Why do people have a problem with people mistyping themselves?

[OrangeAppled]

How can we have an inner world with out experience?

The experience of the inner world, sure, but I'm using experience to mean experiences outside of your own head on one hand, and then experience to mean content you perceive on the other (as opposed to judging that content after having perceived it). I'm saying Fi is not about something happening to you & having an emotional reaction, and then making a value judgment based on that. That's not what it is.

and aren't right and wrong, good and bad, just different descriptions of the idea of value?

Yeah...so? I never said it wasn't.

I wasn't trying to suggest that there is no reasoning beyond emotion in Fi though only that they give more weight/value to their subjective experiences.

I'd disagree with that, but I think you're using subjective differently, and that's what I was trying to clarify before.

You're using subjective to mean "personal" as in concerning humanistic matters, specifically ones which affect that individual, but I'm using it to mean coming from the mind of the individual. Okay here: subjective - 1. relating to properties or specific conditions of the mind as distinguished from general or universal experience; existing in the mind. 2. belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought.

Where a lead Ti might try to strip away as much of their self as possible to get to the facts, a lead Fi wants to determine value and in doing so must relate what they are evaluating to their preexisting opinions of what is valuable. Basically I was under the impression that Ti leads value subjectivity less and Fi leads value it more.

This may be how you experience it, but in reality that is not Ti. Jung notes that both dominant rationals basically use the self as their gauge. What you're stripping away is what you see as irrelevant aspects of yourself, such as emotion. You will also bring in some external info that you deem relevant, such as facts; but isn't deciding that judgment too? This means Ti is not about using facts to judge; it's deciding how to make sense to begin with. Ti is creating a structure to arrange those facts. Well, Fi creates a structure to arrange humanistic matters, so that they "make sense".

So yes, a Fi-dom strips away less of that "personal stuff", because it is NOT irrelevant (or not always) in judging value. Whether such things are relevant or not is part of the Fi process though.... But according to Jung, we resist being affected by external things, & so even our own personal experience can be found irrelevant, because it's too specific to an external context, and we're trying to funnel things down to the deepest, fundamental value concept. The inner world is kept "pure" then, so that what happened to me last week doesn't necessarily change how I view whatever category it falls under. I'm able to separate that from my idea of value still.

As for the bolded, I would say things may be compared to a predetermined concept of what a value category (such as "good") means. Fi is less focused on determining what is good so much as what good means in relation to being human (not just in relation to themselves, but the self is a guinea-pig). Is that clearer?

I just didn't see your initial description as having much to do with Fi. It sounded like a P style of thinking, where they "see" what is & what is not & comprehend things immediately without a line of reasoning because it's "obvious". Fi types reason; it's not some mysterious answer emerging from a haze.

"what is" being objective. value being subjective. Neither necessarily better.

"What is" is not necessarily objective. You can come up with a multitude of systems for labeling & defining things & one may not be more true than the other. Otherwise, all Ti-dom would agree on everything (and it's not just Pe or intelligence making them differ.... it's because Ti, like any function, is subjective, and like any introverted function, the inner world is the focus).

My point was simply that people often confuse Feeling with Perceiving, and that's what it sounded like you were doing. That may very well describe the OP, but not Fi.... so maybe the OP is not INFP? What you said sounded like ENFP or INFJ to me.

That doesn't mean I think the OP is Ti-dom either.... but as I said before, there is no point in trying to type someone who is not open to it. You will just make them defensive & stubborn. No offense to the OP - carry on with your self-exploration, please.

 

[Salomé]

A process which forms a model of the ideal by exploring concepts in the inner world. The concepts of "good", "bad" & all that is inbetween are defined & refined, so that a gauge is created to hold reality up against.

Fi is exclusively concerned with the concepts / value judgements of good and bad, in your opinion?

 

[Totenkindly]

You know, sometimes you and Saturned get so NF that I start to think I might be an INTP again. I really don't know how you two do it, but it's actually kind of impressive in some weird way.

That is Saturned's magical power: She turns anyone placed next to her into a raging INTP by comparison.

 

[Totenkindly]

And that's a good point. This is the kind of thing I'd like people to tell me rather than I'm NF because I like mysticism. You might be on to something.

Well, I think mysticism is more an N province than a T/F one, although it's "fuzzy" enough around the edges that it makes most T's nervous/annoyed. But there's been raging debates on whether Jung himself was INFJ or INTP (as the two main types), due to his acceptance of some level of mysticism.

I think people that might be an IF or IT type who focus more on N can sport the types of usernames and iconography that you do, it tends to be more common with the NFs but but isn't exclusionarily their province.

That's my long way of saying I think a type read is more firmly based on how someone thinks, behaves, processes info, and even determines what info is included in the decision process. So yeah.

 

[digesthisickness]

It's the process that matters, not the manifestation of said process.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

Well, I think mysticism is more an N province than a T/F one, although it's "fuzzy" enough around the edges that it makes most T's nervous/annoyed. But there's been raging debates on whether Jung himself was INFJ or INTP (as the two main types), due to his acceptance of some level of mysticism.

I think people that might be an IF or IT type who focus more on N can sport the types of usernames and iconography that you do, it tends to be more common with the NFs but but isn't exclusionarily their province.

That's my long way of saying I think a type read is more firmly based on how someone thinks, behaves, processes info, and even determines what info is included in the decision process. So yeah.

Very interesting. That could make an interesting thread itself - to explore the thought processes that gravitate towards mysticism. For myself I have the strong "F" attribute of valuing and experiencing empathy, but I completely reject mysticism at some personal and social cost. If I can think of a way to frame a thread I will, but if someone else is inspired I hope they create it.

 

[Red Herring]

The reason it seems to be NT types the most often has nothing to do with them thinking they're smarter or anything like that. It's because of their drive for truth and knowledge. It's right there in the description and it's seriously true about them.

When a person says they're one type, but then they go on to do and say a TON of things that don't match up, it has these effects:

It bugs the shit out of us because it doesn't make sense. It's not a personal thing at all, it (the situation) just doesn't make sense. We want and hunger for truth no matter what it is.

It bothers us when falsities are perpetuated and grow thus kicking truth in the mouth even more. When a person who doesn't seem AT ALL like the type they claim, then go on to give advice constantly, then that's seen as false data being spouted off as true and it's not without a victim. That person is giving wrong information to someone who will believe it and then possibly repeat it and the amount of wrong that can grow and grow and grow makes us want to pull our f*cking hair out.

It's horrendously worse if someone claims to be a type like ours and then does and says things that fly in the face of it thus basically spreading their wrong, but now it's about US in a way. And, while you can insult us all day long on our faults and get nowhere (we embrace truth and pretty much know our faults, so we shrug off someone pointing out the obvious), someone spreading untruths thus feeding stupidity/ignorance will bother us a lot more.

As a NT, it's not personal at all. It's just noticing something we can't help but notice, and sometimes, it can get to us a bit.

Yep.

[MENTION=15773]greenfairy[/MENTION], you might want to try the Not Sure Of Your Type TypeC Video Challenge. Your posts (those I have seen since you joined the forum anyway) do come across as more F than T (specifically, more Fi), but sometimes appearances can deceive. I know of at least one selftyped INTP who became unsure of his type, his interests would have indicated ISTP but on seeing his video it was clear as day the good man is ENFP. He seems very happy about this (self) discovery and has since been typing himself as ENFP You never know wht will happen an it should at least be interesting to see other people's reaction to not only the answers to the video challenge's questions but also to your mannerisms and facial expressions.

 

[digesthisickness]

A thread with video where people actually take the MBTI test, with their reasons given on each answer, would be great.

 

[Red Herring]

A thread with video where people actually take the MBTI test, with their reasons given on each answer, would be great.

Yay! Meta!

 

[INTP]

this is one major reason:

The persona represents your public image. The word is, obviously, related to the word person and personality, and comes from a Latin word for mask. So the persona is the mask you put on before you show yourself to the outside world. Although it begins as an archetype, by the time we are finished realizing it, it is the part of us most distant from the collective unconscious.

At its best, it is just the "good impression" we all wish to present as we fill the roles society requires of us. But, of course, it can also be the "false impression" we use to manipulate people's opinions and behaviors. And, at its worst, it can be mistaken, even by ourselves, for our true nature: Sometimes we believe we really are what we pretend to be!

if you are an F and your environment requires you to behave like T, you start to act more like T(persona is how you act out, in contrast to anima is how you act towards your personal unconscious), in other words, you need to pretend to be someone who you are not, T for example. this can lead to belief that you are who you pretend to be. but in reality, persona has nothing to do with type, except that it can lead you to false conclusions about your type. this is also where more behavioristic models, like socionics and MBTI profiles(compared to jungs model, which is more about cognition, rather than stereotypes you play out) fail and often confuse people about their true type, since the whole idea of type is to large degree about persona also, which in jungian model is not about type at all.

 

[RaptorWizard]

Greenfairy is either NiFi or FiNi because look at all the crazy Fi emotions combined with all the magical Ni mysticism though I will say NiFi is far more likely than FiNi since ISFPs are typically more grounded and INTJs are typically more insane.

 

[garbage]

I'd say that some people have problems with mistypes because, in discussions about typological systems, it helps to have accurate typings. Misrepresentations of type can cause misconceptions and muddled discussions about typology.

Just puttin' that out there, regardless of whether or I actually agree that point of view

If this is how people view NF's, count me out of that club.

The way people use and talk about typological systems (whether good or bad) says more about them--and whether I should bother to pay attention to them or not--than their type does, anyway.

"Great! We've come across a system that helps us truly understand ourselves and one another. That's awesome!

... hmm. Waaait a minute. Wait a minute. Fuck that! We could use it to marginalize people and effortlessly explain away differences in opinion instead of actually considering them! Let's do that instead!!
"​

What I resist is being put into a category I think I don't fit, as it insults my categorization abilities.

Most people don't fit squarely and neatly into these categories. We could chalk that up to the notion certain types just don't want to be categorized because that's how they feel because that's what their types would have them believe. But personality psychologists are also abandoning category/type-based theories for trait-based ones, due in large part to the fact that trait-based theories allow "middle-of-the-road" levels for attributes, which tends to better fit most people.

 

[Pseudo]

The experience of the inner world, sure, but I'm using experience to mean experiences outside of your own head on one hand, and then experience to mean content you perceive on the other (as opposed to judging that content after having perceived it). I'm saying Fi is not about something happening to you & having an emotional reaction, and then making a value judgment based on that. That's not what it is.

What I meant was that our inner worlds are always a response to outside experience because our minds are shaped by the outside world. I don't have any thoughts independent of my experiences because everything I have learned and everything which is possible for me to conceive is based on responding to the outside world. I suppose this assumes the idea of the tabula rasa. We have no built in knowledge so all of our thoughts (inner world) are created through interaction with the outer world.

I'd disagree with that, but I think you're using subjective differently, and that's what I was trying to clarify before.

You're using subjective to mean "personal" as in concerning humanistic matters, specifically ones which affect that individual, but I'm using it to mean coming from the mind of the individual. Okay here: subjective - 1. relating to properties or specific conditions of the mind as distinguished from general or universal experience; existing in the mind. 2. belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought.

I don't see how those definitions are different from "personal". I really wasn't saying that Fi users don't make valid decisions only that they value the subjective more in their decision making which can be beneficial in some circumstances.

This may be how you experience it, but in reality that is not Ti. Jung notes that both dominant rationals basically use the self as their gauge. What you're stripping away is what you see as irrelevant aspects of yourself, such as emotion. You will also bring in some external info that you deem relevant, such as facts; but isn't deciding that judgment too? This means Ti is not about using facts to judge; it's deciding how to make sense to begin with. Ti is creating a structure to arrange those facts. Well, Fi creates a structure to arrange humanistic matters, so that they "make sense"

So yes, a Fi-dom strips away less of that "personal stuff", because it is NOT irrelevant (or not always) in judging value. Whether such things are relevant or not is part of the Fi process though.... But according to Jung, we resist being affected by external things, & so even our own personal experience can be found irrelevant, because it's too specific to an external context, and we're trying to funnel things down to the deepest, fundamental value concept. The inner world is kept "pure" then, so that what happened to me last week doesn't necessarily change how I view whatever category it falls under. I'm able to separate that from my idea of value still.

I not saying that Ti users are infallible masters of facts with no personal biases, or that Fi's are incapable of recognizing universal truths. But as you conceded they include more subjective elements in there reasoning which is what I originally said.

As for the bolded, I would say things may be compared to a predetermined concept of what a value category (such as "good") means. Fi is less focused on determining what is good so much as what good means in relation to being human (not just in relation to themselves, but the self is a guinea-pig). Is that clearer?

I just didn't see your initial description as having much to do with Fi. It sounded like a P style of thinking, where they "see" what is & what is not & comprehend things immediately without a line of reasoning because it's "obvious". Fi types reason; it's not some mysterious answer emerging from a haze.

I think you have a false impression because there is some background to this argument in a very long ridiculous thread about mysticism which was less about mysticism and more about the value of subjective ideas. I will agree that Fi is not mystical, however I do think we've determined that it is fair to call it subjective. Which isn't meant to be an insult at all.

"What is" is not necessarily objective. You can come up with a multitude of systems for labeling & defining things & one may not be more true than the other. Otherwise, all Ti-dom would agree on everything (and it's not just Pe or intelligence making them differ.... it's because Ti, like any function, is subjective, and like any introverted function, the inner world is the focus).

"What is" is objective as reality exists and in a certain way. I agree that my understanding of "what is" or the systems we develop to describe "what is" is not necessarily the objective absolute truth. But I think there is something to be said for the attempt to be completely objective in contrast with consciously accepting subjective elements. I'm not arguing that Tis are fully objective only that they strive for objectivity in comparison to Fi users who embrace subjectivity to help build their humanistic world view.

My point was simply that people often confuse Feeling with Perceiving, and that's what it sounded like you were doing. That may very well describe the OP, but not Fi.... so maybe the OP is not INFP? What you said sounded like ENFP or INFJ to me.

That doesn't mean I think the OP is Ti-dom either.... but as I said before, there is no point in trying to type someone who is not open to it. You will just make them defensive & stubborn. No offense to the OP - carry on with your self-exploration, please.

I really don't see how you are coming to that conclusion. The mysticism was a confused point relating to another thread but from what you've said here I don't know how your position is any different that mine on Fi and subjectivity?


And as I sated earlier, I don't care what she types herself as.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

The reason it seems to be NT types the most often has nothing to do with them thinking they're smarter or anything like that. It's because of their drive for truth and knowledge. It's right there in the description and it's seriously true about them.

When a person says they're one type, but then they go on to do and say a TON of things that don't match up, it has these effects:

It bugs the shit out of us because it doesn't make sense. It's not a personal thing at all, it (the situation) just doesn't make sense. We want and hunger for truth no matter what it is.

It bothers us when falsities are perpetuated and grow thus kicking truth in the mouth even more. When a person who doesn't seem AT ALL like the type they claim, then go on to give advice constantly, then that's seen as false data being spouted off as true and it's not without a victim. That person is giving wrong information to someone who will believe it and then possibly repeat it and the amount of wrong that can grow and grow and grow makes us want to pull our f*cking hair out.

It's horrendously worse if someone claims to be a type like ours and then does and says things that fly in the face of it thus basically spreading their wrong, but now it's about US in a way. And, while you can insult us all day long on our faults and get nowhere (we embrace truth and pretty much know our faults, so we shrug off someone pointing out the obvious), someone spreading untruths thus feeding stupidity/ignorance will bother us a lot more.

As a NT, it's not personal at all. It's just noticing something we can't help but notice, and sometimes, it can get to us a bit.

This is interesting and I can see what you are saying based on observing posts here for many years.

It got me thinking, though, because as an NF truth is of paramount importance to me and this is the sort of point that can make some people feel that MBTI can create false assumptions. I was thinking about the NF community and my own reaction to inaccurate typings. Having spent a little time on the INFJ forums and here for many years, I have seen quite a few people that seem mistyped as INFJ - enough that I think a concept of the type is established as distorted. There are possible INTJs, and many SFJs, and some IFPs, even the occasional INTP, etc. Why is this never called out? Not calling it out appears like a lack of concern for the "Truth", but in some cases that may not be the reason. Conflict can have a greater cost for Feelers, and there may be more awareness of a type of personal space. I would feel I was intruding on someone to call them out, and so I observe and try to understand if my view is incorrect, or to understand the reasons behind the mistyping. This is a different sort of truth, but can teach a lot about human behavior and choices. Also, there is no sense of a unified community to correct mistypings. If for some reason I went to the INFJ forum and called someone out - the effort would likely not be supported.

In this case of green fairy - I'm not aware of the history of this interchange, but what stood out to me was when you made mention in response to Jennifer about why you wanted to be typed as INTP.

 

[Totenkindly]

Very interesting. That could make an interesting thread itself - to explore the thought processes that gravitate towards mysticism. For myself I have the strong "F" attribute of valuing and experiencing empathy, but I completely reject mysticism at some personal and social cost. If I can think of a way to frame a thread I will, but if someone else is inspired I hope they create it.

It does sound like an interesting thread.

Any "mystic" side I have involves more a sense of archetypes and patterns, but I don't really credit them any special power in a tangible sense -- it's all about what they can evoke collectively. (Or is that all mysticism is? Maybe we need to even clarify what is meant by mysticism.)

 

[Randomnity]

When a person says they're one type, but then they go on to do and say a TON of things that don't match up, it has these effects:

It bugs the shit out of us because it doesn't make sense. It's not a personal thing at all, it (the situation) just doesn't make sense.
...

When a person who doesn't seem AT ALL like the type they claim, then go on to give advice constantly, then that's seen as false data being spouted off as true and it's not without a victim. That person is giving wrong information to someone who will believe it and then possibly repeat it and the amount of wrong that can grow and grow and grow makes us want to pull our f*cking hair out.

+1 (and I'm not even an NT). Even the creation of this thread is a very F thing to do.

I usually try to avoid pointing it out more than once, though, because some people are very attached to the type they've chosen, and get very upset/won't consider the possibility of being wrong.

[MENTION=15773]greenfairy[/MENTION], I didn't want to dive into the argument in that other thread, but here's my one time pointing it out: I'd be extremely surprised if you were a T type of any kind, and it has nothing to do with being interested in mysticism etc (although that is stereotypically NF). It has to do with the way you argue things and the reasons you give for believing things. My guess is INFP but INFJ is possible too. You don't read like an INTP at all, which is why I'll specifically point out that I'm not trying to provoke you or insult you by saying that to me, you read very much as an F.

Ultimately it's always our own decision what type to identify with, but if a number of people are "misreading" you, it may be valuable to introspect as well as research more to determine where those readings are coming from.

 

[Totenkindly]

Greenfairy is either NiFi or FiNi because look at all the crazy Fi emotions combined with all the magical Ni mysticism though I will say NiFi is far more likely than FiNi since ISFPs are typically more grounded and INTJs are typically more insane.

Well, thank you for that intriguing bit of logic there...


Hmmmm.. I wonder if GreenFairy has ever heard of Pod'Lair...

 

[Eric B]

People on typology forums use a lot of heuristics to form their decision on your type. You can't use the word fairy in your name and be NT, the Cherokee thread is NF mystical. People tend to call out NT as NF, but never the other way. The answer to why is, because it is a typology forum and their isn't much else to do. Start a thread on Godel, Escher, Bach.

I have always wondered why no one ever called out my type.

I think that's operational in various types, not just NTs. But I'd agree that there are some NTs who are like that. I remember having a kind of disdain for Fe values and illogic when I was a teenager, partly because I (or others) kept getting burned by people who were making capricious or irrational decisions, and I hated it. I remember my self-esteem also sucked, so being hyper-rational was an ego booster for me. But it ain't very conducive to relationships, and when I got married, I had to suddenly face those conceited, self-interested attitudes in myself.

I think it's just a journey people of different types have to go through, and not just T's; there are F's in my family who I think are pretty judgmental and conceited because they really don't grasp the truth that T people might still feel loyalty and love and concern for others but just don't express it as directly as they might, and so they dismiss it as non-existent and then take it out on said T people.

Lol. And I am here wondering, "What does LIKING a particular type have to do with anything?" See what I mean? It's funny you even mention it as part of your decision process.

It's funny that you spent this whole paragraph talking about what you like and don't like, what you want to be associated with and not associated with, and this thread in getting outraged at people for excluding you from their group... this is all more an F province, if anything. I mean, I'm just tossing this out there as an observation... I'm still waiting for you to come up with some hardcore T approach to your dilemma, while so far you seem to be focused on your preferences. Again, nothing wrong with each other approach, but that is all I'm seeing right here.

I went through this when I first entered type, because for one thing, I was dealing with a so-called "expert" who tended to go around saying a lot of people were "mistyped", and the tack was always to push people who thought they were T's to F, and from TiFe to FiTe. Even if you didn't understand the theory quick enough, you must be a slow-witted FP (in contrast to quickwitted TP's), and if you did not get the social vibe fast enough, you were a self-absorbed FP as opposed to a selfless FJ); and "liking" a particular type was even tossed out there at me as "Fi" as well.
And when I first arrived here, this sort of thinking seemed to be prevalent. Look at the early "Mistyped Members" thread and you can see some of this.

But "liking" is not a product of Fi; it's a product of the ego. Fi would be more attention to things you like, and determining what is wholesome, and using thi sense to make judgments.

Oversimplifications like this are why these misunderstandings occur.

It has to do with the history of these forums which started with iNtuitive Central which fell apart, then many types migrated to INTPCentral, then this site was formed to aid in limiting that forum to INTPs only. Because of this iNtuitives have more social power than Sensors and Thinkers have more social power than Feelers. It is harder to see as an NT because people who benefit from a system or who have the most power tend to see it as fair because there can be a tendency to place more weight on benefits to self than others. It is a touchy subject, though.

OK, that's good information regarding the early climate of the forum I witnessed and described, and the problem we're discussing. (I had never even heard of this "iNtuitive Central" before, and assumed it was perhaps the influence of the expert I mentioned).

[MENTION=15773]greenfairy[/MENTION], what I find another thing that seems to blur T/F for INP's is the Interaction Style, and particularly that it embodies two possible temperaments, one classic one, and another that is newly discovered.

The typical INTP would fit this corresponding temperament in this other system:
http://www.pastoral-counseling-center.org/Temperament-Area-of-Inclusion/phlegmatic-inclusion.htm

While INFP (And the ISF's who are also the same Interaction Style) might fit:
http://www.pastoral-counseling-center.org/Temperament-Area-of-Inclusion/supine-inclusion.htm

This last one is the new one, recognized only in that system. (So the ISF's basically fit "Phlegmatic" by default, as that was the closest thing in four temperament systems).

But what I find, beginning in my own experience, and some others I've discussed this with, such as [MENTION=7]Jennifer[/MENTION] and [MENTION=10653]SuchIrony[/MENTION], is that when an INTP falls into that latter temperament, they take on some traits that have become associated with INFP and the ISF's, or even Fe in general. The biggest thing is that Supines have a higher people-focus and need for inclusion by others, which we associate with F, where Phlegmatics are really more moderate and can “take 'em or leave'em”, which would better fit the traditional INTP interaction.
Supine INTP's thus end up with T/F uncertainty, thinking they might be F, but eventually settling on T.
But this based more on traits; some of them overgeneralized, (like the "liking" things or "emotions" stuff) than functions, so they tend to strongly identify with Ti, but have these traits that have become associated with Fi, (somewhat largely mistakenly, but then other factors such as "right-brain alternatives" or shadow dynamics can explain things too).
On the flipside, you have [MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION], who's an INFP Phlegmatic, and also had the same T/F uncertainty, but went the other way, from T to F.

So that you could look into as well.

 

[cascadeco]

Very interesting. That could make an interesting thread itself - to explore the thought processes that gravitate towards mysticism. For myself I have the strong "F" attribute of valuing and experiencing empathy, but I completely reject mysticism at some personal and social cost. If I can think of a way to frame a thread I will, but if someone else is inspired I hope they create it.

To the bolded, I can definitely relate.

I have posted on numerous occasions in my time on this forum whenever the mystic/psychic element of INFJ comes up, that I don't personally think it's mystical ... and I then try to explain how I believe my thought processes/perceptions to actually work. I have conceded that I can see how from the outside it might appear more nebulous and 'mystical', but I don't experience it as such at all, and I also don't gravitate towards mysticism.

I recall the last time this came up with someone on here who typed as INFJ by the end of their stint on the forum, that the person got very ... almost angry when I stated I didn't believe Ni was truly mystical. This person seemed to attach to the idea of Ni *because* of the mystical component.

 

[digesthisickness]

This is interesting and I can see what you are saying based on observing posts here for many years.

It got me thinking, though, because as an NF truth is of paramount importance to me and this is the sort of point that can make some people feel that MBTI can create false assumptions. I was thinking about the NF community and my own reaction to inaccurate typings. Having spent a little time on the INFJ forums and here for many years, I have seen quite a few people that seem mistyped as INFJ - enough that I think a concept of the type is established as distorted. There are possible INTJs, and many SFJs, and some IFPs, even the occasional INTP, etc. Why is this never called out? Not calling it out appears like a lack of concern for the "Truth", but in some cases that may not be the reason. Conflict can have a greater cost for Feelers, and there may be more awareness of a type of personal space. I would feel I was intruding on someone to call them out, and so I observe and try to understand if my view is incorrect, or to understand the reasons behind the mistyping. This is a different sort of truth, but can teach a lot about human behavior and choices. Also, there is no sense of a unified community to correct mistypings. If for some reason I went to the INFJ forum and called someone out - the effort would likely not be supported.

Oh, I can definitely see what you're saying. As important as truth is to me, and I can't stress how important it is enough, I generally always keep my mouth shut about such a things unless the person asks. Or shows some doubt. Any opening will do, actually, but an opening is almost always necessary for me to say something because without one, it stinks of my thinking I know someone better than they know themselves. Which is preposterous and insulting to say the least, and I despise it when someone pulls that in any way, not just type-wise, with me.

Not because I avoid conflict in order to save feelings both for the person and/or for the harmony of the forum, but because I find it ridiculous for one human to presume to know another better or more than they know themselves. It's the other NT thing: autonomy that comes into play here.

And, let's not forget, if someone isn't open to the idea then nothing I, or anyone else says, will make a difference at all. So, doing so is useless.

Just knowing that there are forums like the ones you mentioned that perpetuate falsehoods like that bothers that part of me that hates the idea of ignorance spreading. I don't see how you manage it. To be in an environment that puts harmony first instead of truth would drive me insane. I'd have to bring it up by asking someone at some point, "Just for shits and giggles, have you ever thought yourself another type?" Just to bring it up (See? There are times when I can't help myself), hoping for a better, smarter world. My god, it's the one hope I know is destined to fail, yet can't, for anything, let go of.