"Untypeable" Family Members

[INTJMom]

It's so hard to type older people because they have become more balanced as they have matured - hopefully.

 

[wildcat]

I have two members of my family who have been difficult to type, and I am collecting information on what makes people behave against their type, especially in the family context. So, does anyone care to share (generalized!) portraits of family types who are "off" for whatever reason--how they manifest counter-type behaviours or do seemingly untypeable things?

I'll start off. (Note: They have never taken the official MBTI, just internet approximations.) Sister 1 has always tested as an INFP. I can see that in her childhood, but she shows no orientation in adulthood toward Kiersey's Idealist traits--especially not self-actualization, which she laughs at me for being interested in. She has an F preference, I am pretty sure, being sensitive, but she is interested in science and is much like her INTJ boyfriend now; I wonder if he is the reason for this. She also has always been an amazing artist. I cannot figure out her type for sure.

Sister 2 has tested TWICE as ENFP but this cannot be true. She is a textbook ESTP: as early as two years old perfect strangers would watch her and tell my mother, "I think you've got your boy there." To this day she is proud of being "one of the guys." She fits all the descriptions of an SP Artisan. I just don't know why there is such a discrepancy in the test results.

The family members are the most difficult people to type.

Cause: Myopia.

 

[INTJMom]

The family members are the most difficult people to type.

Cause: Myopia.

I agree.

 

[TaylorS]

Hmmm...

I know how you feel. It is highly irritating. My father is virtually "untypeable." He is definitely IxTx. INTP can be ruled out. That leaves us with INTJ, ISTP, and ISTJ. He is very much against tradition, so ISTJ then ends up seeming unlikely. He doesn't seem particularly N (I think he is borderline on the N/S dichotomy), which would make INTJ seem less likely. But he seems too organized and J-like to be an ISTP. If he were to take the cognitive functions test, I predict that he would score lowest on Fi and Fe.
Clearly, whichever type he is, he is an abnormal version of it.

The options...
- An stressed-out INTJ who keeps his Ni to himself, and out of stress, uses his Se quite a bit more than usual.
- A very, very untraditional ISTJ.
- An organized ISTP who is not that much of a risk-taker and who appreciates politeness (Fe + Si) more than most ISTPs seem to.

I suppose I'll just have to force a barrage of Jungian tests on him.

I'll guess he's probably an INTJ who's cautious about exposing the Ni aspects of his behavior for some reason, though it comes out in his anti-tradition attitude.

 

["?"]

I would think that a family member (or anyone you live with) should be the easiest to type, since you are able to observe them while at home.

 

[OctaviaCaesar]

Yes, "?" you are able to observe them all the time, and so you see them engaging preferences and non-preferences all the time. It muddies the waters.

 

[Wandering]

Not to mention that you see them using far more than just their two Primary functions, which can lead to confusion as to which two functions are their Primary.

Also, people don't necessarily express their functions in the same way when they are at home. For example, Fi-people can be as expressive as Fe-people (or even more expressive!) with their loved ones, which could lead one to mistake them for Fe-people. That mistake would much more easily be avoided when typing a colleague for example.

 

["?"]

Which should be the case. Most, including MBTI, try to put personalities into a box. The personality is too fluid and multi-dimensional. If one is unable to type the persons that they live with, then they have a limited knowledge of type, are too subjective and close to the person(s) being observed or again the system being used is too limiting. I choose the latter and for that reason find it just as quirky when people attempt to speedread someone they have little or no knowledge of. You are reading a personna, not the real person. it also corroborates the point that the dichotomies when observed in real time, are quite confusing. Si/Ni live in the past and future not the present, Ti/Fi base decisions on principles/values, Ne/Se need external stimulus in the present to be effective, etc.

 

[Wandering]

If one is unable to type the persons that they live with, then they have a limited knowledge of type, are too subjective and close to the person(s) being observed or again the system being used is too limiting. I choose the latter

In my case it's clearly the second option that's the most problematic: I'm too subjective and close to the person being observed. Typically, it's far easier for me to propose a type for someone I don't know at all but am given a good description of, than for someone I know even a little.

 

["?"]

I think you are correct Wandering. I make no attempts to determine my families types, but I think this may be an intuitive thing anyhow. I know as an introvert, that I don't show my true nature to even my closest family members so even with them I can only indicate how they appear when their guards are down. Besides as I have determined, attempting to type someone else when it has taken me seven years to get mine correct is a good indication that my validity of typing them correctly could be in error.

 

[Nonsensical]

sometimes it's hard to type those who are close to you..