# What MBTI type dislikes reading about people?



## Joonas (Aug 2, 2011)

My question relates to what I didn't enjoy while studying. I have always had 0 interest in philosophers, singers, politicians, or to put it bluntly, anyone you ended up studying about. I might be very interested in what has been said, but I still don't care one bit about who that person is.

My point of view is that I'm being schooled mainly to improve myself, and knowing which philosopher said what doesn't matter as long as I know what the theories are. Music or art in general is the same. The people behind the art should be irrelevant to the value of the piece. If it looks/sounds like crap, then it is just that.

I'm fairly sure that I'm an ENTP, but does this thread prove or disprove it?


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

Eh not sure that's ENTPish (probably not actually) but its definitely indicative of a strong Thinking type (taking the personal or humane components out of the equation).


----------



## Owfin (Oct 15, 2011)

Yeah, it indicates T dominance of some sort. Since you don't care about the _people_ behind it, I suspect INTP or ISTP.


----------



## TheOwl (Nov 3, 2010)

haha I'm like that too.
It always annoyed me when I said I was a fan of a band, and other fans would criticize me for not knowing the name of the lead singer or whatever. It's the music that's important. That applies for philosophers, and all those kinds of people.
This is why history is my least favorite subject to study in school. It's really interesting, but I just can't remember all those names because they're unimportant to me (and that's what we're tested on - the names and dates).

I think it's a thinker thing...although I'm either an INTP or INFP.


----------



## The Great One (Apr 19, 2010)

Joonas said:


> My question relates to what I didn't enjoy while studying. I have always had 0 interest in philosophers, singers, politicians, or to put it bluntly, anyone you ended up studying about. I might be very interested in what has been said, but I still don't care one bit about who that person is.
> 
> My point of view is that I'm being schooled mainly to improve myself, and knowing which philosopher said what doesn't matter as long as I know what the theories are. Music or art in general is the same. The people behind the art should be irrelevant to the value of the piece. If it looks/sounds like crap, then it is just that.
> 
> I'm fairly sure that I'm an ENTP, but does this thread prove or disprove it?


The two biggest types that could give less of a damn about psychology is:

1. ESTJ
2. ISTJ


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

> I think it's a thinker thing...although I'm either an INTP or INFP.


So, if it's a thinker thing, how can you think that you're an INFP? INFPs are dominant F types, while INTPs are inferior F types. There's a world of difference between these dominant and inferior perspectives (let alone, INTPs barely use Fi, which is the dominant function of INFPs, while INFPs barely use Ti, which is the dominant function of INTPs).


----------



## MuChApArAdOx (Jan 24, 2011)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> So, if it's a thinker thing, how can you think that you're an INFP? INFPs are dominant F types, while INTPs are inferior F types. There's a world of difference between these dominant and inferior perspectives (let alone, INTPs barely use Fi, which is the dominant function of INFPs, while INFPs barely use Ti, which is the dominant function of INTPs).


Ti, heck they barely use Te  INFP don't use Ti, they use Te as an inferior function.


----------



## dejavu (Jun 23, 2010)

The Great One said:


> The two biggest types that could give less of a damn about psychology is:
> 
> 1. ESTJ
> 2. ISTJ


Dunno what you're basing that on. I know of at least 3 ISTJs in real life that are very into psychology.

And there are a lot of ISTJs and ESTJs hanging out here talking about psychology and personality theory...


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

> Ti, heck they barely use Te  INFP don't use Ti, they use Te as an inferior function.


Yeah, I should've clarified that Ti would be the 8th function for INFPs, as for Fi in INTPs.


----------



## Joonas (Aug 2, 2011)

LiquidLight said:


> Eh not sure that's ENTPish (probably not actually) but its definitely indicative of a strong Thinking type (taking the personal or humane components out of the equation).


 That's a great thing to know since tests like to tell me I'm an F 

____

I've thought about it some more, and I think that this could in some way summarize it:

Seeking knowledge for knowledge's sake doesn't interest me at all.
Seeking wisdom for wisdom's sake interests me very much.


----------



## TheOwl (Nov 3, 2010)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> So, if it's a thinker thing, how can you think that you're an INFP? INFPs are dominant F types, while INTPs are inferior F types. There's a world of difference between these dominant and inferior perspectives (let alone, INTPs barely use Fi, which is the dominant function of INFPs, while INFPs barely use Ti, which is the dominant function of INTPs).


I don't think I'm an INFP. I'm not sure if I'm an INTP or an INFP. Personality is not completely black and white. I have some traits that make me seem like more a thinker and some that make me seem like more of a feeler. Combine that with the fact that my knowledge of Jungian psychology and of myself isn't complete.
It's not like, "Oh, I don't read the biographies of my favorite musicians. Now I know that I MUST be a thinker."
People don't have the argument, "Martin Luther King Jr. didn't like to read biographies. That makes him a thinker, despite all other evidence that he's a feeler." People are complex.

I read my previous comment and realize that you might have thought I was trying to make an argument of "Since I don't usually read biographies, and I'm a thinker, people who don't read biographies are thinkers." That's not what I was trying to say. The two opinions weren't supposed to be connected like that.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

@TheOwl

Interests have little to nothing to do with how we use cognitive functions. You can't go by interests to determine type. To determine type, you have to consider whether or not you naturally gravitate toward using logical reasoning to defend your ego or if you use *humane* feeling values to defend your ego. If you gravitate toward logic more, you're a thinking type. Same reasoning goes for the latter. Everyone uses all of the functions, a T, F, S, and N function all consciously together to create balance in the personality, so it's obvious that any function can be used when wanted or needed, but in determining type, it depends on using which is your most natural *preference* to make decisions and interact with the world. If you are a dominant F or dominant T type, this shouldn't be difficult to figure out (especially if you just disregard stereotypes about the types' behaviors, which should have nothing to do with typing at all).


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

> People don't have the argument, "Martin Luther King Jr. didn't like to read biographies. That makes him a thinker."


This is a really retarded argument. Interests have no bearing on type. Everyone is probably interested in famous people. F doesn't have to do with finding someone interesting, F relates to how someone interacts with the world - it's about connecting with others harmoniously and humanely. It's a rational worldview of greatly valuing the subjectivity of the realm of humanity over logic. The people who make stupid arguments like this are probably trying to define their personas rather than their innate personality, since arguments as shallow as this can only fit a persona, which is very, VERY shallow relative to actual personality (since persona is just a social mask). That's why this stuff is all part of a *psychological* theory, after all (as originated by Carl Jung).


----------



## TheOwl (Nov 3, 2010)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> Interests have no bearing on type.


That's exactly what I'm saying. Maybe I'm not good at explaining that, but we agree here.
The argument "Martin Luther King Jr. didn't like to read biographies. That makes him a thinker." is an over-simplified argument. I was pointing that out - it was an example of how one interest should not be used to completely determine type. Perhaps I didn't make that clear, you didn't read carefully enough, or I am misunderstanding you now. 

Although feelers are more personal while thinkers are more impersonal, whether or not someone reads biographies should not determine whether or not someone's a feeler or thinker because people have many different personality traits rather than just their interests.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

TheOwl said:


> That's exactly what I'm saying. Maybe I'm not good at explaining that, but we agree here.


I know. So if you know this, why is typing so difficult for you?


----------



## TheOwl (Nov 3, 2010)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> I know. So if you know this, why is typing so difficult for you?


Like what I said earlier:


TheOwl said:


> I have some traits that make me seem like more a thinker and some that make me seem like more of a feeler. Combine that with the fact that my knowledge of Jungian psychology and of myself isn't complete.


Also, some of my identity comes from how other people see me. Other people tend to define me in ways that are contradictory. People I have talked to face to face who have been familiar with Jungian psychology have typed me as both an INTP and an INFP. When people describe me, some people tell me I'm very warm and caring and even emotional (and I realize that not even all feelers are. Would you say those are stereotypes? I've known Fi dominants that I would consider to be cold), while others have called me very logical and detached. I have had both dispositions in different situations, and I'm not sure which is my first preference.

I'm also not sure how much my environment growing up has affected my personality - not necessarily my Jungian type and how I think, but my behavior. I have been taught to rely on logic and that following the heart is foolish. If I'm an INFP, that side of me has been suppressed (although, I do believe it's important to follow my heart to some extent).


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

@The Owl

But as I said before, everyone uses all four functions (an S, an N, a T, and an F) in everyday life, so basically, you've probably already recognized that by pointing out how you approach everyday life. However, there should be one that leads "the ship" so to speak. You just have to be able to figure out which one that is if you want to know your type. And this F function you speak of might just be inferior Fe, as opposed to dominant Fi, if you are an INTP (being warm and caring sounds much more like Fe than Fi, which preserves the feelings of a person on the terms of their preferences for how they want to feel about everything that affects their feelings. They have a much more self-centered focus on their feelings and adapting their own feelings by their own self-generated standards to please them, although since F functions have a ethical focus on others also, their feelings aren't completely selfish and still account for positive regard of others, at best). Inferior Fe can look pretty emotional and all-over-the-place, since it isn't regulated by the highly conscious control that it would be in the higher Fe types. I've never met any INFPs that come across as being logical and detached (they tend to want to forge connections between their highly sophisticated Fi and others who appreciate it), so I have a feeling that this is what represents your most natural personality, thus I'm thinking that you're probably a Ti dom. The people who have typed you as both probably know nothing beyond the overly-simplistic J/P labels, because on a cognitive functions level, INTPs and INFPs shouldn't be that similar, aside from Ne & Si in the same positions. I don't think you sound like an Fi user at all if you require others to define you to get an understanding of who you are (of course, everyone needs input, but Fi users have their own derived feelings criteria that they would judge this input against, which I'm not getting from you at all). Your reliance on others sounds much more Fe to me (Fi doms tend to be excessively sensitive to others telling them who they are, for better or for worse).


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

The big difference between Ti and Fi is how accurately Fi works as a way for a person to define who they feel they are comfortably within the parameters of their feelings and values, and it can work off of this to determine what's best for others as well (it's a very humanistic function). It's very different from Ti, since it defines what isn't inherently logical, which is essentially the self and the feeling dynamic of the self. It's an extremely misunderstood and underestimated function.


----------



## TheOwl (Nov 3, 2010)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> @The Owl
> 
> But as I said before, everyone uses all four functions (an S, an N, a T, and an F) in everyday life, so basically, you've probably already recognized that by pointing out how you approach everyday life. However, there should be one that leads "the ship" so to speak. You just have to be able to figure out which one that is if you want to know your type. And this F function you speak of might just be inferior Fe, as opposed to dominant Fi, if you are an INTP (being warm and caring sounds much more like Fe than Fi, which preserves the feelings of a person on the terms of their preferences for how they want to feel about everything that affects their feelings. They have a much more self-centered focus on their feelings and adapting their own feelings by their own self-generated standards to please them, although since F functions have a ethical focus on others also, their feelings aren't completely selfish and still account for positive regard of others, at best). Inferior Fe can look pretty emotional and all-over-the-place, since it isn't regulated by the highly conscious control that it would be in the higher Fe types. I've never met any INFPs that come across as being logical and detached (they tend to want to forge connections between their highly sophisticated Fi and others who appreciate it), so I have a feeling that this is what represents your most natural personality, thus I'm thinking that you're probably a Ti dom. The people who have typed you as both probably know nothing beyond the overly-simplistic J/P labels, because on a cognitive functions level, INTPs and INFPs shouldn't be that similar, aside from Ne & Si in the same positions. I don't think you sound like an Fi user at all if you require others to define you to get an understanding of who you are (of course, everyone needs input, but Fi users have their own derived feelings criteria that they would judge this input against, which I'm not getting from you at all). Your reliance on others sounds much more Fe to me.


Sorry, I was unclear. No one has called me both an INFP and INTP. I mean some people have typed me as an INTP, and some have typed me as an INFP. Gosh, I really need to practice my writing. 
Although, one of the people who typed me was throwing out a lot of NF stereotypes ("you're really artistic and creative", blah blah blah), so I should probably disregard that opinion.

I do pay attention to how other people see me, but I also tend to disregard advice and go do my own thing (I especially did this when I was younger. One could explain that saying I've developed my Ne more, so I'm focusing more on the external/objective). 
I tend to follow my gut when making decisions. I'm not sure if that is Fi or just Ti in combination with intuition. 

Thanks for the analysis. It sounds accurate to me.
Although, I think INTPs and INFPs can look quite similar, at least on the outside, because of the auxillary Ne and tertiary Si and because Ti and Fi are both focused inwardly. Neither are typically very outwardly expressive. I've known 2 self-typed INFPs who were rather cold, actually.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

> I do pay attention to how other people see me, but I also tend to disregard advice and go do my own thing


This gives no indication that you use Fi whatsoever. This sounds more like an indication of inferior Fe than anything (you care what others think, but at the same time, you don't care enough to deal with it, seems to be what I'm getting here...). And being cold has nothing to do with F/T. INFPs might come off as reserved because they tend to be highly protective of their feelings since they value them so much.



> because Ti and Fi are both focused inwardly


This could be said to compare any introverted function. I have yet to mistake an INTP with an INFP. INTPs have tendencies to de-humanize everything in their minds (they tend to detachedly analyze the world around them), while INFPs are the exact opposite, tend to humanize everything.


----------



## TheOwl (Nov 3, 2010)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> And being cold has nothing to do with F/T.


 I know. By cold, I meant logical and detached. I just said that because you said you had never known a detached INFP. I have. 



JungyesMBTIno said:


> I've never met any INFPs that come across as being logical and detached



Could you explain what inferior Te in an INFP is like? 

Also, I try not to de-humanize everything because it makes me sad (even though it might be my natural tendency). Does that make sense?

I'm thinking I'm an INTP, though.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

> Also, I try not to de-humanize everything because it makes me sad (even though it might be my natural tendency). Does that make sense?


With inferior Fe having a strong influence over dominant Ti, this makes sense, as the inferior prevents the dominant from being too one-sided.

About inferior Te from Developing Your Type - INFP | Dunning Personality Type Experts (which is a good website on type, btw).

"Developmental challenge is expressing opinions logically and evaluating objectively."


----------



## TheOwl (Nov 3, 2010)

Thanks @JungyesMBTIno 

and sorry, Joonas, if we've taken over the thread a bit.


----------

