Type my son

[Thalassa]

As culture changes (evolves) so do many of these type-descriptions. Many of them are becoming out-dated. But the principle behind them remains the same.

Right, and I've discussed this in depth with someone who has a profound knowledge of Jung, as well as reading Jung on my own, and I actually understand what Si and Fe do, and that the Keirsey descriptions try to be too specific to particular cultural upbringings, and also too extremely divided from one another, which is why I tend to reject his theory. Keirsey has some overall, generalized good points, I'll agree, but he attempts to be way too specific about things like particular moral beliefs or sexual behavior, which is a logical fallacy. It's quite evident, though, where a man of his age, education, and socio-economic status absorbed those particular stereotypes. Unfortunately, he's kind of missing the core motivations of the cognitive functions and relying too heavily on stereotypes.

 

[Thalassa]

Nevertheless, I like my formula and I've been using it for a long, long time. I just need to see some good counter-arguments to my claims. If you don't like my disagreement, let me just point out that I often agree with you more than disagree. But I suspect we come from very different generational perspectives.

While INTJs may excel at a particular style of intelligence, there is no real correlation between being smart and being a particular personality type. Too many people on the Internet mistype themselves as iNtuitives, in my opinion, just because they think they are unique, interesting, different, question things, are educated, and have above average intelligence (which is often true, I'll admit, when you encounter many people on discussion forums they tend to be people who are a little quicker intellectually in many cases) ...but that isn't what really divides Sensors from Intutives.

The argument that Jung himself was ISTP is very compelling evidence that his theory is the most correct one, as it does not rely on the Keirsey or MBTI stereotypes which perpetuate N-snobbery and bias against Sensors, as it addresses core world views rather than stereotypical cultural ways of being.

 

[InvisibleJim]

Any thoughts?

This is his natural behaviour.

He needs input, by input I do not intend spinning classes, socialising or making friends or hugging; I mean museums, hobbies (like gaming or chess) and mixing with people who will expand his horizons. He needs space and time to develop his interests and support to be allowed to do so in his own time and in a way that he can repeat.

He is IxTJ.

The pre-teens are a time where IxTJ types broaden their horizons to what the world has to offer and to gain interest in topics before they start socializing playing with girls (or boys I suppose) and then later dedicating themselves to a purpose. This is very demarcated and you are just seeing the demarcated 'input please' phase and panicking because you are struggling to understand it.

If in doubt, your son can tell you all of this. But, he may not choose to do so if you approach it from a socially 'this is what you should be doing' angle and you will infact be bounced back and hard.

 

[Mal12345]

While INTJs may excel at a particular style of intelligence, there is no real correlation between being smart and being a particular personality type. Too many people on the Internet mistype themselves as iNtuitives, in my opinion, just because they think they are unique, interesting, different, question things, are educated, and have above average intelligence (which is often true, I'll admit, when you encounter many people on discussion forums they tend to be people who are a little quicker intellectually in many cases) ...but that isn't what really divides Sensors from Intutives.

The argument that Jung himself was ISTP is very compelling evidence that his theory is the most correct one, as it does not rely on the Keirsey or MBTI stereotypes which perpetuate N-snobbery and bias against Sensors, as it addresses core world views rather than stereotypical cultural ways of being.

Both of your posts above introduce some unusual arguments. I'm certainly not one to be against unusual arguments, I just need a more personal basis for taking them into consideration.

 

[Lily flower]

"When he was a baby, the only thing that would calm him down was if I sang to him. He wasn't calmed down by rocking or being held like other babies."

Studies on babies indicate that this, unfortunately, signifies a low-level IQ. Do you have any IQ information on him?

My call is either ISTP or ESTP, based on the personality information you gave and not the IQ or baby-hood behaviors.

His tested IQ is 91. We were very surprised because our family tends to have high IQ's in general. I never heard that about babies and IQ. Do you happen to remember where you heard/read that? I would be interested in finding out more about that.

 

[Mal12345]

His tested IQ is 91. We were very surprised because our family tends to have high IQ's in general.

Thank you very much for that information. I know it's not proof of type, but I'm just trying to rule out some of them.

Coincidentally, just a few days ago I heard from a doctor I know that babies that are hard to calm down have IQs in the low range. He did not specify how low.

 

[Thalassa]

Both of your posts above introduce some unusual arguments. I'm certainly not one to be against unusual arguments, I just need a more personal basis for taking them into consideration.

They aren't unusual arguments at all among people who follow Jungian cognitive function theory and Jungian analysts like Beebe or Lenore Thomson.

They just address the functional basis for the stereotypes that Keirsey and Myers-Briggs later collectively perpetuated in an obvious attempt to over-simplify personality theory.

Don't get me wrong - I think Keirsey and Myers-Briggs did add something to the sphere of personality theory knowledge, but typing people based upon outdated stereotypes of culturally normative behaviors isn't really helping anyone reach real self-understanding. Many SJs are offended at the way they're portrayed in these silly on-line descriptions.

I was even offended when I read Keirsey as someone who feels like a cross between how he portrays NFs and SPs. He left no room in the middle for someone who isn't a fucking social worker or who doesn't want to work in human resources, but also values things like reading and verbal intelligence.

 

[Thalassa]

Thank you very much for that information. I know it's not proof of type, but I'm just trying to rule out some of them.

Coincidentally, just a few days ago I heard it from a doctor I know that babies that are hard to calm down have IQs in the low range. He did not specify how low.

Just a little reminder that Einstein, notorious INTP, had a low tested IQ as a child.

 

[Mal12345]

Just a little reminder that Einstein, notorious INTP, had a low tested IQ as a child.

Was Einstein's IQ tested as a child? What was his score?

I read one of his biographies years ago. Einstein was a poor student. He spent most of his time staring out the classroom window.

 

[Mal12345]

They aren't unusual arguments at all among people who follow Jungian cognitive function theory and Jungian analysts like Beebe or Lenore Thomson.

They just address the functional basis for the stereotypes that Keirsey and Myers-Briggs later collectively perpetuated in an obvious attempt to over-simplify personality theory.

Don't get me wrong - I think Keirsey and Myers-Briggs did add something to the sphere of personality theory knowledge, but typing people based upon outdated stereotypes of culturally normative behaviors isn't really helping anyone reach real self-understanding. Many SJs are offended at the way they're portrayed in these silly on-line descriptions.

That however is a subjective response. Perhaps this is just the way the SJs typically respond to these descriptions.

This reminds me of something I read in "The Art of Thinking" (Harrison/Bramson). Some big guy in the audience at one of their lectures took their InQ test, scored Realist, and declared that he was nothing like the Realist description. The authors noted that this is a typical Realist response.

The Realist InQ type corresponds very well with the SJ.

I was even offended when I read Keirsey as someone who feels like a cross between how he portrays NFs and SPs. He left no room in the middle for someone who isn't a fucking social worker or who doesn't want to work in human resources, but also values things like reading and verbal intelligence.

I'm not a big fan of Keirsey.

 

[Lily flower]

I was just looking into to personality types as children and I found this great resource!

http://www.personalitypage.com/html/kid_info.html

It assigns all kids only 3 letters, and reserves giving the 4th until they're 13 or older, which is really smart actually, or at least really accurate for me. There a test for YOU to fill out here

http://www.personalitypage.com/cgi-local/build_pqk.cgi

or you can just read the profiles. I think you could have your son fill out the test, but it's really more from a parent's perspective.

I did the test and got IN J. I was thinking he was probably INTJ, and all the feedback seems to indicate that direction.

 

[Thalassa]

That however is a subjective response. Perhaps this is just the way the SJs typically respond to these descriptions.

This reminds me of something I read in "The Art of Thinking" (Harrison/Bramson). Some big guy in the audience at one of their lectures took their InQ test, scored Realist, and declared that he was nothing like the Realist description. The authors noted that this is a typical Realist response.

The Realist InQ type corresponds very well with the SJ.

NO. NO. NO. NO. NO. AND NO.

This is why sometimes I think I must be a Sensor because what you're saying here is so divorced from reality and pledging allegiance to your pet theory that it makes me want to scream. It's not just the SJs themselves that are offended. It's the friends and acquaintences of these SJs who know that their SJs aren't, for example, sexual prudes or blindly obedient worker bees.

I can see, yes, where some people might not want to accept that a certain description is a description of themselves. But some of these descriptions are so outlandish that I want to barf.

If I'm an NF, why don't I fear conflict? Why do I seek it? Why was I not afraid to physically hit people as a teenager? Why do I feel a need to prove my own boldness blah, blah blah. And if I'm an SP, how come I score so high on verbal intelligence? Why was I such a good student in college?

It's all very annoying and offensive on so many levels, it's just like perpetuating misinformation to support one's own delusion of the world, not entirely unlike organized religion.

 

[Lily flower]

This kind of sounds like possible aspergers or autism?

I tried to have him tested for aspergers when he was about 5 years old. The neurologist asked him a bunch of questions, to which he replied, "I don't know" to about 90% of them and gave one word answers to the others, then the neurologist said, "He doesn't have aspergers because he can carry on a conversation." Arg! When I read books about Aspergers, he seems spot-on.

 

[Mal12345]

I did the test and got IN J. I was thinking he was probably INTJ, and all the feedback seems to indicate that direction.

Not all of the feedback indicates INTJ.

 

[Mal12345]

NO. NO. NO. NO. NO. AND NO.

This is why sometimes I think I must be a Sensor because what you're saying here is so divorced from reality and pledging allegiance to your pet theory that it makes me want to scream. It's not just the SJs themselves that are offended. It's the friends and acquaintences of these SJs who know that their SJs aren't, for example, sexual prudes or blindly obedient worker bees.

I can see, yes, where some people might not want to accept that a certain description is a description of themselves. But some of these descriptions are so outlandish that I want to barf.

If I'm an NF, why don't I fear conflict? Why do I seek it? Why was I not afraid to physically hit people as a teenager? Why do I feel a need to prove my own boldness blah, blah blah. And if I'm an SP, how come I score so high on verbal intelligence? Why was I such a good student in college?

It's all very annoying and offensive on so many levels, it's just like perpetuating misinformation to support one's own delusion of the world, not entirely unlike organized religion.

The SJs I know are sexual prudes and worker bees.

 

[Mal12345]

I tried to have him tested for aspergers when he was about 5 years old. The neurologist asked him a bunch of questions, to which he replied, "I don't know" to about 90% of them and gave one word answers to the others, then the neurologist said, "He doesn't have aspergers because he can carry on a conversation." Arg! When I read books about Aspergers, he seems spot-on.

The neurologist sounds like an idiot. Did he say anything about your son looking people in the eye? Asperger patients have a problem doing this.

 

[Thalassa]

The SJs I know are sexual prudes and worker bees.

Well I've had very good sexual experiences with SJ men, overall, and the only identifying factor I see with them is that they demand fidelity to the point of implied or stated violence.

Sure, they can be extremely consistent and busy, but no, not necessarily worker bees, and definitely can question many things when of a certain level of intelligence.

Sometimes I think that INTs are really stupid about people. Maybe that's what it is.

 

[Mal12345]

Well I've had very good sexual experiences with SJ men, overall, and the only identifying factor I see with them is that they demand fidelity to the point of implied or stated violence.

Sure, they can be extremely consistent and busy, but no, not necessarily worker bees, and definitely can question many things when of a certain level of intelligence.

You're just drawing fine lines there: Yes hard worker, but not necessarily "worker bee." He wasn't a "prude," but he wasn't into open relationships or 3somes or things like that.

Sometimes I think that INTs are really stupid about people. Maybe that's what it is.

I think SFP's are just easily offended by disagreement.

 

[Thalassa]

You're just drawing fine lines there: Yes hard worker, but not necessarily "worker bee."

Yes hard worker as in cleaning the house, mowing the lawn, organizing the DVDs...but not necessarily always model employees or even wanting to take part in corporate structures any more than I do.

He wasn't a "prude," but he wasn't into open relationships or 3somes or things like that.

I'm fine with that, actually. I'll take passionate sex with someone who isn't afraid to try anything with me, but I also know won't cheat on me.

Keirsey talks about SJ women not enjoying sex, and SJs seeing sex as a duty thing and I'm just like...god, yeah, the SJs who were guilted to death by organized religion, maybe, but not all SJs were raised in that kind of environment. Like, duh.

I think SFP's are just easily offended by disagreement.

Nah, I'm pretty sure INTx fail with social intelligence, just as you're sure SJs are prudes.

 

[Mal12345]

Yes hard worker as in cleaning the house, mowing the lawn, organizing the DVDs...but not necessarily always model employees or even wanting to take part in corporate structures any more than I do.



I'm fine with that, actually. I'll take passionate sex with someone who isn't afraid to try anything with me, but I also know won't cheat on me.

Keirsey talks about SJ women not enjoying sex, and SJs seeing sex as a duty thing and I'm just like...god, yeah, the SJs who were guilted to death by organized religion, maybe, but not all SJs were raised in that kind of environment. Like, duh.




Nah, I'm pretty sure INTx fail with social intelligence, just as you're sure SJs are prudes.

Some examples would help. My INTJ friend, for example, has a highly developed social sense. He just happens to "hate people." But that doesn't mean he can't be really good with social situations. An SJ friend is prudish about sexual matters, but he admits to me that he had a Quagmire period in his early 20s. Another SJ I know is a very prudish Catholic guy - but he would probably be offended by the term "prude."

Which type description uses the term "prude"? I don't think they try very hard to offend anybody or to castigate anyone with labels.

Oh, and by the way, just when did Einstein have his IQ tested as a child? You never responded to that question for some reason.