment they judge me wrongfully or do something duplicitous a repeated number of times, though, I drop people easily, no matter how close I was to them. I try to be thoughtful and kind by giving my time and encouraging words, but do not display deep emotions often or let others in often, but when I do it's intense. Many people tell me I seem reserved and composed, but my emotions are actually quite intense underneath. I only show them to 2 or 3 people in my life, though. Family and friends don't often understand or find me unreliable when I break plans sometimes or don't see them for months, but I no longer feel guilty about it because I think since I'm tolerant of others, they should be tolerant of me too. I confess, though, that half of the time, I break plans to pursue non-essential hobbies and interests. I am very attuned to my environment and sensitive about certain stimuli (HSP), but my emotions are very internal. Some descriptions say INTJs have a need to be right and they do not care about the feelings of others. I dislike being argumentative unless it is a big issue, and I am tolerant. I also am not super confident as INTJs are painted out to be. I'm very self-critical as I am a perfectionist, and I can be critical of others as well, but I don't voice it as I think it is rude to do so, and just avoid people if I dislike their behavior. I find that INTJ are usually seen as very strong figures, but I am more subtle and agreeable socially unless something I strongly believe in or know a lot about is blatantly being challenged or spoken about without little evidence (very INTP).


----------



## randomshoes (Dec 11, 2013)

Everything you've said is very, very P (that is, extroverted perceiving function, introverted judging function). Being insanely productive in spurts and then spacing out for a long time is classic perceiving. In particular, sounds like Ne to me. INTJs have Te, which considering your tendency to be flexible, unreliable, and often inefficient seems pretty unlikely. It also sounds like you have inferior feeling to me. So from those choices I'd pick INTP. I'd type you as any perceiving type before INTJ, so I'd pretty much throw that idea out.


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

@Lady Phoenix - you talk about this using a lot of concrete examples, sensory examples, and though you ask a lot of questions and are interested... is it possible that the theoretical aspect of all this is not your strongest suit?

Is it then possible that we are dealing with a false dichotomy here, and that INTx is not the question at all?

Why N and not S, for example?

Just a thought, of course... and I suppose I do agree with @randomshoes assessment that you seem to show more of a Pe approach, but that can get messed up by a lot of things... not the least of which is a skewed self-perception. 

Perhaps give an example of one of your tangential projects?


----------



## Lady Phoenix (Mar 13, 2013)

arkigos said:


> @_Lady Phoenix_ - you talk about this using a lot of concrete examples, sensory examples, and though you ask a lot of questions and are interested... is it possible that the theoretical aspect of all this is not your strongest suit?
> 
> Is it then possible that we are dealing with a false dichotomy here, and that INTx is not the question at all?
> 
> ...



Hi. Thanks for reading though my long entry and for your response. I do understand the functions enough and have been professionally typed as a INTJ when I was younger and as an INTP last year. I used concrete sensory examples since I do relate to the higher functions of both types almost equally. I'm quite self aware. In fact, I spend a lot of time reflecting about my the meaning of my actions and thoughts, so I am certain I am not an S or F type. I have the descriptions and the dominant cognitive functions of theses types, and do not relate at all. For instance, I'm definitely not S because I am always in my head, analyzing, and not in touch with my surroundings. Two of my friends are S types, and they always note this. I'm also definitely not a F type because I don't like dealing with feeling issues. Even dealing with family issues and feelings overwhelm me, and I wish everyone would handle their emotions better rather than complain to me. I think I'm conscientious, but I have been accused of not being there for people enough. It perplexes me because I think people should be more independent and less needy emotionally. I dislike it when I need others emotionally also. 

If it would help, I will give some examples of which functions I use quite often in all honesty.
*[FONT=Tahoma,Helvetica]
Ti: Introverted Thinking**
*I am always trying to find the right word to express concepts or my view on things. I often correct people grammatically or regard errors in reasoning, such as when there is a lack of evidence or facts, especially those close to me. I have learned to refrain from doing that with strangers and cut down with family as well as I don't like coming across as abrasive and because it seems to get people too riled up emotionally. However, I still mentally note their errors and make judgements about their education level or amount they read based on their use of grammar and communication style. I wouldn't say this to them as I am aware that this seems a bit pompous and egotistical, and they would not understand that it is not personal (i.e. Thought I may conclude they're less intelligent, I don't look down on less educated or less intelligent people or treat them without common courtesy or respect). I've been called a know-it-all and stubborn, but people don't realize that if they present a better argument with facts or ideas that make sense to me, I am willing to take it into account. I am very harsh on myself when I don't express my views or theories in a precise manner, and spend always seem to edit my responses on forums if I see a grammatical error. 

Te: Extraverted Thinking
I also am very precise about percentages and note errors when someone is presenting evidence. I notice when someone says something, but does the opposite or when people are being hypocritical. It is one of my pet peeves. I am not argumentative usually, but definitely am when someone is presenting something a fact with little evidence. It annoys me when people get upset about this as it is not personal, but just exploring facts and evidence.

Ti: Introverted Thinking
I categorize things in my head all the time, making mental lists and tables. I do so when I see a new object or a new leaf or animal as I enjoy science. Categorizing helps me to understand how the object works or why the animal behaves the way they do. When I was a child, I loved Mr. Rogers not because of the make believe, but because of the segments where he spoke about how things are made. 

Ne: Extraverted iNtuiting
I make connections with the forces of nature, such as the wind moving the leaves, and a mystical state, but I don't believe in man made religions. When I get really stressed, I take a walk in nature, and I think about how all things in nature are connected, including animals, such as us. I have a hard time shutting down my brain as I am always thinking, even at night before bed, so this and deep breathing are the only things that help me clear my mind.

Ni: Introverted iNtuiting
I'm feel inspired when I am thinking about a scientific concept, such as inertia, and then observe how it comes into affect in the world. For instance, when on the train, when the train stops, I'll say to myself mental, "awesome - my body continuing to move while the train has stopped. This is is inertia", then I'll literally disengage physically from my surroundings and people around me and and start thinking about the concept of inertia in depth. I make the same observations and conclusions about people, such as, once a woman I worked who was senior to me not in position, but because of her years on the job, with was quite bitchy to me although I was quite polite to her. I made a conclusion that she was being so because she had not went to school, and felt threatened or inadequate because I had and was getting praised from my boss as being intelligent. It irritated me and drained me that she was so insecure to mistreat me instead of bettering herself, but I never lost my cool and acted uncivilized back with her in return. I left the job eventually, though, due to my bosses lack of response to remedy the situation after I brought it to his attention that the woman was sabotaging me by keeping information from me that I needed to do my job. I left another job because my boss was micromanaging my work and even reading my emails, even though I was doing a good job.

*A tangential project* - I literally spent a month every day reading about something about minimalism, such as blogs and videos, reading the philosophy, watching videos about Zen Buddhism and what motivated people to become minimalism, then practical tips to get started all because I want to make my house less cluttered. Then, I de-clutter like crazy for a day or so, then got bored of it. Now two weeks after that de-cluttering frenzy, I'm not happy with my progress as things are still cluttered, so I am reading a few blogs again to get me re-inspired.

I'll try to make my responses less lengthy, but I wanted to give details, so you can see the inner workings of my behavior. I sincerely appreciate your reading this long response and your input. [/FONT]


----------



## Lady Phoenix (Mar 13, 2013)

randomshoes said:


> Everything you've said is very, very P (that is, extroverted perceiving function, introverted judging function). Being insanely productive in spurts and then spacing out for a long time is classic perceiving. In particular, sounds like Ne to me. INTJs have Te, which considering your tendency to be flexible, unreliable, and often inefficient seems pretty unlikely. It also sounds like you have inferior feeling to me. So from those choices I'd pick INTP. I'd type you as any perceiving type before INTJ, so I'd pretty much throw that idea out.


I do relate to INTP more, and was type professionally as such last year, but what throws me off is that I was type as INTJ when I was younger (late teens). It was during one of my more ambitious phases though, so I wonder if the fact that I was trying to be more action oriented habits and motivated affected the results at the time. I am aware of my weakness of getting bored (mentally) easily and not being consistent with acting, so I find myself trying to be more decisive and efficient to combat that. Thanks for your input.


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

Lady Phoenix said:


> Hi. Thanks for reading though my long entry and for your response. I do understand the functions enough and have been professionally typed as a INTJ when I was younger and as an INTP last year. I used concrete sensory examples since I do relate to the higher functions of both types almost equally. I'm quite self aware. In fact, I spend a lot of time reflecting about my the meaning of my actions and thoughts, so I am certain I am not an S or F type. I have the descriptions and the dominant cognitive functions of theses types, and do not relate at all. For instance, I'm definitely not S because I am always in my head, analyzing, and not in touch with my surroundings. Two of my friends are S types, and they always note this. I'm also definitely not a F type because I don't like dealing with feeling issues. Even dealing with family issues and feelings overwhelm me, and I wish everyone would handle their emotions better rather than complain to me. I think I'm conscientious, but I have been accused of not being there for people enough. It perplexes me because I think people should be more independent and less needy emotionally. I dislike it when I need others emotionally also.


 

Why wouldn't an S type reflect on the meaning of their actions and thoughts?

Being in your head could simply be cognitive introversion. What about that speaks toward N specifically?

You make a more compelling argument for T, however, though I can't definitively say in which attitude. However, the way you stereotype feels like Si to me. Anecdotal, subjective, fairly absolute. 




Lady Phoenix said:


> If it would help, I will give some examples of which functions I use quite often in all honesty.



Directly, no, because the more we remove your filters the better of we will be.




Lady Phoenix said:


> I am always trying to find the right word to express concepts or my view on things. I often correct people grammatically, especially those close to me. I have learned to refrain from doing that with strangers though as I don't like coming cross as abrasive, but I still mentally note their errors and make judgements about their education level or amount they read based on their use of grammar and communication style. I wouldn't say this to them as I am aware that this seems a bit pompous and egotistical, and they would not understand that it is not personal. I am very harsh on myself when I don't express my views or theories in a precise manner, and spend always seem to edit my responses on forums if I see a grammatical error.


 

Well, that can go anywhere. For some reason I associate that with Si, but I am sure all sorts of types do it. A better question might be 'why' do you do it?




Lady Phoenix said:


> I also am very precise about percentages and note errors when someone is presenting evidence. I notice when someone says something, but does the opposite or when people are being hypocritical. It is one of my pet peeves. I am not argumentative usually, but definitely am when someone is presenting something a fact with little evidence. It annoys me when people get upset about this as it is not personal, but just exploring facts and evidence.



What sort of errors?




Lady Phoenix said:


> I categorize things in my head all the time, making mental lists and tables. I do so when I see a new object or a new leaf or animal as I enjoy science. Categorizing helps me to understand how the object works or why the animal behaves the way they do. When I was a child, I loved Mr. Rogers not because of the make believe, but because of the segments where he spoke about how things are made.


 

Interesting. Why? What's the point?




Lady Phoenix said:


> I make connections with the forces of nature, such as the wind moving the leaves, and a mystical state, but I don't believe in man made religions. When I get really stressed, I take a walk in nature, and I think about how all things in nature are connected, including animals, such as us. I have a hard time shutting down my brain as I am always thinking, even at night before bed, so this and deep breathing are the only things that help me clear my mind.



Also interesting. How are we connected?




Lady Phoenix said:


> I'm feel inspired when I am thinking about a scientific concept, such as inertia, and then observe how it comes into affect in the world. For instance, when on the train, when the train stops, I'll say to myself mental, "awesome - my body continuing to move while the train has stopped. This is is inertia", then I'll literally disengage physically from my surroundings and people around me and and start thinking about the concept of inertia in depth. I make the same observations and conclusions about people, such as, once a woman I worked who was senior to me not in position, but because of her years on the job, with was quite bitchy to me although I was quite polite to her. I made a conclusion that she was being so because she had not went to school, and felt threatened or inadequate because I had and was getting praised from my boss as being intelligent. It irritated me and drained me that she was so insecure to mistreat me instead of bettering herself, but I never lost my cool and acted uncivilized back with her in return. I left the job eventually, though, due to my bosses lack of response to remedy the situation after I brought it to his attention that the woman was sabotaging me by keeping information from me that I needed to do my job. I left another job because my boss was micromanaging my work and even reading my emails, even though I was doing a good job.



Well, I'll tell you from this that I am doubting INTP - mainly because there has been less than zero Ne in this.... and I am also leaning Te because you are mostly just telling things how they are, rather than showing us your 'theory' conclusions. The data is presented objectively, I mean... though the perception might not be. 




Lady Phoenix said:


> *A tangential project* - I literally spent a month every day reading about something about minimalism, such as blogs and videos, reading the philosophy, watching videos about Zen Buddhism and what motivated people to become minimalism, then practical tips to get started all because I want to make my house less cluttered. Then, I de-clutter like crazy for a day or so, then got bored of it. Now two weeks after that de-cluttering frenzy, I'm not happy with my progress as things are still cluttered, so I am reading a few blogs again to get me re-inspired.



Any other examples? This is a pretty sensory example. 




Lady Phoenix said:


> Again, I wanted to give details, so you can see the inner workings of my behavior. I sincerely appreciate your reading this long response and your input.


You are welcome. I hope I can be helpful. I guess from this I am leaning IxTJ. I feel like you are asking for our logic, rather than sanity checking your own, so that you can pull it into your perceiving function and see if it resonates. That would be Te and Pi. I suspect that functions might be Si, because you seem to be resonating it off of sensory comparisons. That is just a guess, though. 

I'll admit that it is not a small factor that I perceive that you are not like me at all. Notably, I don't have the stamina or brain power for mental tables of things, or the necessity for them, per se, and I liked the make believe in Mr. Rogers. The make believe was dramatically more important to me as a child, as it is still. If I need to know how something works, I might be inclined to challenge myself to reinvent it entirely... which would require a devilish imagination rather than to know how it might be done by another. In that I'd be rather of a similar sentiment to, say, Doctor Who. Imagination is like exercise for the mind... and with a fit mind, you can wing it and succeed in a new and unexpected way. That's a hallmark of NTP.

The first thought I had when you said that we are connected to animals was "what does that mean? I am not aware of such a connection" though I might like to imagine connecting to the intelligence of some hypothetical creature in some fantastical scenario. I wouldn't conflate that thought with any sort of reality, though. I find that INTP are somewhat inclined to objective deconstruction in that way. I can't speak for INTJ. 

More data will be useful.


----------



## Lady Phoenix (Mar 13, 2013)

arkigos said:


> Why wouldn't an S type reflect on the meaning of their actions and thoughts?
> 
> Being in your head could simply be cognitive introversion. What about that speaks toward N specifically?
> 
> ...


I appreciate you being helpful, but I have studied the processes and I am also very self-aware, and I spoke to the psychologist in depth who typed me, and I am definitely not a S type. I have no bias to any type, but I do not relate to the others. The only types I can relate to in terms of the processes and behavior are INTP or INTJ. I am in fact quite imaginative. I write short stories and poems since I was a child, and fantasy and science fiction are my favorite genres to read, which is why I am interested in science. I also am quite creative and have been reinventing my clothing, crafts and other things, though I don't always finish these projects. I liked to know how things worked on Mr. Rogers because I like to mentally take ideas and things apart to see how they work the way they do and how, which is very Ni.

Perhaps, the way I phrased my response caused your confusion. I don't believe my example is a sensory example as my reasoning for it is because I wanted to figure out what minimalism is about and it's philosophical implications, more than the actual sensory or physical affect or image of it. Otherwise, I wouldn't need that push or motivation to do it as my husband (an ESFJ) has been nagging me about my messiness for years. lol

I don't agree that there is no Ne as I am in my most relaxed and natural state when I interpreting hidden meanings and connections. I used to do that so much so that I was always daydreaming, and got nothing accomplished, which is why I try to be more action oriented now. I see connections in nature and animals as if there is a metaphysical intelligence that is causing all of this world and universe to be in tandem and flow like a symphony. It's difficult to explain. How does one fully explain the theory of light or string theory? We can explain how to do the calculations, but part of it is an intuitive understanding of it. In terms of the scientific concepts that I am interested in, they are more fantastical ones in physics, such as string theory and neuroscience.


Also, I am asking to make my own conclusion, or else I would have agreed with you. I am disagreeing with you because what you are saying does not resonate with me, especially because I know myself and what I have read about extensively over the years about the functions and types. I intuitively understand this. I apologize if I have not explained it well, but in almost every account, I relate most to INTPs and INTJs, especially in terms of behavior and how I perceive things and process things. I know myself, and have no desire to be anyone, but myself. Your post actually made me delve into the processes a bit more, though. I believe that you are interpreting them differently from me, but I trust my analysis for myself after speaking to the professional who typed me and had been doing this for 20 years. Here are a few of the professional INTP profiles and function analysis that I found helpful. I have read and studies over 50 websites and have read a book about MBTI, and I realized that at the end of the day, you have to trust your own personality assessment based on intensive study. I do appreciate your feedback, but it's not accurate for me. Thanks, anyway. Take care.



An INTP Profile
INTP | Prelude Character Analysis
INTP (Engineer) Personality Type - Jungian
Keys 2 Cognition - Cognitive Processes
The 16 Type Patterns


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

I posit some form of xSFJ and I lean ESFJ. Not an ounce of Te in the op.

For clarification, I know for a fact that I'm an INTJ but I don't relate to the op at all. Also tbh, most professional typers suck. They have never read Jung and have no fucking clue what the functions are.


----------



## Lady Phoenix (Mar 13, 2013)

ephemereality said:


> I posit some form of xSFJ and I lean ESFJ. Not an ounce of Te in the op.
> 
> For clarification, I know for a fact that I'm an INTJ but I don't relate to the op at all. Also tbh, most professional typers suck. They have never read Jung and have no fucking clue what the functions are.


Actually, my typer was a psychologist who studied Jung for his thesis, and read much of MBTI. I have also read Jung. XSFJ is definitely not me. My spouse is an ISFJ / ESFJ, and we are quite different. Are you guys reading the same functions as me? Please tell me your source.

I think it's hilarious that people think they know others more than one knows oneself. What makes you think that you can be certain of your type, but I cannot be when I have studied this as well. It is quite illogical to insinuate that you know me better than I know myself based on a few posts when you do not know me personally, have not met me or interacted with me in person. I'm not taking it personally as I am not insecure or unaware of myself, but I do know how I think and how I am. Perhaps, I am not expressing myself succinctly to gather a conclusion, but I have no further interest in elaborating to those who make rash assumptions. I'd much rather read more and research to understand myself more.

Information is not knowledge. - Albert Einstein

Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods. - Albert Einstein 
​


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Lady Phoenix said:


> Actually, my typer was a psychologist who studied Jung for his thesis, and read much of MBTI. I have also read Jung. XSFJ is definitely not me. I think it's hilarious that people think they know others more than one knows oneself. Perhaps, I am not expressing myself succinctly to gather a conclusion, but I do know how I think and am. My spouse is an ISFJ / ESFJ, and we are quite different. Are you guys reading the same functions as me? Please tell me your source.


Apparently we are not because what I see when I read your definitions is not congruent with neither Jung or how I understand it. Breaking things apart into pieces is Ti, not Ni. Ni doesn't break things apart because it's attuned to deeply personal symbolic content. When I am reading your cognition I do so with Ni.

The stuff you wrote about things being connected is Fe. Fe sees the connections of things and how they relate to each other. This is because Fe is extroverted and thus more interested to see what is outside the objects than inside of them. 

This is not an issue of you not expressing yourself succinctly, but the problem is that you don't seem to understand what intuition is. At its simplest from, intuition is the ability to see what is beyond the corner without seeing it. If we compare what you just described as intuition, there is nothing about seeing what something could be more than what it is. You aren't describing what's behind the corner because as you put it yourself, you are experiencing connections between things. Jung gave an example of intuition in how the intuitive type sees a person in emotional pain but instead of seeing a person in pain, they see a person struck by an arrow in the heart. You aren't describing this kind of mental process at all. 

That you are extroverted can be discerned in that your primary cognitive focus seems to be that you collect and refer to things outside yourself. You are describing yourself by first referencing the outside and comparing that with the inside. Introverts do the opposite - they study the inside to see how it's different from the outside. When you describe yourself you keep referring to external things. Description says this about me, people say this about me. This does not indicate introversion. 

That I think your psyche is focused around the Fe-Ti axis is because you are very categorical the way every rational dominant is. You aren't describing things as much as you are defining. That you prefer Fe and Ti over Fi and Te can be discerned by studying the nature of your logic and ethics. You have found a personal conclusion and you are trying to make data fit that idea. This is the subjective logic of Ti, not Te. A Te type recognizes external data and would be more open if someone suggests something about them that is seen as factually correct, because to the Te type, traits are seen as factual systems of impersonal nature and can thus be true or false. Either someone is kind or they aren't based on generally agreed upon definitions. You don't do this. Instead you seem to draw upon generally agreed upon collective experience of ethics and values like passion, love etc. We can discern this sensitivity because you keep citing the fact that you are HSP. You seem to appear to be naturally and strongly attuned to the emotional environment around you and because you are Si over Ni, you experience this in your body as a physical sensation over seeing it as archetype symbolic content. 

Your psychologist is wrong. He doesn't know what intuition is. He thinks imagination is intuition but it isn't.


----------



## Lady Phoenix (Mar 13, 2013)

ephemereality said:


> Apparently we are not because what I see when I read your definitions is not congruent with neither Jung or how I understand it. Breaking things apart into pieces is Ti, not Ni. Ni doesn't break things apart because it's attuned to deeply personal symbolic content. When I am reading your cognition I do so with Ni.
> 
> The stuff you wrote about things being connected is Fe. Fe sees the connections of things and how they relate to each other. This is because Fe is extroverted and thus more interested to see what is outside the objects than inside of them.
> 
> ...


Your response provided more detail, and I do agree with you on some points, but not on others. We actually do interpret the functions similarly, but I don't agree with some of their applications to me. I agree with you that my dominant function is Ti. However, Si is quite secondary in use. It is something that I have worked on as I am always in my head and analyzing, and it has contributed to my anxiety. Developing my Si by observing sensory details helps with anxiety - it is a tactic of mindful meditation that I have learned, but not a natural, dominant skill of mine.

Every person uses all 8 cognitive functions, but to varying degrees. I noted some behaviors that I do, but did not specify what I do most of the time. I am definitely not an extrovert as I like to be alone and engage in solitary activities, and feel drained after social interaction. As far as being HSP is concerned, I scored borderline (14) on the self test (Self Test), so I am not extremely HSP. As an HSP, I identify with the the qualities the refer to introversion, such as having a rich inner life, needing to withdraw after social situations, not the sensory input questions or those about being strongly attuned to my environment. I'm usually quite detached from it and more an observer, actually. That is why I dislike crowds and parties. 

I know that dominant cognitive process is Ti. I have no question about it as I know how I think and engage with the world. Perhaps, I should have noted what I do most of the times, but really I wanted to clarify the behaviors that I mentioned to see whether they are also consistent with being an INTP or INTJ. I did not write about the behaviors that I am sure about identify with INTP or INTJ, but the ones that I was unsure of as that would be redundant. In any case, I am always thinking and analyzing everything from concepts in science, law and even the conclusions of people on this forum. I am not a very social person, and I care very little for social interactions, although my upbringing has taught me to be polite. 

This is why I have a contention about some of these conclusions. I have read, analyzed and reflected on all of the cognitive process and type descriptions from Jung himself. I am not a child, but in my late 20s, and have studied psychology, personality types and myself since I was in my late teens. I am very intelligent and self-aware, so I am certain that I can make an accurate conclusion and assessment of myself. I only asked here because I wanted to see feedback on consistent habits of INTPs and INTJs. I am pretty sure that I am an INTP, but I am more action oriented. It has not always been so as I have jumped from job to job in my early 20s. I conclude that my action oriented-ness is just me now being mature, and perhaps developing my weaker functions as I think we can all improve. As you will see from my other posts, I do take in data and perspectives, when I deem it relevant, but I will not conclude on something about myself from people who have never met or spoken to me about issues, observed my way of thinking and processing or behaviors. If consider opinions and new data, but I will not make a conclusion and abandon data that I already know about myself. I even asked for sources to look at data myself, but no one provided as such as I did mine. So, I certainly and not going to take someone's opinion who I don't know if they have any credibility or from where they are making this up. And frankly, I am the last one to blindly follow authority, but I trust a psychologist who knows me well, has observed me and typed me than some random person on the internet who perhaps have read some data and post on this forum, without giving me sources. I am a natural skeptic, and I have seen people misquote and misinterpret things, so it's not personal. I would provide you with the same data and sources as well if you were to ask a question.


Btw, my psychologist and I understand intuition quite well. Intuition is the ability to understand something immediately, without the need for conscious reasoning. It is intuition that I use when I make the assessment that some of your wrong conclusion about me being extroverted or sensory just don't resonate with me. It is intuition that helped me understand concepts of science and nature before I even started school and studied it. It is intuition that helps me read people so well and flesh out fake people, etc., even though I am not very social or comfortable with networking.

In any case, perhaps I should have asked if the habits I described were consistent with either type, not what type I am as they are not all my habits. I do not often speak about myself, but either observe or think about things or spend more time talking about concepts and ideas when I do talk. I don't have a problem explaining concepts, but perhaps I am a little rusty in communicating my mode of thinking or how I am. It is easier for me to describe my habits, but as well all know habits are not an absolute reflection of cognitive types (i.e. INTJs are not always neat, and INTPs are not always messy).

Thanks again for your input. You have helped me clarify that I am an INTP with more developed weaker functions. Take care.


----------



## Lady Phoenix (Mar 13, 2013)

ephemereality said:


> Apparently we are not because what I see when I read your definitions is not congruent with neither Jung or how I understand it. Breaking things apart into pieces is Ti, not Ni. Ni doesn't break things apart because it's attuned to deeply personal symbolic content. When I am reading your cognition I do so with Ni.
> 
> The stuff you wrote about things being connected is Fe. Fe sees the connections of things and how they relate to each other. This is because Fe is extroverted and thus more interested to see what is outside the objects than inside of them.
> 
> ...


Your response provided more detail, and I do agree with you on some points, but not on others. We actually do interpret the functions similarly, but I don't agree with some of their applications to me. I agree with you that my dominant function is Ti. However, Si is quite secondary in use. It is something that I have worked on as I am always in my head and analyzing, and it has contributed to my anxiety. Developing my Si by observing sensory details helps with anxiety - it is a tactic of mindful meditation that I have learned, but not a natural, dominant skill of mine.

Every person uses all 8 cognitive functions, but to varying degrees. I noted some behaviors that I do, but did not specify what I do most of the time. Please see my cognitive processes results below for that. I am definitely not an extrovert as I like to be alone and engage in solitary activities, and feel drained after social interaction. As far as being HSP is concerned, I scored borderline (14) on the self test (Self Test), so I am not extremely HSP. As an HSP, I identify with the the qualities the refer to introversion, such as having a rich inner life, needing to withdraw after social situations, not the sensory input questions or those about being strongly attuned to my environment. I'm usually quite detached from it and more an observer, actually. That is why I dislike crowds and parties. I have social skills when I need to be social, but I prefer to be alone, and would rather read and watch documentary for days that engage with people.

I know that dominant cognitive process is Ti. I have no question about it as I know how I think and engage with the world. Perhaps, I should have noted what I do most of the times, but really I wanted to clarify the behaviors that I mentioned to see whether they are also consistent with being an INTP or INTJ. I did not write about the behaviors that I am sure about identify with INTP or INTJ, but the ones that I was unsure of as that would be redundant. In any case, I am always thinking and analyzing everything from concepts in science, law and even the conclusions of people on this forum. I am not a very social person, and I care very little for social interactions, although my upbringing has taught me to be polite. 

This is why I have a contention about some of these conclusions. I have read, analyzed and reflected on all of the cognitive process and type descriptions from Jung himself. I am not a child, but in my late 20s, and have studied psychology, personality types and myself since I was in my late teens. I am very intelligent and self-aware, so I am certain that I can make an accurate conclusion and assessment of myself. I only asked here because I wanted to see feedback on consistent habits of INTPs and INTJs. I am pretty sure that I am an INTP, but I am more action oriented. It has not always been so as I have jumped from job to job in my early 20s as they became rote and intellectually un-stimulating after a while. I conclude that my action oriented-ness is just me now being mature, and perhaps developing my weaker functions as I think we can all improve. As you will see from my other posts, I do take in data and perspectives, when I deem it relavant, but I will not conclude on something about myself from people who have never met or spoken to me about issues, observed my way of thinking and processing or behaviors. If consider opinions and new data, but I will not make a conclusion and abandon data that I already know about myself. I even asked for sources to look at data myself, but no one provided as such as I did mine. So, I certainly and not going to take someone's opinion who I don't know if they have any credibility or from where they are making this up. And frankly, I am the last one to blindly follow authority, but I trust a psychologist who knows me well, has observed me and typed me than some random person on the internet who perhaps have read some data and post on this forum, without giving me sources. I am a natural skeptic, and I have seen people misquote and misinterpret things, so it's not personal. I would provide you with the same data and sources as well if you were to ask a question.

Btw, my psycologist and I understand intuition quite well. Intuition is the ability to understand something immediately, without the need for conscious reasoning. It is intuition that I use when I make the assessment that some of your wrong conclusion about me being extroverted or sensory just don't resonate with me. It is intuition that helped me understand concepts of science and nature before I even started school and studied it. It is intuition that helps me read people so well and flesh out fake people, etc., even though I am not very social or comfortable with networking.

In any case, perhaps I should have asked if the habits I described were consistent with either type, not what type I am as they are not all my habits. I do not often speak about myself, but either observe or think about things or spend more time talking about concepts and ideas when I do talk. I don't have a problem explaining concepts, but perhaps I am a little rusty in communicating my mode of thinking or how I am.

Thanks again for your input. You have helped me clarify that I am an INTP with more developed weaker functions. Take care.


----------



## Dragheart Luard (May 13, 2013)

I only want to comment about a huge error that you're doing, and it is to rely on behaviour for determining your type. The relevant point is to see how you process information, not some superficial descriptions that are full of bad stereotypes. By the way, it's clear that you're mistaking your Fe for intuition, thing that seems to be a really common error as well. Besides relating to descriptions and similar things is something that happens to Fe dom/aux types, and personally I find that strange as I can't even imagine such process.


----------



## Lady Phoenix (Mar 13, 2013)

Blue Flare said:


> I only want to comment about a huge error that you're doing, and it is to rely on behaviour for determining your type. The relevant point is to see how you process information, not some superficial descriptions that are full of bad stereotypes. By the way, it's clear that you're mistaking your Fe for intuition, thing that seems to be a really common error as well. Besides relating to descriptions and similar things is something that happens to Fe dom/aux types, and personally I find that strange as I can't even imagine such process.



Thank you for your comment. As I noted before, I am not relying my behavior to explain my type. I have a hard time expressing my mode of thinking and internal process as I am very private and do not do that often. Also, since people here obviously do not know me, I thought noting some of my behaviors (NOT dominant behaviors, but ones that I struggle to balance) would be helpful since I am not used to verbalizing my internal processes. I do understand the cognitive processes though, and which I know that I do, so I am fairly certain I am not Fe dominant. I do agree with the previous poster about Ti dominance, however. I have also browsed the threads and their mode of thinking with Ti types rings true for me as well. Also, kindly provide sources for your processes interpretation. Thanks.


----------



## sanari (Aug 23, 2011)

..


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

I do wish to point out and clarify one thing: I did not at any point suggest you are Ti dominant. I made a pretty strong case for Fe-Ti as a whole, but Fe dominance over Ti dominance. I don't see Ti dominance in you. Your thinking isn't static like it is in Ti types, and you are very consciously aware and concerned about the emotional atmosphere etc., hence you start and end your posts like this: 



> Thank you for your comment.


Ti doms are too repressed in Fe to be able to do this in a sense that doesn't feel awkward to them so they will likely avoid it. 


> Btw, my psycologist and I understand intuition quite well. Intuition is the ability to understand something immediately, without the need for conscious reasoning. It is intuition that I use when I make the assessment that some of your wrong conclusion about me being extroverted or sensory just don't resonate with me. It is intuition that helped me understand concepts of science and nature before I even started school and studied it. It is intuition that helps me read people so well and flesh out fake people, etc., even though I am not very social or comfortable with networking.


First things first: intuition is not the ability to understand something immediately. That is something any somewhat intelligent person is capable of doing. Intuition does not include reasoning process no, but that's because intuition is merely the ability to experience intuitive content as it is, but you honestly don't display this at all within yourself. You are extremely categorical in the way you express yourself and you always define things as opposed to let the objects speak for themselves. You say what something is, instead of how it's experienced. It's a very big difference. I want to stress that this has nothing to do with your supposed inability to communicate or express yourself, but it is simply because the evidence you put forth here, the reasoning you display in every post you make, suggests something different. What do I mean by reasoning process? The mental content you are expressing and producing in every thought you express in here. I see it very viscerally, though it is not of a physical nature. This is seeing something for more or beyond what it is, hence intuition. I am not reading intent, emotions, or any of the sort in you. I am merely observing things about you. 

Also, intuition does not arrive at conclusions such as "assessments". That's within the realm of rationality or T/F. Also, intuition does not necessarily again help people to understand concepts either since that actually contradicts what you just described intuition to be yourself, i.e. without conscious reasoning. Understanding requires reasoning or in other words, rationality. When I have very strong intuitive moments I don't rationalize, I just feel/experience. Also, intuition can read the contents of people, but so can sensation and feeling. What you seem to have described here for most of the part is a dominant rational process, not irrationality itself.


----------



## sanari (Aug 23, 2011)

@Lady Phoenix

When you walk into a foreign place, what is the first thing you see or notice?


----------



## Lady Phoenix (Mar 13, 2013)

ephemereality said:


> I do wish to point out and clarify one thing: I did not at any point suggest you are Ti dominant. I made a pretty strong case for Fe-Ti as a whole, but Fe dominance over Ti dominance. I don't see Ti dominance in you. Your thinking isn't static like it is in Ti types, and you are very consciously aware and concerned about the emotional atmosphere etc., hence you start and end your posts like this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I did not read the whole post because I am off to work, but by the way, saying thank you is just good upbringing. It has nothing to do with type. If you read my post, you would see that social graces are something that I developed through years of working and navigating the world. It is not natural to me, and I was a very awkward child and didn't even fit in as a teenager and even now with many people. However, I still have manners that I was taught as a child. This does not mean I am Fe dominant. Additionally, you are generalizing based on behavior, which is a bit hypocritical since you go to such painstaking efforts to try to describe your interpretation of the cognitive processes.


----------



## Lady Phoenix (Mar 13, 2013)

Guu said:


> @_Lady Phoenix_
> 
> When you walk into a foreign place, what is the first thing you see or notice?


The mood/energy of the room.


----------



## sanari (Aug 23, 2011)

And what about when you are cleaning your house - how do you plan out your method?

[ie - I am not as meticulous as you are, and I do not clean... heh. But what do you notice that needs cleaning? How do you prepare for cleaning? How do you clean so meticulously? Take me on that journey, so that I might get inside your head.]


----------



## Lady Phoenix (Mar 13, 2013)

Guu said:


> Ok, my analysis is that your dominant function is Fe, and you use Ne as a tertiary or quaternary function. You do not use Se very much at all. Te is strong in you, young padawan, and Ti is shortly distant after it. You might use Si more than you'd like to hear me say, hence my taking a long time to getting around to saying it.
> 
> I will let the others evaluate what I've said.
> @_ephemereality_



What's your logic on these, btw?


----------



## sanari (Aug 23, 2011)

The first question, among your other responses and the first post, revealed Fe as your dominant. The second and third question eliminated Se as a used function. The third and fourth questions, as well as your first post and a few others revealed Si. Te is apparent everywhere, cannot be denied.

I posted my story so you could see an intuitive story (Ni). Your story is strongly based in the real world, very grounded. It has elements you are familiar with, and traditional themes.

This was the strongest indicator of Si, because it was your creativity. If you choose to deny yourself, it is your choice.


----------



## Lady Phoenix (Mar 13, 2013)

Guu said:


> The first question, among your other responses and the first post, revealed Fe as your dominant. The second and third question eliminated Se as a used function. The third and fourth questions, as well as your first post and a few others revealed Si. Te is apparent everywhere, cannot be denied.


I see. I disagree because I base the mood/ambience of a room/foreign place based on the construction of the room - the materials, structure of the building, etc. I'm into architecture and design.


----------



## sanari (Aug 23, 2011)

Lady Phoenix said:


> I see. I disagree because I base the mood/ambience of a room/foreign place based on the construction of the room - the materials, structure of the building, etc. I'm into architecture and design.


Ok, more Si.


----------



## liminalthought (Feb 25, 2012)

Aesthetics is another theme that keeps coming up, especially in the op. The emphasis on this is easy to notice so this points more towards Si. The question now is, Si dom or Fe dom?


----------



## tangosthenes (Oct 29, 2011)

I am calling bullshit on this thread. You are warned...


----------



## Psithurism (Jun 19, 2013)

Guu said:


> The first question, among your other responses and the first post, revealed Fe as your dominant. The second and third question eliminated Se as a used function. The third and fourth questions, as well as your first post and a few others revealed Si. Te is apparent everywhere, cannot be denied.


If Fe is her dominant, how can she be a Te user? Maybe I didn't get what you're saying. 


Anyways, I also think you are a clear Fe user OP. I don't really have anymore to add then what has been said. The whole mood/atmosphere thing seems especially Fe-esque.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Guu said:


> Ok, my analysis is that your dominant function is Fe, and you use Ne as a tertiary or quaternary function. You do not use Se very much at all. Te is strong in you, young padawan, and Ti is shortly distant after it. You might use Si more than you'd like to hear me say, hence my taking a long time to getting around to saying it.
> 
> I will let the others evaluate what I've said.
> @ephemereality


Please tell me where you see Te at all in the OP? Because I personally fail to see it. No Te at all in the OP.

And no offense Guu since this isn't your thread, but I fail to see what was Ni about your story. It seemed Ne-Si random to me.


----------



## sanari (Aug 23, 2011)

ephemereality said:


> Please tell me where you see Te at all in the OP? Because I personally fail to see it. No Te at all in the OP.


I thought the way she presented her ideas and structured her thoughts were Te-like. I make mistakes too, you know. If you guys don't see it, it's not there. 

That's the purpose of peer review.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Guu said:


> I thought the way she presented her ideas and structured her thoughts were Te-like. I make mistakes too, you know. If you guys don't see it, it's not there.
> 
> That's the purpose of peer review.


The structure is not Te. Anyone can structure. The question is how it's structured.


----------



## uncertain (May 26, 2012)

randomshoes said:


> Everything you've said is very, very P (that is, extroverted perceiving function, introverted judging function). Being insanely productive in spurts and then spacing out for a long time is classic perceiving.


Do you think perfectionism a P thing?

And I relate to the "insanely productive in spurts and then spacing out for a long time" a lot. Recently I have been like, in a week intensely working on projects for 3 days, pulling up all-nigher(s). Then I am unable to do anything for the next 4 days and I feel like a lazy person.

That one and perfectionism has a lot to do with each other. But I am not sure that's because of my P.


----------



## randomshoes (Dec 11, 2013)

uncertain said:


> Do you think perfectionism a P thing?
> 
> And I relate to the "insanely productive in spurts and then spacing out for a long time" a lot. Recently I have been like, in a week intensely working on projects for 3 days, pulling up all-nigher(s). Then I am unable to do anything for the next 4 days and I feel like a lazy person.
> 
> That one and perfectionism has a lot to do with each other. But I am not sure that's because of my P.


Huh, interesting. I'm certainly a perfectionist, but I can't say I that think it's a universal trait of P people. Maybe we tend towards it though? In the sense that we over-focus on details, so we can see everything that's wrong with something, even if it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of the project? Extroverted judging is certainly what gives you a wide-angle view of which pieces are going to matter. In that sense I'd guess that IxxP people would be worse, since you have Je as your inferior. So maybe you're worse at perfectionism and we're worse at procrastination? I don't know. On the other hand, we lead with our perceiving function....hmm. Side not: having read more of the OP's posts, I'm starting to suspect she might not be perceiving because of the way she structures her arguments. So maybe they're not connected.


----------



## uncertain (May 26, 2012)

randomshoes said:


> In the sense that we over-focus on details, so we can see everything that's wrong with something, even if it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of the project?


That's so true! It's mostly about the art pieces I do. I often have some tiny not-so-well-done details that bug the hell out of me, especially if I keep staring at them and I am like, "fuck you." A lot of time no one even notice those wrong details.

Sometimes even if I realize that the details don't matter I can't help. Most of the time I don't because I am so into things that I don't even care. It's almost sentimental because most of the things that I am perfectionist with are things that I like doing, and can matter a lot to me.



> Extroverted judging is certainly what gives you a wide-angle view of which pieces are going to matter.


Really? I mean I don't know. Why is it so? I thought that's a big picture thing which was Ni.



> So maybe you're worse at perfectionism and we're worse at procrastination? I don't know. On the other hand, we lead with our perceiving function....hmm.


I am bad at both. And are you saying that perceiving function lead is related to procrastination? How so?



> Side not: having read more of the OP's posts, I'm starting to suspect she might not be perceiving because of the way she structures her arguments. So maybe they're not connected.


How do you tell?


----------



## randomshoes (Dec 11, 2013)

uncertain said:


> That's so true! It's mostly about the art pieces I do. I often have some tiny not-so-well-done details that bug the hell out of me, especially if I keep staring at them and I am like, "fuck you." A lot of time no one even notice those wrong details.
> 
> Sometimes even if I realize that the details don't matter I can't help. Most of the time I don't because I am so into things that I don't even care. It's almost sentimental because most of the things that I am perfectionist with are things that I like doing, and can matter a lot to me.


Oh my goodness I know all about that. Except for me it's a comma out of place or an extra word that should have been edited out. For example, I accidentally wrote "side not" instead of "side note," in that post, and it's driving me up the wall.



uncertain said:


> Really? I mean I don't know. Why is it so? I thought that's a big picture thing which was Ni.


Well, different meanings of big picture. Ni does the sum of the parts and that thing that the sum has that the parts don't: meaning. It gets rid of the details to get to the meaning, so it's not going to be able to tell you what you don't need to stress about, at least not as you're working on something. Fe and Te tell you where you're going, and therefore where you are. Like a map, perhaps, or a timeline. They're trying to get somewhere, so they're the functions that will tell you to stop dawdling and hurry up. Ni is more of an art critic, summing up the painting. Je helps you figure out where the boat goes. 



uncertain said:


> I am bad at both. And are you saying that perceiving function lead is related to procrastination? How so?


Only a theory, and I was mostly talking about extroverted perceiving doms. I'm waffling, because Pe leads tend to let the world happen to them and then they play with the things that come their way, which isn't very conducive to deadlines. However, eventually the world is going to be loud enough that we have to stop playing and do a little work, whereas people who lead with Fi and Ti are busy organizing their inner world, thank you very much, and so will often just keep doing so, deadlines be damned. So, no conclusions. Maybe it's a wash?



uncertain said:


> How do you tell?


Ooh, a bit of NF intuition mixed with some reservations about her tendency to get distracted by projects meaning exactly what I thought it meant. She's quite a bit more thorough than I am with her projects (like the minimalism one--incidentally something that it's hard for me to imagine someone who's neither extroverted nor sensing being that into) and tends to express herself in a very, very definitive way, which isn't a trait I've ever noticed in NPs: we question everything up to and including our mothers and reality, throw up our hands, and then do it all again. I'd say that might be related to leading with a judging function, but my INTP girlfriend is like this too. Scratch that, much more so.


----------



## Lady Phoenix (Mar 13, 2013)

bearotter said:


> @_Lady Phoenix_ --
> 
> first of all, you're going to remain in a bit of a muddle, in my understanding, until you start giving a serious thought to whether you're an intuitive or a thinking dominant, or whatever other dominant functions you find apply upon self-observation. People (incl. professionals) can suggest types to you, but what's important if you're going to use this stuff for development is to observe yourself. When people suggest types, ask them why they suggest it. Then don't necessarily respond immediately, see if you can work that data intelligently into your thought process.
> 
> That's the real meat of where you discover more.



You've the only one whose made total sense on this thread. Introverted functions are not easily manifested, especially in a post or writing, but observing oneself and how you think and process is the best way to figure that dominant function. It's certainly not feeling or sensing for me as these are not natural to me and I've worked years on them. People who know me agree and have helped me realize theses as my weaknesses, so that I can work on them. Some people here are obviously young or immature to think being able to structure writing or being polite relates to personality types. Anyone who went to college or read writing books can learn to structure writing. Anyone who has worked for years like I have in law and scientific research can learn to say thank you and learn that making requests politely gets you more information than being rude. I find their opinions irrelevant. It's pompous to say you can type or understand someone better than themselves and people who know them. When I observe my brain and thoughts, I see very differently from what some of these posters say here. I'm going to study the functions and observe myself in relation to them.


----------



## sanari (Aug 23, 2011)

Lady Phoenix said:


> You've the only one whose made sense on this thread. Introverted thinking is not easily manifested, but observing oneself and how you think and process is the best way to figure that dominant function. It's certainly not feeling or sensing for me as these are not natural to me and I've worked years on them. Some people here are obviously young or immature to think being able to structure writing or being polite relates to personality types. I find their opinions useless and this forum is such a disappointment and unscientific to me. When I observe my brain and thoughts, I see very differently from what some of these posters say here. I'm going to study the functions and observe myself in relation to them.


No, you are disappointed that people do not see what you see in yourself. You call those who responded to your thread all manner of things, but as I walk away from this thread, I can only sigh because if you never truly introspect, you will never find your type. And I believe you will be forever lost, thinking you've found yourself. You might be incapable.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

Lady Phoenix said:


> Anyone who has worked for years like I have in law and scientific research can learn to say thank you and learn that making requests politely gets you more information than being rude.




Agreed. You can judge type based on anything you want, but to get an interesting and illuminating answer, I'd cut pleasantries and mannerisms and basic abilities out. In fact, I'd not measure type by abilities much at all, because as I've posted countless places, it's easy to associate an ability with a function, but this is largely folly, as how something is actually processed is very different from what constitutes its apparent "main point." 




> When I observe my brain and thoughts, I see very differently from what some of these posters say here. I'm going to study the functions and observe myself in relation to them.




You'll hear a lot of things that you'll have to discard, but keep an eye open -- what people outside yourself can do is help do a sanity check of some things, but at the end of the day you need to pinpoint one, two or three relatively inferior functions (inferior as compared to the ones you identify as dominant). What's interesting is these needn't be the ones you think are least significant in your psyche.
The most important thing when you hear suggestions that diverge from what you might've seen is getting their reasons. That way you can figure out what is going on behind them, and sometimes even if not in the way the suggester expects, work in the information.
And be sure to question yourself a lot, that's key. 

Because in reality, we don't fit neatly into a 4-fold hierarchy of functions necessarily, but what does happen is these functions figure in somehow or another within the psyche, and you have to start tracing that independent of ordering them. Then, you may find different ways to argue how to order them, even. But unless you are truly someone who doesn't significantly see through 2-3 functions' point of view at many junctures, ordering them at the start might do poor justice to your self-discovery.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

Anyway, I also think now is a good time to say, the four-fold dichotomy system is supposed to be a way of indicating type, not a substitute for reflection on cognitive processes, dichotomy meaning the tests who tell you I/E, N/S, etc.

What has happened with some on the forum is they prefer this system it seems due to the fact there's tons of statistics one can refer to on the MBTI manual as to correlations among the four dimensions.

Now this, I have no problem with, and it is a way of determining certain information about someone's external presentation consistent enough that it'll tell you a little something about what it is like to deal with them.

But ultimately what a lot of people including myself have concluded is that means of typing will not necessarily indicate with much foolproofness the cognitive type, because it's become far, far, far too indirect, and also presumes too much about how people's cognition is determinable through such external presentation. 

That said, it's its own thing itself like I've said. A lot of what you wrote in the OP might help in deciding your four-letter code, but I do think deciding your cognitive type takes more serious reflection, and there's also not a hard and fast external check I know of (nor care to find to be honest) that'll do it.

Cognitive functions tests suffer from a simple problem, which is that they naively add together points for every item you mark, without assessing what the true relation between your psychological processes and that response-item really is. They (referring e.g. to Nardi's test) might help to some extent indicate preferences, and are probably more relevant to cognitive type than the dichotomies items on the official MBTI, but again I'd say if you're close on a few things especially, to take those with a grain of salt.


----------



## S8on (Nov 23, 2013)

ISTPs might act like INTJs but test INTP, but I see very little Se. My best bet is INTP with a more expressed/developed inferior Fe. To see if you're Ti or not, Ti dominants will accept a given conclusion and find ways to see why it is wrong. Te would be more using the given variables to add up to the conclusion. I do see a lot of Ti stubbornness in you.


----------

