Does anyone else hate their type's profiles?

[entropie]

I think, with the type description in question, it's all about the words "may", "usually" and "most", e.g. "most INFPs have strong faith". So, of course not all INFPs are like that. They're just saying that they can be disposed towards that.

But, of course, it's phrased really badly. They shouldn't follow up a statement like that first one ("Nearly all INFPs...") with generalizations like the ones that come later. Badly done.

To answer the OP, a ton of sites say that ESTJs would do well in the military, which, in another life, I might, but NOT IN THIS ONE. They also say that I don't question authority. I often do, with authorities that I don't respect. On the ESTJ equivalent of that INFP page, they said that ESTJs are "natural leaders", and with regard to that point, I couldn't disagree with them more. Maybe ENTJs are natural leaders, but not us. Certainly not me, anyway.

Bearing in mind of course that there are such things like INFPs, ESTJs, ...

 

[BlahBlahNounBlah]

I don't identify with how heavily those profiles emphasize the ENTP tendency to argue.


I'm nothing like that. I actively avoid arguments (with people I care about). I will disagree or offer a contrary perspective quite easily but when I sense an argument brewing, I run for the hills.

 

[Verfremdungseffekt]

I don't mean to disrupt the streak of bitterness here, but to function as a human being there comes a time when you have to just trust in things, or in people. You can't always run around, confirming and reconfirming everything in your life, and people aren't ever a constant.

Sometimes you just have to trust that your spouse or your friend or your child or your neighbor knows what he's doing or, one way or another, has the best of intentions. If you can't do that, you've got some serious problems.

That sentiment -- the one that both holds us together as a society and allows us to shrug off the burden of everyone else and just get on with our own business -- can be applied well, or poorly; on a small or a grand scale; or anywhere in the middle. It can be useful or it can be completely counterproductive.

Ultimately, faith is a tool every bit as powerful as logic. They're opposites and complimentary. Without one, the other is pretty much useless.

 

[LotsOfHeart]

I always hated when INFJ profiles tried to paint pictures of INFJs as these peace-loving teddy bears. That's definitely not the case with me, and wouldn't be with most of us I'm sure. I'll be the first to admit I don't go looking for a fight, but I'm not a bitch either.

That said, I was overall pretty happy with my profile "Portait of an INFJ". It was for the most part accurate for me and most INFJs I've known. In fact, that's what really made me realize that this typology thing was the real deal. So, it's not that bad. Plus, that INFP description in the thread's original post was okay to me. I'm sorry that it bothered you, and for that reason I wish that it could've been different, but it doesn't affect my perceptions of INFPs.

INFPs, like INFJs, often hold back part of their true selves. I know this for a fact because a very close, diagnosed INFP friend of mine actually acts pretty extroverted, especially in large groups of people. He has a wide circle of friends and everyone likes him, as they should, because he's a great person, however when he took the test I was surprised he was an INFP. I was totally sure he'd be an ENFJ. Now, the INFP thing makes sense, because I can see it in his personality now that I know it's there. I like INFP females as well.

 

[Jeffster]

I personally think type should be determined by functions and not have any profiles... since there are so many holes in them, but the function order makes sense and is in use for everyone of that type.

What does that mean?

 

[A Schnitzel]

I once dated my type profile. Quite a tumultuous few weeks. It involved more video gaming and LARPing than I would have liked, but I was young and foolish, didn't know any better.

Now while we left on good terms I still hide a little resentment towards it, so thanks for creating this thread and giving me this opportunity to vent.

 

[BlackCat]

What does that mean?

Profiles should be built around, say for the ISFP what Fi, Se, Ni, and Te do for them. Not that they are "starving artists" and like to jump off of cliffs.

 

[Jeffster]

Profiles should be built around, say for the ISFP what Fi, Se, Ni, and Te do for them. Not that they are "starving artists" and like to jump off of cliffs.

Oh. Well, then I completely disagree. The second part might be a generalization that can be inaccurate for many people, but the first part is completely hypothetical and built on raw speculation. That might work for N types as profile descriptions, but it's become obvious to me it doesn't really work for S types. What it induces in us is odd attempts to take our observations of our own and others' behavior and stuff it into function definitions, whether it actually fits or not.

If your goal is to make profiles more vague, so that it "fits" more people, the way ambiguously written horoscope stuff does, then by all means build it around "what Te does for you", but if you want something that actually has practical understanding in the real world, it should be experience-based, but try to use as wide and diverse a sample of people as possible.

 

[BlackCat]

What it induces in us is odd attempts to take our observations of our own and others' behavior and stuff it into function definitions, whether it actually fits or not.

I actually like to do that though Jeff.

 

[erm]

I don't mean to disrupt the streak of bitterness here,

Bitterness? Where was that?

It's a lot easier to be happier when one is rational. Since working out how to be happy and escape bitterness is a rational process. The world is a great place because of rationality.

Took me a while to realise that "faith" in the sense you used it was the cause of my unhappiness. It is the attitude that cause bitterness, since faith fails more often than not.

but to function as a human being there comes a time when you have to just trust in things, or in people.

No. There'll come a time when you have to trust your instincts.

You're talking like you are in a film or something. I've never even had to have faith in my parents, the only time I was unsure of them was when I wasn't conscious (less than 5 years of age), so there was nothing I could have done.

You can't always run around, confirming and reconfirming everything in your life, and people aren't ever a constant.

Of course you can. It would be a great thing if more people realise this and give up some of their ignorance.

People are a constant. Even insane people are very predictable. I know someone who tries to be unpredictable, it's very predictable when he's gonna do it. Granted, what he specifically does is unpredictable.

Sometimes you just have to trust that your spouse or your friend or your child or your neighbor knows what he's doing or, one way or another, has the best of intentions. If you can't do that, you've got some serious problems.

Again, I don't know what world you are living in. Spouses and friends prove their worth over time. Faith plays little part in it. Trust is a vague word, it can be used in an irrational sense or a rational sense. In the rational sense it's equivalent to going with the highest odds.

That sentiment -- the one that both holds us together as a society and allows us to shrug off the burden of everyone else and just get on with our own business -- can be applied well, or poorly; on a small or a grand scale; or anywhere in the middle. It can be useful or it can be completely counterproductive.

It's highly counterproductive to any goal. This is why that sentiment causes such bitterness. That sentiment is ignorance. Ignorance can only help through chance.

Ultimately, faith is a tool every bit as powerful as logic. They're opposites and complimentary. Without one, the other is pretty much useless.

Again, what?

 

[OrangeAppled]

Hm, I don't think the profile in the OP is too bad, it just makes a lot of generalizations & goes straight for the stereotypes. I've seen worse actually. I've always felt that INFP profiles emphasize the hippy Mother Theresa side a little too much. I almost feel guilty identifying with such a "nice" profile, because I'm simply not that sugary by a long shot. I had trouble seeing myself as having Fi at first because of these descriptions.

Now, I would say that internally I relate to the INFP profiles more than I appear to though. If you go by this profile, I think you might mistake some INFPs for INTPs initially, because many of us are quite aloof. I mean, I absolutely hate when people say we're teddy bears, or whatever. Externally, I'm not that soft, and internally I am not that simple (or soft...).

I find myself and some other INFPs to be a little bit of a dichotomy. Seemingly opposite traits exist in an individual, while more "related" traits may not.

I start with Fi:-
Carl Jung. "Psychological Types" Book. CHAPTER X (General Description Of The Types). The Introverted type.

Add Ne etc.

It's the most accurate description I've seen for me. Probably because it excludes things outside of type.

I agree, that is a very good profile.

 

[ladyinspring]

But that Carl Jung profile requires me to separate every little phrase to try and understand what the heck it means. It's way too Freudian for me, all the conscious/unconscious talk. I can't say I hate it, but I find it useless.

The only profiles I know I hate are the typelogic ones by Joe Butt. Especially some of the SJ ones, in particular, the "functional analysis" section for ISFJs. None of those descriptions are appealing at all, and some are very difficult to relate to how people really are (Si is the function "full of archetypes/mythical figures/hobgoblins"? All their Fe does is make them tentative about expressing opinions? Nothing else?)

I don't know if all the Butt descriptions are bad, I doubt it. But that's one of the profiles I always remember not liking at all.

 

[durentu]

When going around to MBTI pages, I sometimes wonder how much MBTI has limited or liberated people.

I use MBTI as a tool for self reflection. I take the negative points and think about them to see if they apply and if it's something that I should try to work on. It's been helpful in that regard. Especially the cognitive functions.

I'm sometimes taken back by how people have weaponized MBTI and attack each other. "Since you're INTP, you suck at parties"

There was a time that this was true, but instead of thinking that this description is my destiny, I saw it as a way to improve.

Like all tools, it can be used for good or bad, to create or destroy.

 

[Unique]

The ISTP profiles are terrible

 

[iamathousandapples]

The ISTP profiles are terrible

Seconded. There are few, if any good ISTP profiles out there

 

[Nonsensical]

You want to know what I think?

I think Black Cat is an INTJ.

 

[Sniffles]

The INFJ profiles seem alright to me.

 

[Jaguar]

Survival Guide For INFPs - PersonalityCafe

^This seriously makes me want to vomit. It starts with an overview of the INFP type and it's like... no. I personally think type should be determined by functions and not have any profiles... since there are so many holes in them, but the function order makes sense and is in use for everyone of that type.

Anyone else?

Vomit. Vomitus. Excreta. Excrement. Excrementitious. Excremental.


You are going to have to stop making such good points.
I'm tired of agreeing with you.

I think all the profiles are nonsense.
Function orders are what matter.
Not the order MBTI claims people have;
the function order a person actually has.

There should be more tests online that attempt to do this.
I'm not satisfied with the limited number available, nor their caliber.
But then is this cat ever satisfied?
Nah.
Goes with the territory.

I don't think you are INFP anyway.

 

[Ace_]

The ENTJ profile fits me well and I feel a little proud when I read it. I even love the weaknesses section because it makes me laugh.

 

[Tallulah]

You want to know what I think?

I think Black Cat is an INTJ.

I think so, too.