# INFP or INTJ?! Which am I?!



## Vanishing Point (Oct 2, 2012)

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> All I'm saying is, don't read the fucking descriptions and say "oh, well here it says INFPs do so and so, but I also do this thing ISFPs do, I must be so damn special I use Ne/Si and Se/Ni equally." No. Read _*Jung's work*_ and learn more about the cognitive functions of extroverted intuition and extroverted sensing if you truly want to know which of the 16 boxes you fit in.
> 
> This would be a good place to start: Classics in the History of Psychology -- Jung (1921/1923) Chapter 10


Well I don't know. I had an epiphany reading the Personality Junkie INFJ profile because it was like someone had looked inside my mind. It's not readily apparent to others what I'm like necessarily, so sometimes they can be eerily accurate. ...and I still think it's harder to figure out your aux-tert so I don't really think it's necessary to be so harsh about it. In this instance between the Pe and Pi functions. On a forum where there is a cornucopia of threads about confusion over which aux-tert function is the right one is it really something to get worked up about to the point of being insesitive about it? It's not at all uncommon. Oh and I just posted that link btw.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Vanishing Point said:


> Well I don't know. I had an epiphany reading the Personality Junkie INFJ profile because it was like someone had looked inside my mind. It's not readily apparent to others what I'm like necessarily, so sometimes they can be eerily accurate. ...and I still think it's harder to figure out your aux-tert so I don't really think it's necessary to be so harsh about it. In this instance between the Pe and Pi functions. On a forum where there is a cornucopia of threads about confusion over which aux-tert function is the right one is it really something to get worked up about to the point of being insesitive about it? It's not at all uncommon. Oh and I just posted that link btw.


Yes... Texts suffering from the forer effect are really accurate... Of course they are...


----------



## Vanishing Point (Oct 2, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Yes... Texts suffering from the former effect are really accurate... Of course they are...


Edited for making a snarky comment. I think I'm off.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

Vanishing Point said:


> Well I don't know. I had an epiphany reading the Personality Junkie INFJ profile because it was like someone had looked inside my mind. It's not readily apparent to others what I'm like necessarily, so sometimes they can be eerily accurate. ...and I still think it's harder to figure out your aux-tert so I don't really think it's necessary to be so harsh about it. In this instance between the Pe and Pi functions. On a forum where there is a cornucopia of threads about confusion over which aux-tert function is the right one is it really something to get worked up about to the point of being insesitive about it? It's not at all uncommon. Oh and I just posted that link btw.


I wasn't intending to be perceived as rude or harsh. I was trying to indifferently convey that reading Jung's work is a lot better than the personality junkie descriptions, no matter how well it described you or how much you liked the description.


----------



## Vanishing Point (Oct 2, 2012)

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> I wasn't intending to be perceived as rude or harsh. I was trying to indifferently convey that reading Jung's work is a lot better than the personality junkie descriptions, no matter how well it described you or how much you liked the description.


Well I agree. It is a lot better. I prefer Jung. I still see no harm in reading profiles too though, or doing tests. What's wrong with having multiple sources and perspectives? 
You might want to re-read your comment I responded to though, because it was pretty blunt with the "I must be so damn special" rant. Maybe it wasn't intentional, but you can't really say it's very nice to read if you're the one whose comments are being referred to.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

Vanishing Point said:


> Well I agree. It is a lot better. I prefer Jung. I still see no harm in reading profiles too though, or doing tests. What's wrong with having multiple sources and perspectives?
> You might want to re-read your comment I responded to though, because it was pretty blunt with the "I must be so damn special" rant. Maybe it wasn't intentional, but you can't really say it's very nice to read if you're the one whose comments are being referred to.


There's nothing wrong with having secondary _educated _sources and perspectives. Key word there would be in italics.


----------



## Vanishing Point (Oct 2, 2012)

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> There's nothing wrong with having secondary _educated _sources and perspectives. Key word there would be in italics.


Well I suppose you should list the ones you deem educated enough and maybe have them made a sticky thread.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

Vanishing Point said:


> Well I suppose you should list the ones you deem educated enough and maybe have them made a sticky thread.


The ones written by Jung and other psychologists...


----------



## Vanishing Point (Oct 2, 2012)

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> The ones written by Jung and other psychologists...


So Nardi and Thomson are kosher then. ...and Personality Junkie profiles written by Dr. A.J. Drenth ...unless he's a doctor of some other kind dabbling in typology. My own go to doctor of psychology (old buddy of mine) thinks MBTI is only good for career testing anyway and that I'm pretty much wasting my time on the forums. :wink:


----------



## Elyasis (Jan 4, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Yes... Texts suffering from the forer effect are really accurate... Of course they are...


That escalated quickly.


----------



## darkestraven (Mar 12, 2013)

Actually, I started out left handed and was forced to write with the right hand so over time I had to use my right hand. Though I can write with both for the most part, left's more sloppy I guess. Not the point though but still - that's a possibility for some people.


----------

