# Someone is Mistyped - How do you know?



## brightflashes (Oct 27, 2015)

I've been thinking a lot about the phenomenon of some PerC community members' irritation with mistypes. What I'd like to focus on in this thread is ... how exactly does one know if someone else is mistyped? I'd like to explore each type and assert how one would know that a person has mistyped as that particular type. Also, if anyone has stories about a certain mistype (without naming names), could you share them here?

In other words, I'm looking for answers that are like:

INFP - I know that someone is mistyped an INFP if they ...
INTP - I know that someone is mistyped an INTP if they ...

OR

So there's a person who says they are an ENTJ. However, their behavior is indicative of a different type OR their behavior doesn't support this. Here are the ways in which this person's behavior doesn't support this.

Essentially what I'm looking for is examples of how people arrive to these conclusions. I'm the kind of person who may be skeptical of someone's type, but I don't really mind if they're mistyped or not. If they're a close friend or we talk a lot on the forum, I'd send a PM to discuss the possibility of them being a different type, but only for their own discovery process. 

I see a lot of posts that say "most people on the XXXX forum aren't really that type" but no explanation of why they think this. I'm trying to get to the bottom of these sorts of statements. Thanks for any help!


----------



## PiT (May 6, 2017)

One of my biggest mistype indicators (this applies most frequently to INTJs, but is ultimately general) is when someone seems too infatuated with their own type, e.g. they unironically trumpet their own type as superior. Personally, INTJs appear utterly bog-standard to me, while ISTJ/INTP/ESFJ/ENFP/whatever appear to be the unusual sorts (even though they are all statistically more common types). Given that this is about how you think and recognizing patterns that are "normal" to you, this sort of perception is to be expected. For this reason, I find it strange when someone refers to their own type as something exceptional.


----------



## Timelordvictorious (May 9, 2018)

In the end you don't really know. You barely know if you are typed correctly, much less other people. Part of the typing is also how you feel about the description, if you think you use the functions in a certain order and all that, I wouldn't know how other people really feel about the description, they could tell me but in the end I won't know. We could have a conversation about it, discussing what they think and what I assume based on what they tell me, but the typing would be consensual. 
I think that a lot of people say "most people in the XXXX forum aren't that type" because a lot of people don't seem to take the typing seriously or they type themselves based on misconceptions ("if I' m an extrovert I need to be good with people" , "If I' m a feeler I' m irrational", and stuff like that).
At the same time, a lot of people making statements on where others belong could also do it based on stereotypes ("If you are an enneagram 5 you NEED to like serious topics").

I can understand wanting people to be typed correctly to gives our own typing validation since we compare to others as one of the ways to understand if we are typed correctly. So if everyone of your type is totally different from you and you cannot identify, then you doubt your own type.
At the same time, it doesn't really matter how others identify themselves, if I try to fit into an ENTJ box but I' m not I' ll just hinder the understanding of myself more than I would be hurting others.

In the end, you can't tell if someone is typed or mistyped. You can't tell either how to correctly type someone. You can offer feedback if you feel like it, but ultimately the person has the final word since they are the ones who know themselves best, and even then they make mistakes and change their type later.



PiT said:


> One of my biggest mistype indicators (this applies most frequently to INTJs, but is ultimately general) is when someone seems too infatuated with their own type, e.g. they unironically trumpet their own type as superior. Personally, INTJs appear utterly bog-standard to me, while ISTJ/INTP/ESFJ/ENFP/whatever appear to be the unusual sorts (even though they are all statistically more common types). Given that this is about how you think and recognizing patterns that are "normal" to you, this sort of perception is to be expected. For this reason, I find it strange when someone refers to their own type as something exceptional.


I don't know, the ENTP subforum is full of "You know you are an ENTP when you think it's cool to be an ENTP, it's Ok I think so too". INFPs have "INFP is the best result you can get, we are right there with Oscar Wilde". Thinking your type is the coolest seem to be the norm, INTPs are the most rational, ENTJs are the most badass... in the end they are all stereotypes or ways to feel better about your type. However, I don't think it necessarily means you are mistyped.


----------



## brightflashes (Oct 27, 2015)

@Timelordvictorious

Thanks for giving me something to think about. I don't have the same experience with thinking my type is the most badass, though, so I have to stretch my imagination a bit to see that. I can only go as far as to say that I am secure in my type and I prefer it for myself, but as to the most badass, I think that's ISTP (for conventional reasons) or INFP (for my personal reasons which sort of glorify Fi use). I don't think there's anything all that remarkable about INTJs (my type) except that they tend to be interested in the same sort of exploration that I am interested in. 

- - - - - - - - - - 

To answer my own question, I think that I'm best at detecting INTJs and INTPs as I'm an INTJ and my husband is an INTP. Like @PiT said, the whole boasting about one's type does seem inauthentic. I have noticed that INTX types who seem to champion being smart above all else tend to "protesteth too much". However, if this is a sign of immaturity or mistype, I'm not fully aware. 

I do think that glorifying the stereotypes of each type can be an indication that an individual has a poor understanding of typeology and type dynamics and are probably less likely to type correctly or see other's types as being the correct type. 

Some stories:
An NT is an SP

* *





There was an individual who claimed to be an NT type on this forum about a year ago. I noticed their posts seemed to be indicative of a strong presence in the moment and flowed the way I admire about introverted juders (Ti, Fi). At this point, the member has switched over to an SP type which I believe fits this member much better. I was never close enough to this member to ever have a conversation about it, but it was interesting seeing that discovery process come to fruition.




- - - - - 
INTJs are all mistyped because a member believes an ENTJ is an INTJ.

* *





An individual here who was new at the time made an assertion that most of the INTJs were not really typed correctly. I messaged this member directly because I was curious about why they said that. The member went on to say that the only person on the INTJ forum they felt was correctly typed was a member who had especially strong Te. I found that interesting because I believed at the time that the member probably had ENTJ as a "best fit type" instead. In the mean time, that member has switched to ENTJ as a label. I think that's a very good example of how many perceive INTJs by their Te which will certainly make a lot of INTJs look like they're mistyped since INTJs lead with Ni.




- - - - - 
My story of being a mistyped INFP and finding out that INTJ is my best fit type.

* *





I myself came to the forum mistyped. I admit to having a bias for this type when I was younger - it seemed like a really ideal type to be if one was a woman, especially since it seemed to me feminine without compromising my introversion. I typed as an INFP. However, I found that when interacting with INFPs, my Te would rear its head often. I found that I was much more "confrontational" than INFPs, much more keen to argue, and much more severe in general. I also noticed that my N wasn't prone to distractability or tangential in the way that I saw demonstrated in INFP writings and in the general spirit of the INFP forum. It wasn't until I started interacting with a few INTJs that the realization really hit me. 

The cognitive functions lined up perfectly (the direction of my N seemed much more focused and averse to distraction rather than keen to be distracted). To solidify the whole thing, I was professionally tested with a counseling session afterward. My best fit type was INTJ. Now that I have looked further into the theory, especially through 8 function models, I can see clearly some indicators that would have been very obvious had I been aware of them at the time.

I was a mistyped INFP and here were some clues:
- I had much more initiative in general than the INFPs on the forum.
- I was not averse to arguments and I actually felt I got more energy and learned from them whereas INFPs tend to see that sort of thing as seeking out drama or creating unnecessary friction.
- While the Fi/Fe clash is famous among Fi dominants, I took it to the next level. Learning about 8 function models like Socionics and the PoLR Fe and Beebe's 8 function model and the 7th trickester/blind spot helped me understand my issue with Fe was way more ingrained.

And last, I _wanted _to be an INFP. I wanted to some how prove that I could be feminine and soft. This had been a challenge for me growing up as an NT.




I'm really enjoying these responses. Please keep them coming!


----------



## Timelordvictorious (May 9, 2018)

brightflashes said:


> Thanks for giving me something to think about. I don't have the same experience with thinking my type is the most badass, though, so I have to stretch my imagination a bit to see that. I can only go as far as to say that I am secure in my type and I prefer it for myself, but as to the most badass, I think that's ISTP (for conventional reasons) or INFP (for my personal reasons which sort of glorify Fi use). I don't think there's anything all that remarkable about INTJs (my type) except that they tend to be interested in the same sort of exploration that I am interested in.


No problem. Although I mentioned ENTJs in particular I think that It's not strange for INTJs to actually say something similar (most badass or the smartest). My wife is an INTJ and she was quite annoyed at all the memes "As an INTJ you think everyone is an idiot... and you are right!"

I think your experience on how you realized you were an INTJ and not an INFP is interesting and I encourage you to make a guide for future users since many people tend to be stuck between two types.


----------



## Soul Kitchen (May 15, 2016)

@brightflashes I'd like to reverse engineer this question for a moment. When you read the Mark "Chopper" Read analysis I wrote and submitted anonymously, you thought it seemed like an INTP's writing, and my owning up to writing it confirmed that hypothesis. Could you elaborate on what process you use, when typing based on the content of what one writes?

Since you yourself are an INTJ, and since your husband is an INTP, you've likely developed an eye for the reasoning process of those types. If so, would it stick out to you if you saw an INTJ reason in an INTP fashion, such as belabored elaboration and following of tangents?


----------



## PiT (May 6, 2017)

Timelordvictorious said:


> I don't know, the ENTP subforum is full of "You know you are an ENTP when you think it's cool to be an ENTP, it's Ok I think so too". INFPs have "INFP is the best result you can get, we are right there with Oscar Wilde". Thinking your type is the coolest seem to be the norm, INTPs are the most rational, ENTJs are the most badass... in the end they are all stereotypes or ways to feel better about your type. However, I don't think it necessarily means you are mistyped.


It doesn't necessarily mean that you're mistyped, but it is something that makes me suspicious. And perhaps most of those people are mistyped. ~15% of Americans on 16personalities get INFP as their type. No official study has ever indicated anywhere close to that frequency of INFP (the Myers-Briggs site reports 4.4%). Sure 16personalities isn't necessarily a representative sample, but this kind of discrepancy has to raise questions.



brightflashes said:


> INTJs are all mistyped because a member believes an ENTJ is an INTJ.
> 
> * *
> 
> ...


This is something I have thought about for a while. Te is more obvious than Ni, which leads people to associate Te with INTJs. Anyone who met me IRL would perceive me as being strongly Te. For this reason, INTJs are subject to accusations of mistyping whenever we indicate strong Ni. I tend to act more Ni on this forum since I introspect a lot more than I do IRL, and I have been told on occasion that I seem a little odd for an INTJ (because I guess I should act the same talking about myself and talking about external objects).


----------



## brightflashes (Oct 27, 2015)

Soul Kitchen said:


> Could you elaborate on what process you use, when typing based on the content of what one writes?


My knee-jerk answer probably doesn't provide enough concrete evidence. It's simply that the writing reminded me of my husband's writing. When I saw your response, I knew the reason, but I needed to take the time to think about what is similar in INTP writing. For me, Ti is very linear. When Ti wants to express how they come to a conclusion, they tend to format their answer in a way that shows a structure such as "first, and then, so I thought this, and then, and at last my conclusion is X." In other words, it walks the reader through the exact chronological, linear process they went through to come to their conclusion.

Ni/Te would respond to the same question in a sort of pool of impressions. For example, he seems X, Y, and Z. I noticed that he does these things which support an axis and he does these other things which support the other axis. From there, I came to my conclusion. The report is much more perceiving oriented and, as such, is less linear. 

While I'm not saying that INTJs can't be linear or that all INTPs are linear, when it comes to explaining how one arrives at a conclusion, these are the traits of a judging dom vs a perceiving dom.



> If so, would it stick out to you if you saw an INTJ reason in an INTP fashion, such as belabored elaboration and following of tangents?


Unless it was an assignment for school or something related to their work (expertise tends to feed the sort of thurough explanations and almost over-explanations), I'd either think that they're extremely interested in what they're saying or they may not be properly typed. However, this would not be the main way I'd consider someone is "mistyped". I'd look more at behavior over time. If they always wrote the way an INTP wrote, I'd look for other clues to their being an INTP. 

What was interesting about your response, again, is that it really sounded like it was something my husband could have easily written himself.


----------



## Soul Kitchen (May 15, 2016)

PiT said:


> It doesn't necessarily mean that you're mistyped, but it is something that makes me suspicious. And perhaps most of those people are mistyped. ~15% of Americans on 16personalities get INFP as their type. No official study has ever indicated anywhere close to that frequency of INFP (the Myers-Briggs site reports 4.4%). Sure 16personalities isn't necessarily a representative sample, but this kind of discrepancy has to raise questions.


This assumes the type statistics of 16personalities need align with the official statistics. When the Myers Briggs professionals source their statistics, they source test results from a wide distribution of people who took the test, many of whom wouldn't have known what an MBTI even is until after they took the test - and would likely have forgotten their results soon after.

Those aren't people who necessarily think "gosh, MBTI is so interesting that I'm going to find a random online test, and take it to learn more about my type". All things considered, the INs are much more likely to take typology seriously than the general population. The membership statistics of PerC show that INFP is the most common type here, with around 20% of members typing themselves as INFP in their profiles.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Who knows, no one can know. How can one _know_ (?) "Intuition" - a hunch? Utilizing too many nouns in a sentence? They "just feel off" ... (?) What does that have to do with knowledge? Seemingly inauthenticity _warrants doubt _of ones type or only ones "personal suspicions and idle speculation"? Really? The real "Insert Type™" has spoken? If, not how do you know? What is your criterion of unbiased "judgment" for authenticity, if not warrant your suspicions? Not liking what they say?

How is that a good method for knowledge gain. Should this then, actually warrant doubt, as this a thread of "Thinking™" types anyhow? Should I be suspicious of the specimens that go around "declaring to know who is/isn't" mistyped?


----------



## brightflashes (Oct 27, 2015)

Catwalk said:


> Who knows. How can one _know_ (?) "Intuition" - a hunch? Utilizing too many nouns in a sentence? They "just feel off" ... (?) What does that have to do with knowledge? Seemingly inauthenticity _warrants doubt _of ones type or only ones "personal suspicions"? Really? The real "Insert Type™" has spoken? Are you testing specimens know? If, not how do you know? What is your criterion of unbiased "judgment" for authenticity, if not warrant your suspicions? Not liking what they say?
> 
> How is that a good method for knowledge gain. Should this then, actually warrant doubt, as this a thread of "Thinking™" types anyhow?


This is pretty much the reason that I started the thread. I want to know how a person is so sure that another is mistyped. While I also like to remain open minded and take other people at their word (which is what I usually do), I have noticed a few people who have been way off in their self analysis. I was just wondering where other people are coming from when they make these statements.


----------



## bucolic (Apr 4, 2017)

I guess you could look to see if they are confusing their inferior function with their dominant one. Not too uncommon for an ENFj to assume Ti is their dominant function because they are interested in "intellectual" topics.


----------



## PiT (May 6, 2017)

Soul Kitchen said:


> This assumes the type statistics of 16personalities need align with the official statistics. When the Myers Briggs professionals source their statistics, they source test results from a wide distribution of people who took the test, many of whom wouldn't have known what an MBTI even is until after they took the test - and would likely have forgotten their results soon after.
> 
> Those aren't people who necessarily think "gosh, MBTI is so interesting that I'm going to find a random online test, and take it to learn more about my type". All things considered, the INs are much more likely to take typology seriously than the general population. The membership statistics of PerC show that INFP is the most common type here, with around 20% of members typing themselves as INFP in their profiles.


My last sentence should indicate that I am not assuming anything, but rather noting that the level of discrepancy is bizarre and what that could explain.

There is a significant difference in the level of commitment/interest between taking a test and making an account on a forum. You assume people who take a test online are actually interested in MBTI and were not just led there by a friend (as I have done a number of times). I have seen three different people who were later determined to be ISTJs mistyped as NFs by the online test. Of course my personal anecdotes prove nothing, but the possibility that a large proportion of all declared Intuitives are mistyped cannot be discounted, either empirically or theoretically.


----------



## Soul Kitchen (May 15, 2016)

PiT said:


> My last sentence should indicate that I am not assuming anything, but rather noting that the level of discrepancy is bizarre and what that could explain.
> 
> There is a significant difference in the level of commitment/interest between taking a test and making an account on a forum. You assume people who take a test online are actually interested in MBTI and were not just led there by a friend (as I have done a number of times). I have seen three different people who were later determined to be ISTJs mistyped as NFs by the online test. Of course my personal anecdotes prove nothing, but the possibility that a large proportion of all declared Intuitives are mistyped cannot be discounted, either empirically or theoretically.


Perhaps I had jumped the gun there. My mistake.

How were those three people later determined to be ISTJs? What was the deciding factor in determining a mistype?


----------



## Conscience Killer (Sep 4, 2017)

I generally tend to take people at face value. There are a couple members whose types I am sure of (at least in terms of temperament), just because I read lots of their posts and interact with them a lot. Everybody else is kind of like a blur. Sometimes it throws me off when a member I know well drastically changes their type from the one I've come to associate with them, to a totally different temperament. I'm like whaaaat. However, I'm not going to say anything to anybody unless they specifically solicit it.


----------



## LonelySpaceEmperor (Jan 4, 2018)

Trying to find out why they call themselves a certain type is a good start. This whole system is plagued by people having their own subjective understanding about it; hence such errors are to be expected.


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

Most authentic TJs
Speak very direct and concise

When someone who is very flakey about committing to a type does type as them I more so chuckle than that I care at all
They are usually changing types periodically and often mimicking stereotypes of how they perceive the type they choose

Shrugs like I said I don’t care 

I think I notice when someone doesn’t seem to be TJ quick though because of how extra extra transparent it can appear compared to other TJs 

I am not the authority on knowing it’s speculating 
But I do think people who mistype as TJ usually stick out like a sore thumb more than any other mistype


----------



## PiT (May 6, 2017)

Soul Kitchen said:


> Perhaps I had jumped the gun there. My mistake.
> 
> How were those three people later determined to be ISTJs? What was the deciding factor in determining a mistype?


One took the official test as part of a retreat at work and got ISTJ there. She had gotten INFJ online, and N wasn't particularly close. It didn't hurt to support the official test result that when we did an exercise of describing a photo to demonstrate the difference between N and S, she clearly demonstrated a strong Sensing preference by recapitulating the contents of the photo in exacting detail.

A second friend took the test twice; he got INFP and several of us strongly suspected he was ISTJ (including an INFP fellow who had defended several other controversial INFP typings), so we bugged him to do it again. This guy might be an ESTJ actually, since he has loads of Te.

A third one was a guy I've known for over a decade and went to high school with. Based on my interactions with him, I was pretty sure he was xSTJ and I asked him to take it primarily to see if he would get E or I. He then got INFJ (though both N and F were almost 50/50).


----------



## Stevester (Feb 28, 2016)

I think DaveSuperPowers (if we're allowed to mention him) absolutely NAILED it when he said that if you typed yourself correctly, then you're probably not crazy about your type because you are sharply aware of said type's shortcomings. 

So yeah, whenever you see a N type touting how special and superior they are, chances are they are a self-loathing sensor who desperately wants to feel special and lift themselves up. A real Intuitive probably hates the fact that they can't be more realistic and aware of the details in their environment and every day details. Just as it pisses me off that I struggle so much to think outside of ""what is".


----------



## danthemanklein (Mar 30, 2018)

Ever since I got into MBTI, I would take quizzes and do a little research. I got INFP on 16personalities the first time I took it, but got INFJ with my mom. This was all before I got into the functions, but when I did, I was pretty convinced I was an INFP. When I posted my “What’s My Type” post on Reddit, Typology Central, and here, I would get a lot of INFP answers, and it really cleared up some things because before, I got visually typed as ESFP by that YouTube channel, and I took it pretty personally that I would try and dig up if this is really true to me, and I found out that I was not an Se dom at all.

It made me happy that things got cleared up because of which. However, I was still very indecisive about my true type being INFP, yet the more that I think about it, the more it could very well be likely. I’m still indecisive from the other few answers I got, which were ISFP, ISFJ, INxP because what if they are true, you know? One person even said ESFJ, but used Fe and Se as an example... yeah, no. I really do want to be true with myself and my own type, and not walk around telling people what my type is (I wouldn’t go around telling people about MBTI all the time, unless you’re my parents, lol), and then have them telling me I’m not that type, which leads to even more perseveration and indecisiveness on this stuff.

I’ve been told I talk in a very linear tone, but I don’t always notice it unless I’m telling stories. Although, it could very well be possible that I might come across somebody who doesn’t even think I’m linear at all. I’m not sure how that’s related to type, but it could lead to speech patterns, I’m guessing. I do remember, however, that one person on Reddit was able to pick up my tertiary Si, and it got me thinking that I’m probably, very much so, on the Ne/Si axis, instead of the Se/Ni axis. I realized that I probably don’t repress either Ne or Si at all, so it was almost clear that I have them smacked down in the middle, leading to either IP or EJ, and so many people have said IP, with only one EJ answer.

I was also debating wherer Fi or Ti was my dominant, but to be very clear on that was to look at my stress levels. I realized that whenever I get stressed, I would get abrasive, aggressive, and lash out, while also overthink or over interpret things. This could lead to dominant F with inferior T. In fact, I can’t really see myself as a lead T at all. It was pretty clear to me that F was a big sign for me. Other people may have different opinions, but I’ve been really thinking about it lately, and am coming to the conclusion that I *very* well may be an INFP, Enneagram 4 with possible lead so variant. In fact, both last night and today was when I figured it almost all out and felt a sense of satisfaction. I’m not exactly all the way there, but I have this feeling that I’m getting close.

So @brightflashes and @Soul Kitchen, I’m probably at the point that I am leaning so much on INFP that I’m more than willing to come out and have confidence that this could very well be my true type. For whatever reason, I knew INFP was probably going to be the best fit I could think of ever since I got into personality typing. Sorry for the long, dramatic post, but I felt it was necessary to get my thoughts on this out there. Thank you guys for your comments, it was definitely worth it.

EDIT: Also, just to bring this up, I don’t care if INFP is the “feminine” or “soft” in a stereotypical sense. It’s just a part of who I am, and there’s plenty more to my personality than MBTI. So if someone calls me soft because of my type, then so be it.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Stevester said:


> So yeah, whenever you see a N type touting how special and superior they are, chances are they are a self-loathing sensor who desperately wants to feel special and lift themselves up. A real Intuitive probably hates the fact that they can't be more realistic and aware of the details in their environment and every day details. Just as it pisses me off that I struggle so much to think outside of ""what is".


Lul. What a nonsense post. 

No, you do not have to _trash-talk yourself/demonstrate you have low-self esteem_ - nor envy the traits of another type to "prove" (or indicate) you an authentic intuitive. What even is this self-hating shit.

"_Prove your an intuitive to me by being envious of Sensing traits_" (?) Most of this is an exaggeration from supposed self-loathing 'sensor bias'. Lots of projection here. I will not slap myself so you can feel better about being ISTJ. Either the articulation of this is terrible; or this is trap for suckers.


----------



## Stevester (Feb 28, 2016)

No one said anything about hating one's own type, but more about being self-critical of it. 

Touting about how one has social/physical difficulties but then proclaiming this is what makes them unique angels is definitely NOT being self-critical. You never see ESxPs bragging about how their lack of foresight makes them unique and cool. (Unless they are internationally known rock stars...).


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Stevester said:


> No one said anything about hating one's own type, but more about being self-critical of it.


But that is (not) what you said either, my guy. The post is_ inconsistent._ You are simply richocheting off Raspberry's post now - which is fairly obvious because it is completely different from your OP. It may be not have directly stated "hating a type," but that is irrelevant to the point. All one must do is consider the distinctions between the claims within (X)-posts (re: humility - and being envious of sensing traits), to see such an assumption is not unwarranted.



Stevester said:


> A real Intuitive probably hates the fact that they can't be more realistic and aware of the details in their environment and every day details. Just as it pisses me off that I struggle so much to think outside of ""what is".


You make a "bold" claim about Real Intuitives™ based off some intuitive dude that struggled with low self-esteem/sensor envy - or deals with being "pissed off" he does not harbor a select set of traits. Like he must be one of the True Representatives™, lul. That is a bias.

The post you presented was an indicator that the OP likely gets off suckering around with low-self esteem N-types thinking they are being humble; not simply self-critical ones that harbor humility in Typological blindspots, because the claim is so extraordinary it is sends off signs that is more of a projection than a critique of something greater. The OP gives off the vibe that because one struggles with feeling "_pissed with themselves_" for not having certain attributes, this must be a sure sign of self-humility, rather than a self-defeatist mindset, and then boldly asserts this a reliable method in determining (_knowledge _wise), that such specimens that cannot relate are defective in their type selection - (ex; mistyped).

This is likely due to your fixation on a few low-self esteem Tumblr kid(s) as a Holy Writ of sample size. Such is obvious in the OP because it makes the hasty assumption the "polar opposite" of lack of awareness of ones shortcomings is an indication of, or leads to self-superiority, which is a personal bias and obviously not always the case for all environment(s), if not the vast majority of them outside of social-media platforms. 




> Touting about how one has social/physical difficulties but then proclaiming this is what makes them unique angels is definitely NOT being self-critical. You never see ESxPs bragging about how their lack of foresight makes them unique and cool. (Unless they are internationally known rock stars...).


_
No sensor/3 sensors ever, right lul_. Think we both know this statement right here is bogus. You claim that "_viewing oneself as unique and cool_" is a trait frequent in intuitives - rather than an attribute unique to the culture of a specific environment; you then went on and claimed that this specimens were likely mistyped sensors. So, what is it now (?) If these specimens are sensors like yourself, then it is not intuitives that need of the brunt of this critique - so I am confused [as to why] your posts as a consistent theme are fixated so heavily on seemingly high-esteemed/prideful intuitives and not low-esteemed/low confidence sensors. 

Not sure the (self-faults/patterns among) your own type outside of social media are in the light of awareness, let alone the biases within ones own posts, if it is so boldly claimed such a phenomena is substantially less likely to occur because of "sensing" attributes. Interesting, the OP presented gives the impression of "touting around" to have a grip on self-critical analysis above that of biased Tumblr kids.

One does not need to acknowledge typology to feel that (X)-traits unique to ones personality (regarding) typology are "cool" in comparison to others - which is what makes "ESxP don't do that," seem heavily undeveloped in its claim. The post you made fixates on a very small crowd tainted with personal-business, then blows it up like it is consistent reality. It does not exist in any actual reality outside of the ones in which you fixate (e.g., certain areas of sub-culture) - and if it does; you have failed to demonstrate how so. Evidently, such claims are [obviously] not "large" sample sizes that reflect of the brunt of intuitive/sensor interactions, as it attempts to make it out to be in reality.


----------



## brightflashes (Oct 27, 2015)

myjazz said:


> I just remembered you also tried to bash me for this


That wasn't a very nice thing to say. I doubt I've every tried to "bash" anyone about anything. I don't do personal attacks. However, if you have a problem with me go a head and PM me directly rather than make a passive aggressive comment in my thread.

Otherwise, your response was enlightening.


----------



## brightflashes (Oct 27, 2015)

Aiwass said:


> I don't know, we shouldn't pretend this stuff isn't subjective. Because it fuckin' is.
> 
> You have a framework. This framework says somebody is ISTP. Your friend has a different framework, and calls the same person an INTJ or whatever. Who is right? Who is wrong?
> 
> There are only interpretations here, or different frameworks. Maybe some frameworks are more consistent. But there is no such thing as an "objective mistype".


This is exactly why this phenomenon confuses me. It's like "How could you possibly really *know* this?" I'm the sort that values that objective data pointing to a mistype. It almost seems arrogant to assume something about a person without knowing them well through biased, subjective impressions. For me, it's a more subtle thing when I suspect someone is mistyped. For example, the INTJ with very developed Te is how I considered an ENTJ until they switched to ENTJ.

- - - - - - - - 
@Arrogantly Grateful

I think one valid reason one would want to be typed correctly is if they're interested in ego development. While psychoanalytic theory isn't a very widespread specialty, the outline Jung has left behind in how to self actualize through individuation is still a powerful tool for therapeutic reasons.


----------



## Aiwass (Jul 28, 2014)

brightflashes said:


> This is exactly why this phenomenon confuses me. It's like "How could you possibly really *know* this?" I'm the sort that values that objective data pointing to a mistype. It almost seems arrogant to assume something about a person without knowing them well through biased, subjective impressions. For me, it's a more subtle thing when I suspect someone is mistyped. For example, the INTJ with very developed Te is how I considered an ENTJ until they switched to ENTJ.


I think we must consider a lot of different factors when it comes to typing. When two people agree on what is someone's type, they generally agree on the following things:

1) The person's characteristics, inner qualities and behavior. At the moment we agree on those things, we at least have a solid base to start a healthy discussion. There were occasions where I saw a particular person as very naive and emotional, whereas other people saw them as tough. In this case, maybe we don't disagree on the definition of the types/functions, but we disagree on what a person does and _why_ they do it.

2) What being X type means. We can see someone in the exact same way (having Z set of personal characteristics), but it is a different question altogether if we see this set of qualities as the essence of X or Y type. Two people may see someone as a quiet, direct, stern intellectual; but while someone attributes those qualities to INTJs, the other person attributes them to ISTPs. Here the discussion becomes purely theoretical and a clash between frameworks.

I do think some few people are mistyped, based on _my_ interpretation of the cognitive functions and MBTI. Other people may think the person is typed correctly because they have _another_ framework, and I respect that. Many times, if we are going to debate someone's type, we are not going to debate only our interpretations of this person; we are going to debate the whole basis of the theory, and it is something which I don't have the patience to do all the time.

This system will never, ever be objective as some people want it to be.


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

brightflashes said:


> @*Arrogantly Grateful*
> 
> I think one valid reason one would want to be typed correctly is if they're interested in ego development. While psychoanalytic theory isn't a very widespread specialty, the outline Jung has left behind in how to self actualize through individuation is still a powerful tool for therapeutic reasons.


Explain the virtues of individuation to me because I did some basic research into it 6 odd years ago and I walked away thinking that it was a lot of hocus pocus.


----------



## Conscience Killer (Sep 4, 2017)

Stevester said:


> You obviously never visited a Tumbler page from a self-proclaimed INsomething who makes a barrage of posts describing how hard it is to be said type because society doesn't understand how awesome they are. The only _''flaw''_ those tweens own up to is how misunderstood they are and of course turn that into a self-affirming super amazing thing, showing that they can't see the MBTI in an objective manner and subsequent self-help tool.


 This is the "pathology" of teenagers everywhere. It doesn't have anything to do with whether or not a person is mistyped.


----------



## Conscience Killer (Sep 4, 2017)

Stevester said:


> No one said anything about hating one's own type, but more about being self-critical of it. Touting about how one has social/physical difficulties but then proclaiming this is what makes them unique angels is definitely NOT being self-critical. You never see ESxPs bragging about how their lack of foresight makes them unique and cool. (Unless they are internationally known rock stars...).


 That's because SPs tend to brag about their prowess. Trust me, every person of every type with a healthy self-esteem does this. I am an ISTP and I enjoy the fact that Ti+Se makes me logical, decisive and able to act quickly in a crisis. 

_Pourquoi??¿¿_ Silly me. Must be a mistyped ENFJ. Go figure. h:


----------



## Soul Kitchen (May 15, 2016)

brightflashes said:


> I've been thinking a lot about the phenomenon of some PerC community members' irritation with mistypes. What I'd like to focus on in this thread is ... how exactly does one know if someone else is mistyped? I'd like to explore each type and assert how one would know that a person has mistyped as that particular type.


It doesn't irritate me if I believe someone else is mistyped. At the end of the day, individuals know themselves better than anyone else, and whatever type they consider themselves is not my decision to make. That's not to say I can't disagree with someone else's self-typing, though.

I've seen a couple of INTPs around who I suspect of being borderline on T/F at most, and it's quite possible those "INTPs" are actually INFPs.

The first "INTP" is a functionista who buys into function axes, where you're not just Ti, but Ti/Fe at the same time. The line of thought which says INTPs have more in common with SFJs than INTJs is baffling, but that's a debate for another topic. I suspect that "INTP" of misconstruing their F traits as inferior Fe. They ranted about how cold the world was, full of people who don't believe love is the answer to everything, and they pondered why people didn't turn to each other and open their minds, to see that we're all each a somebody with hopes and dreams. Where we're all somehow both unique individuals and part of the same nature. And they said it's something that defines them and goes through their heads at all times.

The other "INTP" is a christian. They talk about the way God works in fellowship, where someone comes into church troubled and needing love, and through a process of spiritual growth, they might be able to work through their troubles and come out better for it. Basically, it's whole idea of fellowship as flawed individuals who help each other so they can get to a better place. Then there's the element of "growth", which is an NF buzzword. That's not to say INTPs can't be christians, but the data shows a strong correlation between spirituality and an F preference, while NTs have a greater-than-average tendency to be atheists. In addition, INTPs are independent minded people who typically wouldn't see fellowship as being that essential, at least not to the extent as does the "INTP" I described. Religion asides, they also have mentioned a distaste for society, at least when it comes to writing off others even when they have their own creative, unique perspective.

In my case, I'd describe my T preference as relatively mild. I consider myself a mixture of T and F traits, and I'll admit to having been more idealistic at certain times in my life than others. But when I see F traits showing through that strongly in someone, that's where I really doubt whether the individual is even a T.


----------



## brightflashes (Oct 27, 2015)

Arrogantly Grateful said:


> Explain the virtues of individuation to me because I did some basic research into it 6 odd years ago and I walked away thinking that it was a lot of hocus pocus.


I'm sorry. Something you said gave me the impression you had read a lot of Jung. I really don't think that going through the whole ego development and explaining individuation is something I can do in a forum post. Further, if you've already dismissed it, you're puttinhg me in a double bind situation.


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

brightflashes said:


> I'm sorry. Something you said gave me the impression you had read a lot of Jung. I really don't think that going through the whole ego development and explaining individuation is something I can do in a forum post. Further, if you've already dismissed it, you're puttinhg me in a double bind situation.


You do realize that there are always parts of theories one can overlook while reading others. This is unnecessarily condescending to a genuine question in an effort to learn. I learn by asking questions and having them answered. 

One can dismiss something 6 years ago and be open to be convinced later on because of a fresher perspective. Also someone else's perspective can help build on mine which is one way I learn. 

You're jumping to conclusions. Either answer my question or ignore and move on. No need to make assumptions.


----------



## brightflashes (Oct 27, 2015)

Arrogantly Grateful said:


> You do realize that there are always parts of theories one can overlook while reading others. This is unnecessarily condescending to a genuine question in an effort to learn. I learn by asking questions and having them answered.
> 
> One can dismiss something 6 years ago and be open to be convinced later on because of a fresher perspective. Also someone else's perspective can help build on mine which is one way I learn.
> 
> You're jumping to conclusions. Either answer my question or ignore and move on. No need to make assumptions.


My assumptions are based on your behavior throughout the thread as constantly trying to take it off topic and a general disagreableness which I find very condescending and flippant. And here you are demanding that I be your google. Can't you do things for yourself? Do you have any idea how complicated Jung's theory of individuation actually is? This isn't something I can answer briefly and have that be it. It's not that simple. If you were capable of looking it up 6 years ago, surely you're capable of it now, right?


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

You would want to pull out an MBTI test sheet and answer the questions as if you were the person that you are suspicious about. The test results verify your suspicions are correct and then you tell them. They reform their understanding and change their stated type.


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

brightflashes said:


> My assumptions are based on your behavior throughout the thread as constantly trying to take it off topic and a general disagreableness which I find very condescending and flippant. And here you are demanding that I be your google. Can't you do things for yourself? Do you have any idea how complicated Jung's theory of individuation actually is? This isn't something I can answer briefly and have that be it. It's not that simple. If you were capable of looking it up 6 years ago, surely you're capable of it now, right?



I can use Google and come to my own conclusion obviously but I was asking for why you think I should consider it a virtue. You brought it up. It's only fair to expect you to elaborate on why and what you think.


----------



## brightflashes (Oct 27, 2015)

Arrogantly Grateful said:


> I can use Google and come to my own conclusion obviously but I was asking for why you think I should consider it a virtue. You brought it up. It's only fair to expect you to elaborate on why and what you think.


Dear gods and goddesses, man. I was appealing to what I thought was YOUR OWN interest in Jung. If you had done this extensive reading which I thought you had (I misread), the reason I'd bring it up would be self evident. I was not inserting my personal interest in Jung. Look, we've already played out the first bind. Here's the second bind:

Ego development is the act of becoming conscious of aspects of yourself which you are previously unconscious of. THrough use of the Beebe 8 function "archetype" model, one can become more aware of how certain fuctions decive us, trick us, are used for and against us, and one can then become a master of self through the individuation process. I'm not expanding any further. I resent your manipulation techniques.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

brightflashes said:


> That wasn't a very nice thing to say. I doubt I've every tried to "bash" anyone about anything. I don't do personal attacks. However, if you have a problem with me go a head and PM me directly rather than make a passive aggressive comment in my thread.
> 
> Otherwise, your response was enlightening.


Not to argue but the truth isn't always nice. It was in a PM when you tried to set me up for an attack, I am not complaining cause I got my big boys pants on. If I had a problem with you , you would know it and I wouldn't comment on your OP. And define passive aggressive because it was not really used right.
Actually oddly enough it was about mistyped people in the PM's you sent me...not to mention the thread you started prior to that. 
I only mentioned the situation because it shows how defensive some people get with the slightest hint of wrong Type and I remembered while writing out my comment....and also I was and did not accuse you of mistype it was just the subject you brought about that reflectively made you defensive.

Anywho like I said I didn't mention it to cause a stir nor a I now. So how about instead of the "PM" thing you suggest how about we try maturity and drop the topic or if you wish to continue that's fine but don't try to accuse me of hating on you.

Peace (((( hugs ))))

btw you considered yourself an INFP back then which is why I add'd the reflective part because you might of had an unconscious link somewhere in back of your mind knowing that you might of had mistyped yourself.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

brightflashes said:


> I have noticed a few people who have been way off in their self analysis. I was just wondering where other people are coming from when they make these statements.


There is several reasons, a common one is when someone doesn't understand what the Function or Types really is. Someone might say to themselves well I think a lot so I must be a T Type and more than likely INTP. Someone might say to themselves I am creative so I must be a N Type more than likely INFP....etc etc

Then there is people who don't have a clue or just trolling telling someone they think they are this or that Type when someone is trying to figure out there Type. And that person looks like they are making logic and knows what they are talking about and since the person at hand doesn't really understand enough to realize what the person is saying is mostly hot air.\


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

brightflashes said:


> I think one valid reason one would want to be typed correctly is if they're interested in ego development. While psychoanalytic theory isn't a very widespread specialty, the outline Jung has left behind in how to self actualize through individuation is still a powerful tool for therapeutic reasons.


I believe that for most of the people going thru the process of Typing themselves even if they mistype themselves and change it later and even do this again several times sometimes. Is more beneficial for self growth than knowing what Type ones actually is.

sorry for so many post back to back


----------



## Daiz (Jan 4, 2017)

It's very easy; you just decide you know them better than they know themselves. 

I'm sorry, I know that's totally not a useful answer. I just really hate that there are people who care about this. Why do we need to know if someone's mistyped? So we can arrogantly tell them so?? It's no one else's business. 

One time, a really warm, friendly acquaintance who I'd literally just met told me he was INTJ and I stupidly blurted out "Really? I wouldn't have pegged you for an INTJ. I feel like you're something else!" And I watched his smile fade a little as he said, "Oh, uh, maybe," and I realised, _Daiz, you piece of trash, it doesn't matter! It does. Not. Matterrr._

I just...feel like caring about this is petty af. And I'm not having a go at you, Brightflashes, you don't seem to care that much. I've just been annoyed by this ever since joining and now the topic's come up, I cannot miss my chance to complain.


----------

