# Thought I'd start with this interesting questionnaire



## Celebok (Jun 21, 2012)

I was originally planning to introduce myself by talking about the personality test results over the years and the things that are confusing me in trying to figure out my type, but then I saw this questionnaire posted, and some people claimed they could type anyone from their answers, so I decided I'd just start by answering it and see what people come up with.

*0. Is there anything that may affect the way you answer the questions? For example, a stressful time, mental illness, medications, special life circumstances? Other useful information includes sex, age, and current state of mind.
*
Male, 40, just drank coffee, but haven't eaten lunch yet. (Edit: I ate lunch after question 5, then came back and answered 6-10.) Picked up my car from the shop this morning, happy that it's finally fixed, but not happy about what I had to pay to fix it. My job contract is ending next week, but I don't have anything else lined up at the moment, so I'm a little nervous about not knowing what's next, but not terribly worried just yet.

*1. Click on this link: Flickr: Explore! Look at the random photo for about 30 seconds. Copy and paste it here, and write about your impression of it.
*
[This site won't let me post a link because this is my first post.]

Nice beach; I wonder where it is. Looks like it could be just about any beach on a cloudy day. I wonder if this girl even knows that there's a person with a camera standing behind her.

*2. You are with a group of people in a car, heading to a different town to see your favourite band/artist/musician. Suddenly, the car breaks down for an unknown reason in the middle of nowhere. What are your initial thoughts? What are your outward reactions?
*
Initial thoughts: Oh crap, seriously? The one night I get to see my favorite band in concert, and this happens? I knew I should've driven myself to the concert, instead of put myself in a situation where I'm dependent on someone else getting me there. Now I just have to hope the driver has a decent plan for getting us out of this.
Outward reactions: Silently stare at the driver to see what he does.

*3. You somehow make it to the concert. The driver wants to go to the afterparty that was announced (and assure you they won't drink so they can drive back later). How do you feel about this party? What do you do?
*
I'm not too crazy about going to a party filled with strangers (aside from the few friends I'm there with), especially one that was announced at the last minute, and I won't pretend to be excited about it, but if the driver really wants to go, then I'll tag along, figuring that he's my only ride back, and it's only one night out of the year that I get/have to do this kind of thing, and if anything goes wrong, I can blame him.

*4. On the drive back, your friends are talking. A friend makes a claim that clashes with your current beliefs. What is your inward reaction? What do you outwardly say?
*
Inward reaction: Oh, he's one of THOSE people. Great...
Outwardly: Probably would keep quiet.

*5. What would you do if you actually saw/experienced something that clashes with your previous beliefs, experiences, and habits?
*
If someone is actually in danger or being harmed, I'd try to do whatever is in my power to stop it, whether that means stepping in myself, grabbing other people's attention, or calling the cops if it's something illegal. If nobody is being directly affected, then I'll just walk away from the scene as soon as I can.

*6. What are some of your most important values? How did you come about determining them? How can they change?
*
My independence and rational thinking. I find myself limited when I place myself in situations where I'm dependent on other people (such as the driver in the above situation), and because I don't feel a constant need for companionship, it frees me up to do things on my own, and make decisions only for myself. Because I don't have strong emotional needs, I can view situations with a clear mind and be generally confident that I'm not basing my thoughts on how I feel in the moment. Likewise, I can sometimes help others to see things from a logical viewpoint, unclouded by their or my personal feelings.

*7. a) What about your personality most distinguishes you from everyone else? b) If you could change one thing about you personality, what would it be? Why?
*
a. Same as my answer to #6.
b. I'd like to be able to make confidence decisions faster in situations that call for it. Oftentimes I end up doing nothing and letting situations unfold because I didn't assess the situation fast enough to decide what action to take, and later wish I'd stepped in and said or done something.

*8. How do you treat hunches or gut feelings? In what situations are they most often triggered?
*
I usually ignore them or don't recognize them. Or I'll take the time to think things through to determine if I have a logical reason for having that hunch. I don't know what triggers them, and usually they're wrong.

*9. a) What activities energize you most? b) What activities drain you most? Why?
*
a. Solo road trips, spending time on social media and online forums, watching my favorite TV shows.
b. Standing around with a group of acquaintences having a casual conversation about a topic that doesn't interest me, being put on the spot and being asked my opinion on topics that I've hardly thought about, not knowing when the conversation is going to end when I was planning to leave several minutes ago but couldn't without being rude or lying.

*10. What do you repress about your outward behavior or internal thought process when around others? Why?
*
Pretty much most thoughts that run through my head, when I don't have reason to believe that those people feel the same way I do. I'm not out to change other people's opinions, and I don't see the benefit in taking the time to help others understand the way I think or why I'm the way I am.


----------



## Tsuki (Jan 9, 2011)

At the moment I'm a bit too lazy to provide an explanation, but I'm rolling with ISTJ.


----------



## Wakachi (May 24, 2012)

Istj.



> Male, 40, just drank coffee, but haven't eaten lunch yet. (Edit: I ate lunch after question 5, then came back and answered 6-10.) Picked up my car from the shop this morning, happy that it's finally fixed, but not happy about what I had to pay to fix it. My job contract is ending next week, but I don't have anything else lined up at the moment, so I'm a little nervous about not knowing what's next, but not terribly worried just yet.


----------



## Hashem (Mar 12, 2012)

yeah istj


----------



## Celebok (Jun 21, 2012)

Hey, thanks for the responses. I find this unanimous ISTJ typing rather interesting, because about half the Myers-Briggs tests I've taken throughout my life have resulted in ISTJ. However, I wouldn't even be here at all if I wasn't doubting ISTJ as being my type. When I read the overall description of an ISTJ person, I find that some of it fits me, but a lot doesn't. For the record, I've also tested as INTJ once or twice, and ISTP once or twice, including just this week when I signed up on PerC. In fact, my result said 75% P, which is the highest P I've ever scored. But the S was 50%, which means this particular result was really IxTP. I've never once scored INTP, but I seem to fit a lot of the INTP description, so I'm not ruling that out.

I can totally see why I might appear as ISTJ from the way I answered the questions above. I should note that I've never actually experienced anything like the scenarios described in the questionnaire, so I was answering based on what I THINK I would do. And my theory (which I'd like to know if you disagree with) is that this same lack of experience accounted for my prior ISTJ test results. I say that because as I've gotten older and lived more years as an independent adult, I've realized that my natural tendencies seem to be different from what I've always thought they were, such as organization and adherence to tradition, the common SJ traits. I do tend to follow tradition or other people's rules in the absence of familiarity with the situation, such as the examples in the above questionnaire -- i.e. I don't know what else to do and never really thought about what I should do in that situation, so I just fall back on what others are doing or have done in the past. But if I've developed enough confidence, I will easily follow my own rules and break away from traditions and social norms, and my desire in general is to reach the point at which I'm able to do so.

This also relates to the way I approach organization. From what I've read, ISTJ's are motivated to follow through on tasks, get the job done, create and stick to schedules and tend to be on time. While those are traits that I've valued and aspired to have, I've gradually realized over the years that those are not my natural tendencies. I believe I value those traits because my parents taught me to, and I've appreciated the end results whenever someone else has helped me to get things organized. But in reality, when I'm left alone, I'm a major procrastinator, I fail at sticking to my own schedules even when I create them, I'm almost always late, and I avoid making commitments for fear of losing flexibility.

So given everything I've just described, I'm curious to know if you still think I'm ISTJ, or if you have questions you'd like to ask me to determine if I might be something else. Also, while I've been exposed to Myers-Briggs types for years, I'm fairly new to the concept of cognitive functions, and I find them rather confusing. In fact, I took the cognitive functions test this morning, and it looks like most of my functions are about equally undeveloped, except for Ti and Si, and I don't really know what that means. I think perhaps there's just a lot about myself that I don't fully understand, so that's a big part of why I'm trying to figure this stuff out.


----------



## Celebok (Jun 21, 2012)

Update. I found and took the Keys2Cognition test that I saw a lot of people recommending on these forums, and my function scores were a lot more spread out than the aforementioned test. But what really surprised me was that Fi came out on top! Also Ne was fourth, whereas it was second to last on the other test. And Ti, which was my top function before, slipped down to third. So either I somehow managed to radically develop my Fi and Ne in the course of 12 hours, or one of these tests is unreliable! Or I'm just even more confused than I thought.


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

[Double post. Le sigh. >.<]


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

@Celebok - I actually saw ISTP. Or ESTP. I didn't see much Intuition, no Ne from what I could tell, and no hints of Ni. I also don't think I saw Si, either, even though people have been saying ISTJ. ISTP seems most likely at the moment, although ESTP is possible as well. I see Ti+Se. Being drawn to INTP descriptions could point to ISTP. They both share the same dominant function, so they are both extremely similar. ^_^


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

What we got inferior function wise is:

*ITP* (fe): "...people are so easily manipulated and shallow. I can see how things really work, I couldn't possibly play along. Isn't anyone able to think for themselves?"
The Form of the Inferior - ITPs

vs

*ISJ* (ne): "...such chaos and nonsense, it would all self-destruct if it wasn't for those of us keeping check of things. Do people really _want_ things to fall apart?"
The Form of the Inferior - ISJs

I'm sure you are on the S side tho.
Which one do you agree with the most?


----------



## Yomotsu Risouka (May 11, 2012)

I'm definitely getting ISTJ.

0 cements you as a sensor and thinker--you're providing a lot of detailed information in case it's logically relevant.

1 establishes what is depicted, then lightly analyzes the situation. "Looks like it could be just about any beach on a cloudy day" seems to suggest a reliance on drawing comparisons to memory--strong Si+Te. The segue into the girl's perspective hints at a very limited Ne.

The rest of the post echoes the same. You indirectly mention a need for backup plans (2), show a strong respect for the law (5)... Of course, introversion is pretty clear throughout. It all points to ISTJ.


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

Tenebrae said:


> I'm definitely getting ISTJ.
> 
> 0 cements you as a sensor and thinker--you're providing a lot of detailed information in case it's logically relevant.
> 
> ...


No, the "just any beach on a cloudy day" to me suggested Se. He simply took it in, absorbed it, and described what he saw, really. Paired with some Ti, as well. Strong memory isn't Si. From looking at these questionnares for a while, as well as getting into the Cognitive Function Picture Game, and studying more the difference between Se and Si, Si just looks different. We'd be getting more of his personal impression. 

I suppose I could be wrong, but the describing of the picture at least pointed towards Se. 

A need for backup plans and strong respect for the law could easily be said for pretty much any personality type, so I wouldn't necessarily type him based on those factors. 

Where are you seeing Te and not Ti?


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Julia Bell said:


> No, the "just any beach on a cloudy day" to me suggested Se. He simply took it in, absorbed it, and described what he saw, really. Paired with some Ti, as well. Strong memory isn't Si. From looking at these questionnares for a while, as well as getting into the Cognitive Function Picture Game, and studying more the difference between Se and Si, Si just looks different. We'd be getting more of his personal impression.
> 
> I suppose I could be wrong, but the describing of the picture at least pointed towards Se.
> 
> ...


Completely true and the need for a backup plan is more enneagram oriented.
As an E6w5, then I got a high needs for being prepared for everything that could possibly happen.

I've been told that Si is like Se, but it connects things to what has been.
Si is like Se + a personal touch as far as I know.
Like "I like the summer because then I can swim" vs "I like the summer because I usually swim in the summer and I like swimming"
But I'm really not good with the Si function...

Could just be my Ni taking the place of Si, lol.


----------



## Yomotsu Risouka (May 11, 2012)

Julia Bell said:


> No, the "just any beach on a cloudy day" to me suggested Se. He simply took it in, absorbed it, and described what he saw, really. Paired with some Ti, as well. Strong memory isn't Si. From looking at these questionnares for a while, as well as getting into the Cognitive Function Picture Game, and studying more the difference between Se and Si, Si just looks different. We'd be getting more of his personal impression.
> 
> I suppose I could be wrong, but the describing of the picture at least pointed towards Se.


I'd normally favor Se over Si there myself. It was the appearance of Te which made me reconsider.



> A need for backup plans and strong respect for the law could easily be said for pretty much any personality type, so I wouldn't necessarily type him based on those factors.
> 
> Where are you seeing Te and not Ti?


I'm seeing Te in the need for backup plans and strong respect for the law. I definitely disagree that these "could easily be said for pretty much any personality type"--Te is really all about planning and rules.

In fact, all TPs have a reputation for independence which can tend toward lawbreaking. They have no respect for the law (Te) and limited concern for social norms (Fe), so there's not really much to ground them.


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

Tenebrae said:


> I'd normally favor Se over Si there myself. It was the appearance of Te which made me reconsider.
> 
> 
> I'm seeing Te in the need for backup plans and strong respect for the law. I definitely disagree that these "could easily be said for pretty much any personality type"--Te is really all about planning and rules.
> ...


But Ti isn't all about breaking rules, either. Te doesn't necessarily respect the law or play by the rules. Te isn't where you're getting your logic (which isn't Thinking anyways) or rules or frameworks. Both Te and Ti can both follow laws. Thinking isn't all about laws or logic or reason. To quote Dark Romantic, who I think sums it up nicely: 



> _Thinking is basically choosing the relevance of actions or outcomes according to the objective, non-personal principles. Te focuses mainly on the result, and evaluates relevance based on how well it results in a desires outcome according to whatever standard is being used _


Quite honestly, I saw none of that in this questionnaire. I saw no need for this whatsoever. Especially the answer to number 10. There was no concern for the external world. Considering I cannot see any Si at all, Se seems pretty apparent, and we all agree we do not _think _we see any Intuition, we're left with ISFP and ISTP. I do not think there was any Fi here at all, though. 

On a side note, Fe doesn't necessarily limit a person to social norms, either, although that is something that is commonly attributed to the description of Fe. I think it might help to say that Fe and Fi aren't where you're getting your values, and in the same way, Te and Ti aren't where you are getting your "logic" (just to put it simply). Fe and Te are simply trying to get consensus, and Fi and Ti only concern themselves with the individual (so basically, how _I _feel, how _I _think). But they are not about _where_ you are getting your values or your way of thinking.


----------



## Yomotsu Risouka (May 11, 2012)

@Julia Bell



> Te focuses mainly on the result, and evaluates relevance based on how well it results in a desires outcome





> Fe and Te are simply trying to get consensus


If "Te is trying to achieve a desired outcome efficiently" and "Te is trying to get consensus"...

Then, since the most efficient way to achieve consensus is by basing your way of thinking on an existing outside standard (i.e., the path of least resistance), Te prefers to do so.


----------



## Celebok (Jun 21, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> What we got inferior function wise is:
> 
> *ITP* (fe): "...people are so easily manipulated and shallow. I can see how things really work, I couldn't possibly play along. Isn't anyone able to think for themselves?"
> The Form of the Inferior - ITPs
> ...


I'd say I agree with both statements, but the first one (ITP) is a lot more similar to thoughts I've had on my own in reaction to things I've observed in other people. Whereas, the ISJ statement sounds more like something another person might say and I'd just think, "Yeah, true." I wouldn't normally think it on my own initiative. Does that help at all?


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Celebok said:


> I'd say I agree with both statements, but the first one (ITP) is a lot more similar to thoughts I've had on my own in reaction to things I've observed in other people. Whereas, the ISJ statement sounds more like something another person might say and I'd just think, "Yeah, true." I wouldn't normally think it on my own initiative. Does that help at all?


Yea, because it's about your own reactions.

We can then say that you are probability ISTP.
Did you read the link under the ITP one? Because it says how the different types might react under the influence of their inferior function.

ISTP is like INTP? 

You don't want to be an INTP anyways:tongue:, they can pass by a house MANY MANY MANY times until they notice it's there :laughing:


----------



## Yomotsu Risouka (May 11, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> You don't want to be an INTP anyways:tongue:, they can pass by a house MANY MANY MANY times until they notice it's there :laughing:


Hey, Ne isn't that bad. I mean, who cares if I get lost in the parking lot literally every single time I go grocery shopping? No big deal, man.


----------



## Celebok (Jun 21, 2012)

This is a pretty interesting discussion so far! I appreciate the analysis you guys are doing in try to type me. For now, I'll go ahead and clarify the parts of my answers that you guys are debating about.

"I wonder where it is. Looks like it could be just about any beach on a cloudy day."

The reason I said this was because I've seen several different beaches during the road trips I've taken, and I briefly wondered if the picture was taken at a place that I've been to, but then I quickly realized that there was no way to identify the beach in the photo. Had it been a picture of, say, a corn field, I would've been much less likely to care where the picture was taken.

"calling the cops if it's something illegal" --> strong respect for the law.

From my perspective, I'd normally be inclined to say that you're reading too much into my words, but then I wouldn't be asking for help if I knew the right things to look for. But for clarification, the main reason I said I might call the cops was because I saw that someone was being hurt and I was powerless to stop it, moreso than just the fact that someone was breaking the law. To be honest, I'm not entirely sure if I understood question #5 in the first place.

It does seem like the current debate is whether I'm ISTJ vs. ISTP. I have reasons to doubt both, but I'll see how this discussion continues to unfold a bit more before I go into that. Thanks again!


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Celebok said:


> This is a pretty interesting discussion so far! I appreciate the analysis you guys are doing in try to type me. For now, I'll go ahead and clarify the parts of my answers that you guys are debating about."I wonder where it is. Looks like it could be just about any beach on a cloudy day."The reason I said this was because I've seen several different beaches during the road trips I've taken, and I briefly wondered if the picture was taken at a place that I've been to, but then I quickly realized that there was no way to identify the beach in the photo. Had it been a picture of, say, a corn field, I would've been much less likely to care where the picture was taken."calling the cops if it's something illegal" --> strong respect for the law.From my perspective, I'd normally be inclined to say that you're reading too much into my words, but then I wouldn't be asking for help if I knew the right things to look for. But for clarification, the main reason I said I might call the cops was because I saw that someone was being hurt and I was powerless to stop it, moreso than just the fact that someone was breaking the law. To be honest, I'm not entirely sure if I understood question #5 in the first place.It does seem like the current debate is whether I'm ISTJ vs. ISTP. I have reasons to doubt both, but I'll see how this discussion continues to unfold a bit more before I go into that. Thanks again!


That answer seems INTPish because you were bombarding with ideas about if it's someplace where you've been or not (Ne + Si).


> Had it been a picture of, say, a corn field, I would've been much less likely to care where the picture was taken.


So it was merely that you found it interesting and for a moment wondered if you had seen it before? because then it has nothing to do with your type.


> "calling the cops if it's something illegal" --> strong respect for the law.From my perspective


That's mostly commons in my experience amongst people with strong Si or Ni function.
INTPs top the list of not having a high respect for laws and I think the same goes for ISTP.

Let's go back to square one for me with a broader perspective.

*INJ* (se): "...such a brutal, sensate landscape. why do people settle for animalistic immediacy? I'm not an animal, that's for sure. I'll conceive my own reality, on my own terms."
*ITP* (fe): "...people are so easily manipulated and shallow. I can see how things really work, I couldn't possibly play along. Isn't anyone able to think for themselves?"
*IFP* (te): "...individuals are so divided and discouraged, for such horrid impersonal reasons. I pay attention to how people feel, and that's more important than anything."
*ISJ* (ne): "...such chaos and nonsense, it would all self-destruct if it wasn't for those of us keeping check of things. Do people really _want_ things to fall apart?"

*EFJ* (ti): "...cold, hard logic doesn't go anywhere toward helping people. where would we be without each other? why risk breaking that neccessary bond?"
*ETJ* (fi) "...people are so unwilling to take charge, too afraid of stepping on someone else's toes just to get something done. I get things done, I have the balls to see how life really works."
*ENP* (si) "...immobility never lasts, the earth never sits still. If you just sit in one place, how could you possibly go anywhere?"
*ESP* (ni) "...trying to repress your own instincts only serves to heighten them. why are people so frightened of what's right in front of their nose?"

Which one do you express the most?


----------



## Celebok (Jun 21, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> So it was merely that you found it interesting and for a moment wondered if you had seen it before? because then it has nothing to do with your type.


That seems like a common theme that often causes me confusion when trying to determine my type. My answers to a lot of questions are completely dependent on the situation.



> Let's go back to square one for me with a broader perspective.
> 
> *INJ* (se): "...such a brutal, sensate landscape. why do people settle for animalistic immediacy? I'm not an animal, that's for sure. I'll conceive my own reality, on my own terms."
> *ITP* (fe): "...people are so easily manipulated and shallow. I can see how things really work, I couldn't possibly play along. Isn't anyone able to think for themselves?"
> ...


After reading all of those, I would still go with ITP (fe). I don't even think it's a close call.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Celebok said:


> That seems like a common theme that often causes me confusion when trying to determine my type. My answers to a lot of questions are completely dependent on the situation.


Many things are 



> After reading all of those, I would still go with ITP (fe). I don't even think it's a close call.


Then there's no doubt that you're IXTP.
I believe the problem is in whether your mind is more like a* black hole* that suck information that you find interesting into large archives or if your mind is more like a *super nova* which explodes in different directions with no set course.


----------



## Celebok (Jun 21, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Then there's no doubt that you're IXTP.
> I believe the problem is in whether your mind is more like a* black hole* that suck information that you find interesting into large archives or if your mind is more like a *super nova* which explodes in different directions with no set course.


Okay, I'm not entirely sure I know what that means, but I seem to relate a lot more to the black hole analogy. I do tend to store a lot of information in my head about stuff that fascinates me (very specific topics), with no practical use, other than to amuse people who also are interested in those topics. I'm not sure about the super nova... I don't even really know what that would look like.


----------



## Yomotsu Risouka (May 11, 2012)

Celebok said:


> I'm not sure about the super nova... I don't even really know what that would look like.


Well, you see, a supernova is essentially an exploding star. From a distance, it looks exactly like a normal star, because light doesn't travel quickly enough for you to see it anywhere near when it's occurring. Of course, if you aren't viewing it from a distance, you're already dead. The only way to avoid this, of course, is by shouting "Za Warudo", but that would attract Eggman, as he intends to conquer it. Luckily, he hasn't been able to harness the power of a supernova, though some speculate the Chaos Emeralds may have greater power than the average supernova, in which case his more powerful robots are potentially even more dangerous than one. Of course, the planet Krikkit's supernova bomb would outpace the Chaos Emeralds in this case, making Marvin a robot which is more dangerous than any Sonic has ever faced.

In conclusion, depression overcomes even the power of friendship.

...So yeah.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Celebok said:


> Okay, I'm not entirely sure I know what that means, but I seem to relate a lot more to the black hole analogy. I do tend to store a lot of information in my head about stuff that fascinates me (very specific topics), with no practical use, other than to amuse people who also are interested in those topics. I'm not sure about the super nova... I don't even really know what that would look like.


hihi, busted!
You're an ISTP 



> I'm not entirely sure I know what that means





> I'm not sure about the super nova... I don't even really know what that would look like.


This was the key identification.
You agreed a bit with Ni, but you had trouble understanding the metaphor I put out to describe it (Never met an N that didn't understand it.)

Here comes a nice space art picture of a supernova explosion roud:


----------



## Celebok (Jun 21, 2012)

Tenebrae said:


> Well, you see, a supernova is essentially an exploding star. From a distance, it looks exactly like a normal star, because light doesn't travel quickly enough for you to see it anywhere near when it's occurring. Of course, if you aren't viewing it from a distance, you're already dead. The only way to avoid this, of course, is by shouting "Za Warudo", but that would attract Eggman, as he intends to conquer it. Luckily, he hasn't been able to harness the power of a supernova, though some speculate the Chaos Emeralds may have greater power than the average supernova, in which case his more powerful robots are potentially even more dangerous than one. Of course, the planet Krikkit's supernova bomb would outpace the Chaos Emeralds in this case, making Marvin a robot which is more dangerous than any Sonic has ever faced.
> 
> In conclusion, depression overcomes even the power of friendship.
> 
> ...So yeah.


O-kaaay... thanks for the input...


----------



## Yomotsu Risouka (May 11, 2012)

Celebok said:


> O-kaaay... thanks for the input...


It was an example!


----------



## Celebok (Jun 21, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> hihi, busted!
> You're an ISTP


Heh, okay, thanks. Since that agrees with the most recent tests I've taken, and you came to that conclusion after a thorough analysis, I'll go with that as my most likely type. I still have some questions about some discrepancies with that being my type, as well as questions about my previous mistypings, but I'll post those later in the day when I have more time.



> This was the key identification.
> You agreed a bit with Ni, but you had trouble understanding the metaphor I put out to describe it (Never met an N that didn't understand it.)


What's weird, though, is that I often come up with metaphors like that to explain my thoughts, but more often than not it ends up not helping other people understand me any more than if I hadn't used the metaphor at all.



> Here comes a nice space art picture of a supernova explosion roud:


The link didn't work. :-/


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Celebok said:


> What's weird, though, is that I often come up with metaphors like that to explain my thoughts, but more often than not it ends up not helping other people understand me any more than if I hadn't used the metaphor at all.
> 
> 
> 
> The link didn't work. :-/


The picture was removed 
But when you make metaphors, they will be based on your functions.

To put it bluntly, great minds think alike and so does the stupid people.
You'll have an easier time with another ISTP making metaphors and people like that.
Large parts of the typing of you was made by N doms or people with secondary N function. (Thus the gap in understanding)


----------



## Celebok (Jun 21, 2012)

*Followup Questions after being typed as ISTP*

Thanks for your help! Okay, for now, I'll go ahead and assume that I'm an ISTP, until I hear a convincing enough argument otherwise. So now that leaves me with a new set of questions. Before I even started this thread, I knew that regardless of what I get typed as, I'd want to try and figure out some root causes for all the inconsistencies I've encountered in trying to assess my type.

So assuming that I'm ISTP...

Why was I previously mistyped as ISTJ so many times, by several different tests and more than half the people who responded to this thread (including an ISTP)? I understand now that most online tests are unreliable, and it's easy to blame it on poorly-worded questions, but it seems odd that they'd so often produce the same result. Is it more likely my own lack of understanding of myself, or just a certain misunderstanding of certain concepts that I've applied consistently? Like I noted earlier, I believe I was raised to value organizational skills and other such qualities, so it's possible I tend to misinterpret "I prefer X" to mean "I prefer to be X" as opposed to "I have a natural tendency to do X on an average day".

Why would two different cognitive functions tests show a very high Si and a relatively low Se? (Possibly the same reasons I tend to score ISTJ, since Si is their dominant function?)

What about my tendency to borderline between S and N? I scored INTJ once or twice, and the most recent test reported 50/50 S/N. Yet there's supposedly a big difference between Se+Ni and Ne+Si.

How is it that I can relate to general descriptions of INTP's moreso than ISTP's? Does the ISTP type have a lot of stereotypes that are not true in a lot of cases, moreso than other types?

Examples of ISTP descriptions that don't fit me:

- Can become bored with repetitiveness and routine. (While I enjoy the flexibility of being able to change my routine whenever I want, repetitiveness and routine is usually a comfort zone for me.)
- Closet daredevils who gravitate toward fast-moving or risky hobbies, recreational sports, and careers. (Definitely not. Those types of high-adrenaline activities don't really do anything for me, and I'd rather play it safe... though I do enjoy going on road trips by myself.)
- Mom tells you to do homework, and you start doing house chores instead. (I've always respected my parents' authority, and even if I ever felt like being rebellious, I certainly wouldn't have done house chores.)
- You know thousands of useless sports scores and stats off by heart. (I'm not into sports. On the other hand, I can name off every episode of LOST in order.)
- Care very much about their appearance and the appearances of the objects around them. (I don't care much about appearance in general.)
- Pay close attention to people’s facial expressions, smiles, and mannerisms. (I don't usually notice these things.)
- Enjoy both craft and sport. (I'm not into sports and am not athletic at all.)

So are these just untrue stereotypes of ISTP's, or do they represent qualities that may be manifesting in me in other ways, or are they aspects of myself that I'm unknowingly repressing, or are they hints that I might not be an ISTP after all?


----------



## Yomotsu Risouka (May 11, 2012)

I feel a bit silly still going on about this, because I know I'm trying to save my ego, but I still think I'm right.*

Si*
- "Repetitiveness is usually a comfort zone for me."
- "I don't care much about appearance in general."
- "...it seems odd that they'd so often produce the same result."
- "I believe I was raised to value..."
- "I can name off every episode of LOST in order."
- "I'd rather play it safe..."

*Te*
- Your entire post is very organized and structured. It even has a consistently organized list of points: 'ISTPs are supposedly like this. (I'm not like this.)'
- "...it seems odd that they'd so often produce the same result."
- "Why would *two **different* cognitive function tests show..."
- "I've always respected my parents' authority..."

*Fi*
- "I do enjoy going on road trips by myself."
- "...even if I ever felt like being rebellious, I certainly wouldn't have done house chores."
- General knowledge of personal preferences, used as evidence (Te).

*Ne*
- "I'll go ahead and assume I'm an ISTP, _until_ I hear a convincing enough argument..."
- "I understand now... _but_..."
- "...so it's _possible_ I tend to misinterpret..."
- "How is it that... _Does_ the ISTP type..."
- "So are these... _or... or... or..._" (There's that supernova of yours.)

EDIT: Oh, I'm dumb. I also remembered something about the beach picture. I saw Si in that you were attempting to compare it to other beaches in memory. That's what Si _does_.


----------



## hylogenesis (Apr 26, 2012)

2.) Car broke down. Happens to me all the time, right? So...cover all the bases and see if I can get it going again (I'll probably end up making it worse, of course, because I'd get distracted by something _else_ in there and play with that instead of the problem...). If it won't go, no big deal. Hitch a ride--there's a group. Groups can also be _witnesses_. Outwardly, I'm sure I'd react the same way if you told me bagels are made of bread-- "So?" *blank facial expression* I should note that even with a group of friends I know, it's unlikely that I'd agree to go with in the first place.

3.) I'll go for the drinks _if_ I go at all. 9 times out of 10, I won't because I know almost no one and have no way of knowing what will go down...and the socializing sucks and concerts are pretty social--at least, it's a lot of people crammed into one space.

4.) Since it's a friend, I will have no problem launching into a full-scale argument with them just to see if they can back it up. Inwardly, I'd be both irritated and intrigued. Mostly irritated. Outwardly...I'd sort of look like I was paying attention.

5.) Withdraw, most likely--especially if it involves face-to-face interaction. If it's written...I might write something back...I can be expected to shut down most of the time, though.

6.) learning and thinking are good. A sense of right and wrong is always a good thing. Too little ambition to address the rest of the prompt...

7.) ...words cannot describe, sir.

8.) Depends on if they make logical sense or not. If I have to do something on the fly and have no other option, I'll go for it. Why not?

9.) Learning and engaging in some kind of creative outlet are always good for me. I hate attending social dinners and watching movies afterward. I don't have the attention span for that crap--anything where I have to socialize and don't really feel like it...I mean, if my heart isn't in it, forget about it. You'll just get a bored kid with too much energy who just wants to go for walks and make a mental map of the area and play with cats, but instead comments about every stupid inconsistency or outright falsehood in whatever movie we're watching...thirteen days _sucked._

10.) It depends. If it's someone I know and relate to (so like...one person?) then a lot of the shit in my head ends up getting puked and I'll feel free to be the nutter that I am. Everyone else? They just hear "I'm going to such-and-such-a-store to get blah-blah-blah peroxide" or "okay", "yes", "no", "that sucks", "that's cool", "thank you". Sometimes I'm also very stiff-postured (either in a death-slouch or straight as an arrow), but it depends on my level of discomfort.

I didn't answer 1 or 2 because 1 seemed unimportant and I didn't feel like doing 2.


----------



## Celebok (Jun 21, 2012)

I was hoping I'd get more responses to my followup reply, but I'll have to go with what I've got. At this point, even though there are more votes for ISTJ, the arguments for ISTP sound a lot stronger to me. (Sorry, Tenebrae, but even though categorizing my sentences into the different functions might've been a decent argument for ISTJ in the absence of evidence pointing to other functions, I found Acerbusvenator's analysis more convincing.) Still, I feel like the analysis isn't quite complete, because of the unanswered questions I wrote in my last reply. So for now, I'm still declaring myself to be IxTx, with ISTP being the leading contender, and ISTJ being the runner up.


----------



## Yomotsu Risouka (May 11, 2012)

hylogenesis said:


> I'd didn't answer 1 ... because 1 seemed unimportant...


It's actually the most important! It usually tells us which perceiving function you use with almost 100% certainty.

@_Celebok_: Haha, why are you sorry? In the end, you're the one who knows you best, right?


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

I'm just slamming information in your face 
The typing itself is best done by you


----------



## Celebok (Jun 21, 2012)

Can I ask a question? I'm still new to this site, so I'm not all that familiar with posting etiquette, but... should I not be moving on to asking other questions about discrepancies between myself and type descriptions, until I've declared myself a specific type? I'm still interested in answers to the questions I asked in my earlier reply (if I'm ISTP, then how do you explain these anomalies?), but people seem more interested in directing me toward other clues to determine my type. Do I just need to follow whatever help is recommended (here or wherever else), decide my type, and then post additional questions in a new thread?


----------



## Helios (May 30, 2012)

Celebok said:


> Can I ask a question? I'm still new to this site, so I'm not all that familiar with posting etiquette, but... should I not be moving on to asking other questions about discrepancies between myself and type descriptions, until I've declared myself a specific type? I'm still interested in answers to the questions I asked in my earlier reply (if I'm ISTP, then how do you explain these anomalies?), but people seem more interested in directing me toward other clues to determine my type. Do I just need to follow whatever help is recommended (here or wherever else), decide my type, and then post additional questions in a new thread?


It's a free world. Do whatever you deem necessary.


----------



## Celebok (Jun 21, 2012)

FacelessBeauty said:


> It's a free world. Do whatever you deem necessary.


Okay, then let me phrase my question like this: What method will most likely get me answers to questions I asked, as opposed to a rabbit trail of additional information?


----------



## Helios (May 30, 2012)

Celebok said:


> Okay, then let me phrase my question like this: What method will most likely get me answers to questions I asked, as opposed to a rabbit trail of additional information?


I don't think you'll find the answers you seek without the rabbit trail of additional info because you know yourself better than we do. The information serves as a guide to help you. Follow it and do some soul searching if you will, because the conclusion ultimately rests in your hands. There's only so much we can do.


----------



## Wakachi (May 24, 2012)

Celebok said:


> Okay, then let me phrase my question like this: What method will most likely get me answers to questions I asked, as opposed to a rabbit trail of additional information?


Introspection, sire.


----------



## Helios (May 30, 2012)

Everyone cease fire. Each of you has something useful to bring to the table. Focus on the goal and leave all personal drama behind so this poor lad can figure out his type.
@_Wakachi_ that's actually a really good idea. But be sure get the opinion of a few people in each type you ask (with a reasonable explanation of course).


----------



## Wakachi (May 24, 2012)

FacelessBeauty said:


> Everyone cease fire. Each of you has something useful to bring to the table. Focus on the goal and leave all personal drama behind so this poor lad can figure out his type.
> @_Wakachi_ that's actually a really good idea. But be sure get the opinion of a few people in each type you ask (with a reasonable explanation of course).


=/ Or maybe meanwhile, I'll just reroll another image before @Celebok starts looking like a celebrity. This one seems to test Si vs Se perfectly


----------



## Yomotsu Risouka (May 11, 2012)

@Acerbusvenator: You attack my argument based on your frustration with me (pretty openly, at that!) and assert the reliability of your method without offering any evidence (as usual). That's not very convincing.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

*tries to look up the empirical evidence for MBTI without success*

http://personalitycafe.com/myers-briggs-forum/61693-scientific-evidence-mbti.html <-- Source


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

Celebok said:


> Okay, I watched the video... well, I watched it before, but this time I paused it several times so I could stop and take notes.
> 
> First, I have a question. Given the fact that I'm currently trying to decide between ISTP and ISTJ, is this Si vs. Se comparison supposed to be more or less a tie breaker? Because if it is, and if this video provides the best descriptions of Si and Se, then I definitely show more Si than Se. Here's what I got from the video:
> 
> ...


All right. Those are sadly how Se and Si are commonly described. Let me say this once and for all: no, Se is not that thing that makes you more likely to want to experience physical things and being impulsive. It is not that thing that makes you wear flashy clothing and go for bold risks. No, Si is not memory and has nothing to do with memory. In fact, Si has little to do with looking back on past experiences. That is but one _fragment _of Si. Perceiving functions have been something I have seriously been digging into because ever since I got into this whole theory, Sensing versus Intuition really intrigued me. Partly because nobody seemed to be able to explain the difference well without making weird generalizations. The sad thing is that all of this really aren't the peoples' fault, but mainly the blame goes to the fact that it's actually pretty hard to find accurate information. I hate to overload you with more information, but at the same time, I don't want you to be left with the wrong idea of Se and Si. 

Also, if you use Si as either your dom or aux function, you cannot use Ti as either your dom or aux function. You apparently do seem to identify with Ti better, and I will say that I am still seeing more Ti than Te. Here are descriptions of Se and Si that I do hope you find good (and I really, like I said, don't want to shove information down your throat -- I might mention I think that everybody here has brought up good points): 



> Se is all about externalized impressions. Se is when we take the information of our surroundings as is. Everything around us becomes absorbed in its rawest form at that very moment. There is no _concern _about past or future. This is not to say an Se-user doesn’t have discretion and just jumps into things. What I mean is that their big picture is how all the sensory things tie together _in that moment_.
> 
> If an Se-dom (dominant) were to be walking in a city, they would take in everything. They would notice the people, how many people are about, perhaps the body language of certain people _(they look sad because they appear to be)_, they would notice the sounds… These sensory things connect to create for the Se-user a big picture. They can see what is going on. People make up the city. Their thoughts may be distracted from these things. Their thoughts in fact may be very tangential. They may hear something or see something or feel something that reminds them of another thing. They may connect those two things in their brain.
> 
> ...


And here's Si (thanks to Stephen for helping me with this): 



> Introverted Sensing is all about internalized impressions. Si, like Se, is about what something is. It’s still about Senses. However, Si is _internal_, remember. It is an Introverted function, and therefore subjective. Imagine a Si user’s perception is an impressionist painter. Each experience is stored in one of these paintings:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And just in case, here's a description of Ne. I think there is a possibility that you could you Ne... maybe.  



> Ne is all about seeing possibilities. It sees the possibilities of the present moment. Specifically, since it is an extroverted function, it sees the possibilities of the world _objectively. _Nothing is impossible in the external world, but the external world still has rules, and Ne senses that constraint. Ne, unlike Se or Si, does not trust its senses. A Ne-dom in fact _distrusts _their senses because it sees possibilities, ideas (stemming from those possibilities), and connections (between possibilities). Ne is all about the possibilities of their stimuli. This is why Ne and Se cannot coexist within the same person. Ne _rejects_ and suppresses simply taking things via its senses as it _is.
> _
> Se becomes bored when the present physical experience has been lived by them and become stale (and this does not mean, say, getting on a heck of a ton of roller coasters; just like Ne explores possibilities, Se takes in all of what is going all, all of the sensory details. When these become apparent, Se becomes bored). Ne becomes bored when the present imaginative experiences have been explored and become evident.
> 
> So the Ne-dom walking through the city will see a flood of possibilities for that present moment. They see the people, hear the sounds, etc, but do not trust those sensory elements as the reality of the situation. They wonder about the things _behind _them, and trust the idea that the sensory elements are not the reality. In the end, Ne says that multiple realities are possible for the present moment, and it is all about uncovering these things. Being an Extroverted function, its focus is broad.


----------



## Yomotsu Risouka (May 11, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> *tries to look up the empirical evidence for MBTI without success*
> 
> http://personalitycafe.com/myers-briggs-forum/61693-scientific-evidence-mbti.html <-- Source


The empirical evidence for MBTI?

The fact that it correlates strongly to the Big Five, which is nearly universally accepted in the scientific community.

By the way, claiming "MBTI is all bullshit!" is _not_ a good way of supporting your method of MBTI typing. Just so you know.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

ISTP or unbalanced INTP.
The Ti is obvious.
He doesn't accept any Te authority.
It is why? why? why?

He identified with Si, so I hold a button on overdeveloped Si.



> Oh, he's one of THOSE people. Great...


Immediate linking without any need for more info or pattern recognition.

Making him an unbalanced INTP.
Or a very judgmental ISTP.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Yomotsu Risouka said:


> The empirical evidence for MBTI?
> 
> The fact that it correlates strongly to the Big Five, which is nearly universally accepted in the scientific community.


lol, funny
v


> You attack my argument based on your frustration with me (pretty openly, at that!) and assert the reliability of your method *without offering any evidence (as usual). That's not very convincing.*


----------



## Yomotsu Risouka (May 11, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> lol, funny
> v


You're acting petulant, Acerbusvenator. Wasn't I supposed to be the one with the personal issue, here? Or are you dropping all pretenses of rationality?

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Yomotsu Risouka said:


> You're acting petulant, Acerbusvenator. Wasn't I supposed to be the one with the personal issue, here? Or are you dropping all pretenses of rationality?
> 
> Myers-Briggs Type Indicator - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia





> However, "there was no support for the view that the MBTI measures truly dichotomous preferences or qualitatively distinct types, instead, the instrument measures four relatively independent dimensions."





> The statistical validity of the MBTI as a psychometric instrument has been the subject of criticism. It has been estimated that between a third and a half of the published material on the MBTI has been produced for conferences of the Center for the Application of Psychological Type (which provides training in the MBTI) or as papers in the Journal of Psychological Type (which is edited by Myers-Briggs advocates). It has been argued that this reflects a lack of critical scrutiny





> Some researchers have interpreted the reliability of the test as being low. Studies have found that between 39% and 76% of those tested fall into different types upon retesting some weeks or years later.





> In one study, when people were asked to compare their preferred type to that assigned by the MBTI assessment, only half of people picked the same profile. Critics also argue that the MBTI lacks falsifiability, which can cause confirmation bias in the interpretation of results.


Just sayin'


----------



## Wakachi (May 24, 2012)

@Yomotsu Risouka @Acerbusvenator

Take your argument or grand debate on the PM because you're probably making Celebok nervous, feeling unwelcome and distrustful of the typing process (Acer, really? Snapping your own needle in his thread?) . 

And for the record, I'm going to be more inclined to think _IXTP_ after rereading his form.


----------



## Helios (May 30, 2012)

@Wakachi I agree. I think INTP would actually be quite appropriate.


----------



## Ludi (Dec 25, 2011)

Celebok said:


> Hey, thanks for the responses. I think perhaps there's just a lot about myself that I don't fully understand, so that's a big part of why I'm trying to figure this stuff out.


 @Celebok
A question : how do you like the idea of studying a scholarly subject of your interest during summer vacations?


----------



## Celebok (Jun 21, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> @_Yomotsu Risouka_ if we continue to spend time questioning how others go about things, then there will be less time spent trying to find his type.
> 
> I should also note that @_Yomotsu Risouka_ has a personal issue with me and thus his arguments can come into question.
> 
> Now I think we should once again focus on the typing and not on each other.


For the record, @Yomotsu Risouka was responding to my request to see people address each other's arguments. This does NOT mean bringing your personal issues with each other into it. I don't know you two, and I don't care what issues you may have with each other. I'm only interested in getting at the truth. If you really believe in not focusing on each other, and if you believe that Yomotsu has issues with you, then it's best if you just ignore him.


----------



## Celebok (Jun 21, 2012)

Yomotsu Risouka said:


> @_Acerbusvenator_: You attack my argument based on your frustration with me (pretty openly, at that!) and assert the reliability of your method without offering any evidence (as usual). That's not very convincing.


I agree that it's not convincing, but since I was the one asking the questions, shouldn't I be the one to decide how convincing it is? All you're doing is fueling a pointless argument.


----------



## Celebok (Jun 21, 2012)

hornet said:


> ISTP or unbalanced INTP.
> The Ti is obvious.
> He doesn't accept any Te authority.
> It is why? why? why?
> ...


So INTP comes back to the table. It's starting make sense, but I need to give this some more thought, especially after @Julia Bell's new information. I do seem to identify with a lot of general descriptions of INTP, even though I've never tested as INTP. And by the way, what exactly do you mean by "unbalanced"? I think I have an idea, but I just want to be clear. (Are you referring to the Si being more developed than the Ne?)


----------



## Celebok (Jun 21, 2012)

Ludi said:


> @_Celebok_
> A question : how do you like the idea of studying a scholarly subject of your interest during summer vacations?


Generally I don't. When I go on vacation, I go on vacation.


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

Celebok said:


> So INTP comes back to the table. It's starting make sense, but I need to give this some more thought, especially after @_Julia Bell_'s new information. I do seem to identify with a lot of general descriptions of INTP, even though I've never tested as INTP. And by the way, what exactly do you mean by "unbalanced"? I think I have an idea, but I just want to be clear. (Are you referring to the Si being more developed than the Ne?)


I have no idea about the unbalanced deal here. You seem pretty normal and balanced to me. XD I'll leave that to the original poster of that idea to answer your question there... I might mention a word of warning not to base everything off of the general descriptions, as descriptions are extremely easy to find yourself relating to. However, I think I see that you are using them in the correct way, which is to look up information and see if the description of the type isn't way off the mark. 

Don't worry about never having tested before as INTP. Tests = fail. XD Oh yeah, but there is a cognitive functions test that I have found to be more accurate than most if you are interested: Keys 2 Cognition - Cognitive Processes

Edit: @Ludi - what does studying scholarly articles during summer vacation have to do with personality, out of curiosity? o_o


----------



## Ludi (Dec 25, 2011)

Celebok said:


> Generally I don't. When I go on vacation, I go on vacation.


Well, tell us what you most like doing in your free time, including vacations? ( You may want to include what do _not_ like to do as well).


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Celebok said:


> So INTP comes back to the table. It's starting make sense, but I need to give this some more thought, especially after @_Julia Bell_'s new information. I do seem to identify with a lot of general descriptions of INTP, even though I've never tested as INTP. And by the way, what exactly do you mean by "unbalanced"? I think I have an idea, but I just want to be clear. (Are you referring to the Si being more developed than the Ne?)


I mean that you don't check external reality enough with your Ne.
Ti and Si are both subjective functions.
So if you are imbalanced you would tend to nitpick and compare it with an internal layout without checking new
info enough.

However you readily accept new info so, it may be the other way around too.
You could be a stable INTP with a well developed tertriary Si.

I'm too used to unstable people around here... XD


----------

