Why do people have a problem with people mistyping themselves?

[dobages]

Here's the deal: I find myself really frustrated after using Ti for a while. I find it very unproductive(probably because i use it to analyse this shit out of everything) because i fail to incorporate it. It just seems to pop the hell into my head out of nowhere on occasion when i'm socialising or something.

 

[Wolfie]

The first law of MBTI is that YOUR TYPE CANNOT CHANGE! You are born with a type and you remain that type your entire life. Can you act like other types or take on their traits? Of course you can but it will be a skill you have to learn and by the end of the day it will be an energy drain. Your real type is the state you feel most comfortable in, what is most natural to you. So do you feel more yourself being INFP, INTP, xNxx or whatever else there is?

I think this should be emphasized over and over again. As someone new to MBTI, and trying to sort out my type, I have been put off by a lot of posts I've read that say stuff like "you aren't that way because you don't use Ti". As someone who is learning, I have been hung up on that. It is hard to figure out your type when you feel you may use all the functions to some extent, but people try to limit your functions to just a couple. That above bolded statement is key to understanding your type, I think.

 

[Tiltyred]

That I agree. (And the two of them always reminded me a little bit of each other). I'm trying to grant them something that may give off this "F" vibe they're talking about [that is, Jennifer, and someone else repping me], and the only thing I could see would be the avatar (this is the one from here):

And yes, that's just a feminine image and does not indicate type; but people associate the "niceties" of it (like the pretty flowers and smile) as F or Fi, but my point exactly; it's not type; it's just feminine.

Nooooo. I see how it might look that way but there are miles and miles between that image of a pixie and the fairie with the bow and arrow in greenfairy's avatar and the picture Jen is now using as an avatar. Miles. Leagues. Universes apart.

 

[Jaguar]

This is like saying:
All wombats have fur
l have fur
Therefore I am a wombat.

And isn't that type of thinking a splendiferous crock of crap? Indeed, it is.

 

[copperfish17]

http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56400&page=22&p=1941120&viewfull=1#post1941120

Here is my response to the points you've raised, greenfairy.

EDIT: Actually, I'm going to re-post my entire response on this thread, 'cause I don't understand why OP decided to answer my other post in THIS thread in her other thread. Besides, this post of mine does address some topics that are being discussed on this thread ATM. I have just skimmed over the forum FAQ page, and didn't find a rule that said I can't do this; please do inform me if that's not true. Thanks guys and here goes:

Why?
What would Ti look like in this particular situation?

In what particular situation? You haven't specified one.

A lot of people seem to suggest that I should just "admit" or "accept" that I am INFP, and my point is that this doesn't make sense to me.

Really? REALLY?
Good grief, and I spent so much time trying to show you that you aren't a Ti user, with technical details. At this point I'm at a loss for words; you simply refuse to be convinced, no matter how many people persistantly point out how INTP simply wouldn't be the best fit for you. Wow. Just... wow.

Then how was it meant to be taken?

I won't be able to get you to understand how it was meant to be taken before you stop making false assumptions about cognitive functions; I will address your false assumptions as I respond to the next part of your post.

Why not? I think of them as skills, which can be developed. And people can change their preferences and adjust their behavior.

So if what I think in myself to be Ti is really something else, evidently I am misapplying the definition. Which I don't understand and can't see.
"Introverted Thinking: Analyzing; categorizing; evaluating according to principles and whether something fits the framework or model; figuring out the principles on which something works; checking for inconsistencies; clarifying definitions to get more precision. Analyzing your options using principles like comfort or "Red is a power color.""

Analyzing: yes, I do this.
Categorizing: yes, I am attempting to understand categories and place things in them. My mind works this way. Without categories I would have no way to understand the world.
Evaluating according to principles and whether something fits the framework or model: I am evaluating all this according to the principles of typology and cognitive functions and assessing whether my observations of myself fit the framework/model of the functioning of INTP and INFP.
Figuring out the principles on which something works: Well that's the point, isn't it? After believing that I have done this, if I think I am right and I am actually wrong, I must be either misunderstanding the principles or incorrectly applying them.
Checking for inconsistencies: hence comparing myself to the types to see if they fit, getting feedback on my understanding.
Clarifying definitions to get more precision: yeah. This entire post. Most of my posts on here. What is Ti? What is Fi? What are value judgments?

You honestly see none of the definition in my posts? I find that unbelievable. Either there's a big misunderstanding somewhere or I'm crazy.

A big fat no to both bolded statements.

The cognitive functions are NOT, repeat, NOT skill sets you can "improve." According to Jung, the functions are the way we relate to the world, the Dominant and Auxiliary are those ways of thinking that we relate to consciously, they are what psychologists call "ego-syntonic".

Let's take your definition/understanding of Ti - a set of 'skills' which includes "analyzing; categorizing; evaluating according to principles and whether something fits the framework or model; figuring out the principles on which something works; checking for inconsistencies; clarifying definitions to get more precision; analyzing your options using principles like comfort or "Red is a power color.""

According to your definition, Te users would either not have those skills or not be naturally good at them. Don't try to tell me that our INTJ and ENTJ friends (and all other 6 types of Te users) are incapable of/not naturally competent in performing those 'skills' listed under Ti, for that's simply not true. Do you really think that only Ti users analyze, categorize information, clarify definitions, check for inconsistencies in their arguments etc. (with any degree of proficiency)? Do you really think that non-Ti users are not naturally capable of engaging in those skills and thus have to consciously strive to somehow learn or acquire them? I'm sorry, my INTJ best friend would scoff.

Cognitive functions are 'modes of processing and expressing information/feelings,' and cannot necessarily be categorized in terms of how they tend to 'manifest' in a person. A person who gives a suffering friend a hug isn't necessarily operating on Fe; a person who analyzes and categorizes information etc. isn't necessarily operating on Ti. Fe and Ti COULD manifest that way, but that's not the way to pinpoint which cognitive functions you're actually using.

My point being, the presence of "analyzing; categorizing; evaluating according to principles and whether something fits the framework or model; figuring out the principles on which something works; checking for inconsistencies; clarifying definitions to get more precision; analyzing your options using principles" in your post doesn't necessarily indicate a preference for Ti. I'm not saying that they're not there - but everyone does those things regardless of type (with varying degrees of willingness/success, of course; you're not very successful IMO, if successfulness is to be taken as an indication of true preference at all).

No, it's just subjective and emotional reasoning, which is not the majority of the reasoning I use. I'm just including it. And the part about equally fitting both types so "picking one" I don't think is nonsense- if I have nothing to go on, and I don't contrast with the type I choose, it makes no difference. I now think I do contrast with the type, but I didn't at the moment.

I don't even know what to say to this. Emotional reasoning? I have a different name for it: illogicy.

That's all I've got for now; I'll check for clarity later, when I'm done with breakfast (it's 7:50AM in my time zone).

EDIT: I realized I haven't responded to this part of your argument:

And people can change their preferences and adjust their behavior.

No. That's like saying a cat can turn itself into a dog by somehow teaching itself how to bark and wag its tail.

 

[greenfairy]

Well if you really are extraverted but you are hiding it you have done a pretty slick job though I find this hard to believe.

If you are type 5 and extraverted the most likely type for you would be ENTP but this won't work because you are introverted and if you try to be extraverted it won't be natural behavior.

You're right, I've thought about it and I'm not an extrovert.

 

[greenfairy]

http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56400&page=22&p=1941120&viewfull=1#post1941120

Here is my response to the points you've raised, greenfairy.

EDIT: Actually, I'm going to re-post my entire response on this thread, 'cause I don't understand why OP decided to answer my other post in THIS thread in her other thread. Besides, this post of mine does address some topics that are being discussed on this thread ATM. I have just skimmed over the forum FAQ page, and didn't find a rule that said I can't do this; please do inform me if that's not true. Thanks guys and here goes:



In what particular situation? You haven't specified one.



Really? REALLY?
Good grief, and I spent so much time trying to show you that you aren't a Ti user, with technical details. At this point I'm at a loss for words; you simply refuse to be convinced, no matter how many people persistantly point out how INTP simply wouldn't be the best fit for you. Wow. Just... wow.



I won't be able to get you to understand how it was meant to be taken before you stop making false assumptions about cognitive functions; I will address your false assumptions as I respond to the next part of your post.





A big fat no to both bolded statements.

The cognitive functions are NOT, repeat, NOT skill sets you can "improve." According to Jung, the functions are the way we relate to the world, the Dominant and Auxiliary are those ways of thinking that we relate to consciously, they are what psychologists call "ego-syntonic".

Let's take your definition/understanding of Ti - a set of 'skills' which includes "analyzing; categorizing; evaluating according to principles and whether something fits the framework or model; figuring out the principles on which something works; checking for inconsistencies; clarifying definitions to get more precision; analyzing your options using principles like comfort or "Red is a power color.""

According to your definition, Te users would either not have those skills or not be naturally good at them. Don't try to tell me that our INTJ and ENTJ friends (and all other 6 types of Te users) are incapable of/not naturally competent in performing those 'skills' listed under Ti, for that's simply not true. Do you really think that only Ti users analyze, categorize information, clarify definitions, check for inconsistencies in their arguments etc. (with any degree of proficiency)? Do you really think that non-Ti users are not naturally capable of engaging in those skills and thus have to consciously strive to somehow learn or acquire them? I'm sorry, my INTJ best friend would scoff.

Cognitive functions are 'modes of processing and expressing information/feelings,' and cannot necessarily be categorized in terms of how they tend to 'manifest' in a person. A person who gives a suffering friend a hug isn't necessarily operating on Fe; a person who analyzes and categorizes information etc. isn't necessarily operating on Ti. Fe and Ti COULD manifest that way, but that's not the way to pinpoint which cognitive functions you're actually using.

My point being, the presence of "analyzing; categorizing; evaluating according to principles and whether something fits the framework or model; figuring out the principles on which something works; checking for inconsistencies; clarifying definitions to get more precision; analyzing your options using principles" in your post doesn't necessarily indicate a preference for Ti. I'm not saying that they're not there - but everyone does those things regardless of type (with varying degrees of willingness/success, of course; you're not very successful IMO, if successfulness is to be taken as an indication of true preference at all).



I don't even know what to say to this. Emotional reasoning? I have a different name for it: illogicy.

That's all I've got for now; I'll check for clarity later, when I'm done with breakfast (it's 7:50AM in my time zone).

EDIT: I realized I haven't responded to this part of your argument:



No. That's like saying a cat can turn itself into a dog by somehow teaching itself how to bark and wag its tail.

Well. Thinking of CF's as something other than simple human processes would really throw my entire system of reasoning askew. Probably for the better. It'll take me awhile to find out what they really are. See what I mean? Lack of understanding of concepts.

 

[greenfairy]

Also I am really starting to think I am indeed somewhat autistic. Which might make typing me either impossible or irrelevant (@Salomé 's suggestion, and echoed by another person whose username I forgot). It's not important, just potentially useful information. That would be a good thread: typology + psychological conditions.

 

[King sns]

wow, I've seen this thread title many many times. And I finally just read it the right way. I thought it was about "why do people have a problem with mistyping themselves?"

 

[greenfairy]

wow, I've seen this thread title many many times. And I finally just read it the right way. I thought it was about "why do people have a problem with mistyping themselves?"

lol

That is an entirely different and highly debatable topic.

 

[King sns]

lol

That is an entirely different and highly debatable topic.

yeah, I thought there was going to be a big heated civil war going on in here so I never touched it.

 

[greenfairy]

yeah, I thought there was going to be a big heated civil war going on in here so I never touched it.

There was. Wise decision.

 

[King sns]

There was. Wise decision.

True, the 27 page thing should have given me a clue...

*remains blissfully ignorant*

 

[RaptorWizard]

So if you had to pick a type right now or at least a tritype what would it be and no it doesn't matter whether I or anybody else agree with your typing decision.

 

[greenfairy]

So if you had to pick a type right now or at least a tritype what would it be and no it doesn't matter whether I or anybody else agree with your typing decision.

Well, many of the characteristics I attributed to INTP are also found in the Autism Spectrum description, so I can't say at this point whether it means that the fact that I share those characteristics is indicative of type, or whether I am INFP or something else and just somewhat autistic. Although it's possible that INTP is more frequently diagnosed than other types due to the shared characteristics. So if I am, and am unlike most INTP's it could either be because I am an AS member of the type or because I am another type with similar characteristics due to AS.

I'll leave it. I am what I am. But my first tritype of INFP/INTP/INTJ kind of fits my description more than anything else. Which type is my true "center" I don't think I can truly know at this point.

 

[Burger King]

Ok, I'm going to believe I know what my type is even if not one single other person on here agrees with me. I would rather be crazy and believe I am sane and be happy than believe I am crazy and be unhappy. That seems to be what it comes down to since I believe the definitions of functions apply to me at least 75% and some people believe it's 0%. Which if true would mean I don't understand the English language and am probably crazy.

That might be completely illogical, but I don't care.

If this annoys you, you'll just have to deal with it. End of story.

And I believe we've firmly established that the answer to the question in the OP is that it bothers people because it doesn't make sense to them and they like making sense. End of thread. I don't know how to close it.

I can see why people have been saying INFP. Just to quote a quote from another thread:

"INFP may repress their Extroverted Thinking function, meaning they sometimes preserve their own opinion in the face of facts and evidence to the contrary."

Regarding that autistic thing you're referring to. INTP looks alot like INFP. Fi dom does not exude warmth.

 

[greenfairy]

I can see why people have been saying INFP. Just to quote a quote from another thread:

"INFP may repress their Extroverted Thinking function, meaning they sometimes preserve their own opinion in the face of facts and evidence to the contrary."

Regarding that autistic thing you're referring to. INTP looks alot like INFP. Fi dom does not exude warmth.

Cool. And I might be.

It's just that the ways I don't fit INTP seem to be superficial differences based on observable characteristics. And I agree based on these I don't exactly fit. But everything I've read about the types and how the functions are expressed seemed to suggest otherwise. I have drawers in the filing cabinet of my mind in which I throw every little detail that points to the types, and it seemed that the INTP drawer had a lot more in it than the INFP drawer. I can't possibly take everything out of it and post it online. But reading thing contrasting them I would seem to find many more things about INFP I thought didn't apply to me, and many more things about INTP I thought definitely did. Of course, I could be a poor evaluator of these things. It just seemed like a reasonable thing to conclude at the time, and it's still true; I'll have to re-evaluate things.

Do we have reason to believe that all people of a type behave in many of the same observable ways? You could say that if they don't then they are not the type, but that's kind of circular thinking. Generally if would have to be true since inner functioning tends to manifest as outward behavior- but I just thought there was a lot more type variation. And I was under the impression that they are more about inner working than outward expression. Maybe not.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

Nooooo. I see how it might look that way but there are miles and miles between that image of a pixie and the fairie with the bow and arrow in greenfairy's avatar and the picture Jen is now using as an avatar. Miles. Leagues. Universes apart.

It actually looks like one of the avatars available on the INTJ forum. They have a bunch you can choose from and many are fantasy based.

 

[Tiltyred]

Are you saying there are INTJs who would call themselves "greenfairy" and have such an avatar? Because if that is really true, I need to shut up. I thought I knew what I was talking about, but that would prove that I do not.

 

[RaptorWizard]

This whole odd magical beliefs thing that the OP is fascinated by seems very INTJ to me as I know that is the type most prone to Schizotypal personality disorder as well as the narcissistic, schizoid, and compulsive obsessive disorders.

The OP seems to at least have some obsessive compulsive and schizotypal traits in my opinion!