Why do people have a problem with people mistyping themselves?

[Lady_X]

Thank you that's what I already said! Greenfairy could very well be INTJ you know with the Ni and Fi coming all together!

right yeah that might be a good fit i don't know yet. i think i could tell in a video.

 

[copperfish17]

I'm back from a meal.

Ok, so I don't sound like INTP or argue like one, and I have flaws in my reasonings. That may be. Mind telling me the reasons behind these statements? So I can agree with you? I'm willing to if you can provide me with something to agree with. How do INTP's argue in your experience? How do they sound?

I will now attempt at juxtaposing the workings of Ti and Te as I understand them, with the purpose of showing you that you probably do not have Ti in your top four functions (I believe you have Te instead).

Notice that a number of INTPs have been telling you that you don't seem to be/sound like an INTP. Our dominant function is Ti, which enables us to build our own subjective logical frameworks/models we use to explain/size up the world. Basically, the gist of the argument the INTPs on this thread have been making is this: "You don't seem to fit within my subjectively defined framework of INTP. You + my internal model/definition of INTP = does not compute." The framework each INTP has come up with (through reading up on typology material, observing people of different types, and self reflection, in this case) differs more or less with each INTP - thus it is introverted thinking. It's subjective; it's individualized. We Ti users continue to fine-tune and hone our definitions/frameworks as new information comes in. The aforthmentioned "new information" generally consist of patterns and similarities between things/ideas that's picked up by our auxillary function, Ne.

To me, this is not how you seem to think and reason. Instead, you seem to want to hear unambiguous, objective external evidence that would "prove [you] wrong (or right)" about your type, and use explicit (in other words, generalized) logical procedures in trying to determine your type. These inclinations seem to be what causes you to overrely on online descriptions/tests of MBTI types and cognitive functions (IMO anyway). You claimed to require external validation to form your conclusions in one of your other posts. That's usually a sign of Te. Also, this "I'm not going to change my opinion unless you can prove to me that I'm wrong/give me evidence, evidence, EVIDENCE" attitude is something I've observed in (presumably less than healthy) Te users, for the most part. Correlation, not causation, of course.

Sorry if I'm not being clear enough with the explanations. This is proving to be a difficult task; I tried.

And can you give me one example of a flaw in my reasoning so I can attempt to correct it?

A couple of other members have already helped me out with this part, but I'll dig up another one:

I tested as INTJ in high school because I hated emotionally dramatic people and people basing their decisions purely on emotion.

Here, you seem to be saying that you decided against typing yourself a feeler simply because you hated "emotionally dramatic people and people basing their decisions purely on emotion." From this, it is possible for me to conclude that you're prone to typing yourself based on traits you like and dislike in people, and not necessarily traits you actually do possess. Besides, that snippet I put in quotation marks isn't a very accurate depiction of healthy feelers.

 

[greenfairy]

I'm gonna officially suggest what others already have. Put a video up on that Video type me thread. It could help a lot.

Well I don't have a webcam, so I have to get my video camera working, and that may take a bit. I'm not the most techno oriented. Another point for not-INTP.

 

[greenfairy]

I'm sorry but really an intp would just never say this

Compare yourself to other intps. Can't you see the difference?

I acknowledge I'm different. Having more experience with INTP's now I can see that. I would say this post (edit: the one you are quoting) has either Fi or Fe in it, because I am "considering the human element" of things and being concerned with social harmony. Either INFP or INFJ or maybe even ENFP might say this, although I don't know because I don't have extensive experience yet with any type other than INTP's. And a couple of the feeling type people I know the best (XNFJ and INFP) are rather dysfunctional, so don't give the best picture of the type. (My ENFP sister is pretty cool, but I think about things way more than she does...) Meandering thoughts again. Could be Ne, but probably not very Ti atm.

 

[greenfairy]

was ni a typo?

You don't think I have well developed Ni? That's been pretty much the consensus thus far...

 

[greenfairy]

which an intp wouldn't have!! haha i'm sorry but an intp would never even start a thread with this intention. it's just clear as day to me. i mean...i can't be certain you're infp...maybe you're intj.

there's a frustrating quality here that i've seen in other intjs...so maybe there's something to that.

Ok. I can see that. I attributed it to inferior Fe being overly concerned with other people's expectations. (Fe behavior manifested in an unhealthy way; but if INTP's don't do it, it's probably something else.)

 

[Pseudo]

Ok. I can see that. I attributed it to inferior Fe being overly concerned with other people's expectations. (Fe behavior manifested in an unhealthy way; but if INTP's don't do it, it's probably something else.)

OR you just aren't an INTP.

 

[greenfairy]

On one forum, it was proposed that those with typings that "didn't make sense" should have their types forcibly changed.

Thankfully, that was not this forum.

In my opinion that would defeat the purpose of the forum. Although it would make things more efficient, as people could always post from the perspective of the ways they do fit their assigned type.

 

[greenfairy]

I will now attempt at juxtaposing the workings of Ti and Te as I understand them, with the purpose of showing you that you probably do not have Ti in your top four functions (I believe you have Te instead).

Notice that a number of INTPs have been telling you that you don't seem to be/sound like an INTP. Our dominant function is Ti, which enables us to build our own subjective logical frameworks/models we use to explain/size up the world. Basically, the gist of the argument the INTPs on this thread have been making is this: "You don't seem to fit within my subjectively defined framework of INTP. You + my internal model/definition of INTP = does not compute." The framework each INTP has come up with (through reading up on typology material, observing people of different types, and self reflection, in this case) differs more or less with each INTP - thus it is introverted thinking. It's subjective; it's individualized. We Ti users continue to fine-tune and hone our definitions/frameworks as new information comes in. The aforthmentioned "new information" generally consist of patterns and similarities between things/ideas that's picked up by our auxillary function, Ne.

To me, this is not how you seem to think and reason. Instead, you seem to want to hear unambiguous, objective external evidence that would "prove [you] wrong (or right)" about your type, and use explicit (in other words, generalized) logical procedures in trying to determine your type. These inclinations seem to be what causes you to overrely on online descriptions/tests of MBTI types and cognitive functions (IMO anyway). You claimed to require external validation to form your conclusions in one of your other posts. That's usually a sign of Te. Also, this "I'm not going to change my opinion unless you can prove to me that I'm wrong/give me evidence, evidence, EVIDENCE" attitude is something I've observed in (presumably less than healthy) Te users, for the most part. Correlation, not causation, of course.

No, you're great with explanations! Thanks very much. This helps a lot. I can see where my thought processes would be Te more than Ti a lot. I use Ti, but it's more to fine tune definitions, establish categories, and distill things into their main ideas (edit: and discern underlying principles); my N function recognizes patterns, then I think the decisions and conclusions are filtered through Te. So INTJ is becoming a good fit. My thought processes certainly seem to fit. I have thought for awhile that I make decisions like INTJ, but I didn't think I reached conclusions this way; now it looks like I do.

Here, you seem to be saying that you decided against typing yourself a feeler simply because you hated "emotionally dramatic people and people basing their decisions purely on emotion." From this, it is possible for me to conclude that you're prone to typing yourself based on traits you like and dislike in people, and not necessarily traits you actually do possess. Besides, that snippet I put in quotation marks isn't a very accurate depiction of healthy feelers.

Yes; I put that in as a disclaimer- that I could be INTJ but my reasoning at the time was extremely faulty. The fact is that I don't have much experience with healthy feelers, so it's hard for me to not assume they're all like the annoying unbalanced ones I know and love. Even though I know it's not true, my unconscious associations influence my thoughts and I start thinking that simply being a feeler is conducive to becoming emotionally unbalanced at any moment for any reason because those are the only real observations I have to wrap my mind around. (Te again? Sounds like it.)

 

[Lady_X]

I acknowledge I'm different. Having more experience with INTP's now I can see that. I would say this post (edit: the one you are quoting) has either Fi or Fe in it, because I am "considering the human element" of things and being concerned with social harmony. Either INFP or INFJ or maybe even ENFP might say this, although I don't know because I don't have extensive experience yet with any type other than INTP's. And a couple of the feeling type people I know the best (XNFJ and INFP) are rather dysfunctional, so don't give the best picture of the type. (My ENFP sister is pretty cool, but I think about things way more than she does...) Meandering thoughts again. Could be Ne, but probably not very Ti atm.

that's a poor assumption...that is if she's an enfp. ne doms think like crazy. we may not dissect it in a ti way but the thinking doesn't stop. there's a lot of analyzing going on...it's madness...i sometimes worry that i may have an aneurism.

but really...i understand what you're saying about inferior fe. i have a brother in law that i find to be pretty emotional...and my guess is that he's an intp...but he could be infj. which sounds strange i'm sure...but i'm in full agreement that some people are hard to type....some people don't fit neatly in the box. but this guy is way more sensitive and emotional than i am...maybe he's an infp too

so...all i can say really is that you do not fit neatly in an intp box. you do not vibe like intps...and i think it's most likely that you're an infp.

do you relate more to ni than ne?
have you taken a cognition function test?
do you fully understand fi?
how does this discussion make you feel?
what would be the ideal outcome for you?
is intp your favorite type?

 

[RaptorWizard]

Thanks very much. This helps a lot. I can see where my thought processes would be Te more than Ti a lot. I use Ti, but it's more to fine tune definitions, establish categories, and distill things into their main ideas; my N function recognizes patterns, then I think the decisions and conclusions are filtered through Te. So INTJ is becoming a good fit. My thought processes certainly seem to fit. I have thought for awhile that I make decisions like INTJ, but I didn't think I reached conclusions this way; now it looks like I do.
Hold on, editing...

Indeed INTJ could very well be your type, either that or INxP though you do seem to use a little bit too much Ni to be INxP and you also look very Fi so the question would be are you Ni or Fi dominant? I think you are Ni dominant since INFP does not have Ni and Te is in the tertiary but INTJ has it!

 

[greenfairy]

OR you just aren't an INTP.

That's what I was getting at. (Explaining my reasoning with CF's.)

 

[greenfairy]

Indeed INTJ could very well be your type, either that or INxP though you do seem to use a little bit too much Ni to be INxP and you also look very Fi so the question would be are you Ni or Fi dominant? I think you are Ni dominant since INFP does not have Ni and Te is in the tertiary but INTJ has it!

Yeah. And I was thinking about my answers to the questions in the video challenge (so I could know what I was talking about instead of babbling, and also because I can't wait), and I observed that my values center around 1) making sense (Ni+Te+Fi) and 2) establishing the purpose of things and ensuring that they serve that purpose (Ni+Te). It seems what I took for objective logic (Ti) is in fact utilitarianism (Te) more often than not. (My arguments are so often 'what's the point? what's the point? that doesn't make sense. that's useless/defeats the purpose'.)

 

[Lady_X]

i think you need to read more about fi.

here's something...i'll keep looking.

Approximately 12-15 percent of the general population are introverted feelers (IF), a temperament type that is subjective and, according to Jung, “continually seeking an image which has no existence in reality, but which it has seen in a kind of vision. It glides unheedingly over all objects that do not fit in with its aim. It strives after inner intensity, for which the objects serve at most as a stimulus” (Psychological Types, para. 638).

The depth of this feeling can only be guessed–it can never be clearly grasped. It makes people silent and difficult of access; it shrinks back like a violet from the brute nature of the object in order to fill the depths of the subject. It comes out with negative judgments or assumes an air of profound indifference as a means of defence. The primordial images are, of course, just as much ideas as feelings. Fundamental ideas, ideas like God, freedom, and immortality, are just as much feeling values as they are significant ideas. Everything, therefore, that we have said about introverted thinking is equally true of introverted feeling, only here everything is felt while there it was thought. But the very fact that thoughts can generally be expressed more intelligibly than feelings demands a more than ordinary descriptive or artistic ability before the real wealth of this feeling can be even approximately presented or communicated to the world. If subjective thinking can be understood only with difficulty because of its unrelatedness, this is true in even higher degree of subjective feeling. In order to communicate with others, it has to find an external form not only acceptable to itself, but capable of arousing a parallel feeling in them.

Thanks to the relatively great inner (as well as outer) uniformity of human beings, it is actually possible to do this, though the form acceptable to feeling is extraordinarily difficult to find so long as it is still mainly oriented to the fathomless store of primordial images. If, however, feeling is falsified by an egocentric attitude, it at once becomes unsympathetic, because it is then concerned mainly with the ego. It inevitably creates the impression of sentimental self-love, of trying to make itself interesting, and even of morbid self-admiration.

Just as the subjectivized consciousness of the introverted thinker, striving after abstraction to the nth degree, only succeeds in intentisfying a thought process that is in itself empty, the intensification of egocentric feeling only leads to inane transports of feeling for their own sake. This is the mystical, ecstatic stage which opens the way for the extraverted functions that feeling has repressed. Just as introverted thinking is counterbalanced by a primitive feeling, to which objects attach themselves with magical force, introverted feeling is counterbalanced by a primitive thinking, whose concretism and slavery to facts surpass all bounds. Feeling progressively emancipates itself from the object and creates for itself a freedom of action and conscience that is purely subjective, and may even renounce all traditional values. But so much the more does unconscious thinking fall a victim to the power of objective reality.

Jung continues to discuss the introverted feeling type (IF) by stating that this type is often silent, inaccessible, hard to understand, hides behind a childish or banal mask, and is inclined to melancholy. In fact, as many as 65-85% of people diagnosed with major depressive episode are introverted feelers. Introverted Feelers value peace and harmony above almost anything else; strong emotions are struck down “with murderous coldness” or nearly paralyze the IF. In women, especially, introverted feeling tends to come off as cold because the strong feeling component is introjected rather than sent outward by projection onto others. In pathological introverted feelers, there is a tendency to overpower or coerce others to get one’s way, “in the form of a domineering influence often difficult to define” (para. 642). Introverted feeling women tend to attract extraverted men, for their power touches the unconscious in the man.

 

[Lady_X]

here's another

Although the two functions oppose each other, in Psychological Types Jung said that Feeling was very much like Thinking...

"Everything...that we have said about introverted thinking is equally true of introverted feeling, only here everything is felt while there it was thought..."(p.388, Hull edition)

(My internal sense of symmetry makes me suspect that the same similarity exists between extraverted thinking and extraverted feeling as well.)

What exactly is this "Everything" that Jung talks about? Does he mean that Feeling, like Thinking, is a process involving "reflection"? Does he mean that they are both "reasonable", even "logical"?

It seems to me that what Thinking and Feeling have in common that they both put things in order, or "build" a kind of structure. Thinking builds according to impersonal logic, and Feeling builds according to personal values. So in the first case, it is thought, and in the second case it is felt. For example, both the introverted rational functions try to "realize" the primordial images. They build their structures according to the "dictates" of these images, giving form to the elusive images. Both try to grasp the images through a sort of contemplation process. Thinking tries to understand it. It translates what it understands into logical language, creating intricate philosophical systems. Feeling...well, feeling feels it, and gives form to its values in art, poetry, etc. The art, poetry, etc., comunicates the values to others by bringing about a parallel feeling in other people, by "striking" upon their inner "images".

I must disagree with the distinction between understanding as the aim of thinking, and feeling as the tautological aim of feeling. Both functions seek to make sense of and impose an order on the world that is encountered; in a word, to understand. The distinction lies in the fact that the systems built up by thinking are built upon an impersonal logic (i.e. what does x mean?) while those built by feeling are built upon a personal logic (i.e. what does x mean to me?). Thinking takes as its starting point the position of the objective spectator while feeling begins from that of the subjective participant.

It is this system buiding tendency that gives thinking and feeling their surprising similarity. With an extraverted orientation this might translate into etiquette and law; coresponding to feeling and thinking respectively. With an introverted orientation the distinction becomes even less obvious as both Ti and Fi have a characteristic philosophical bent. In the former case this might resemble a school such as pragmatism with a focus on universal and overarching principles, while existentialism may be an Fi school of philosophy with its focus on the individual and his experience of the world.

 

[greenfairy]

that's a poor assumption...that is if she's an enfp. ne doms think like crazy. we may not dissect it in a ti way but the thinking doesn't stop. there's a lot of analyzing going on...it's madness...i sometimes worry that i may have an aneurism.

Yes sorry, that was worded poorly. My idea of thinking is the in depth, analytical kind.

do you relate more to ni than ne?
have you taken a cognition function test?
do you fully understand fi?
how does this discussion make you feel?
what would be the ideal outcome for you?
is intp your favorite type?

1) I'm not sure. (See 2)
2) Yes, and it looked something like:
Ni, Ti, Ne, Te, Si, Fi, Fe, Se.
3) Not in the least. It all seems so vague and poetic (and I assure you I don't think in poetry- pictures yes), and filled with words I question the validity of, such as "good and bad," "right and wrong," "moral," "sacrifice," etc. And honestly I don't think I'm Fi dominant for a lot of reasons, including the fact that I think feeling a certain way about something is not sufficient justification for any kind of opinion other than simply assessing how I feel. I would always filter my feeling judgments through my thinking to test them for practicality and adherence to reality (at least as I see it).
4) Right now since we appear to be getting somewhere and things are starting to make sense, I feel pretty good.
5) To be able to explain every way I'm atypical of the types thoroughly and irrefutably, with at least a paragraph of reasoning and evidence. (I know, it's a bit ambitious. But it's what I enjoy. I like analyzing things and making them make sense.)
6) I am quite fond of it. It's kind of sexy. And reading the generalized description did seem to explain every trait I have which has been annoying/alienating to others over the course of my life.

I.e. stubbornness, (according to some people) thinking like a computer and being robotic, not being emotionally expressive, lacking awareness of and sensitivity to other people, being blunt and accidentally offending people, not being in touch with emotions (I've changed this a lot), asking too many questions, living life from a place of detached observation, being argumentative, etc.

I was kind of attached to how well I thought it fit me. And the generalized description here really does.
http://www.intp.org/intprofile.html
Except for the things which don't fit, which have been pointed out to me, with which I can no longer argue.

 

[Lady_X]

well damn i wish you had a webcam! i think i'd be able to tell.

 

[greenfairy]

Awesome Fi information, [MENTION=5418]Lady X[/MENTION]! Those were a lot more clear and concrete than trying to understand Jung's rambling.

I'm starting to like Fi more as it doesn't seem to just be about deciding things based on how you feel about them (tends to lead to irrationality) and becoming a melodramatic depressive artist (barf. Enough wrist-slitting).

Edit: Cool, we have negative-stereotype Fi emoticons!

Lol sorry, I'm awful.

 

[Lady_X]

Cool I thought those put it pretty clearly.

And hey... Do you have video on your cellphone?

Cuz that could work.

 

[greenfairy]

Cool I thought those put it pretty clearly.

And hey... Do you have video on your cellphone?

Cuz that could work.

Nope. I don't even have a frickin camera that works. We have 5 here; one is not digital, and the other 4 don't work. Crazy. My video camera should work, I just need to figure out how to turn it on and find the charger. Not necessarily in that order of course.