Your "alien" type.

[entropie]

Hereby I annihilate my last words.

I hate iNTp fake's. I really hate em...

 

[wildcat]

I've been thinking of this for a while now. Thought I'd see what you lot thought.

Right I'm placing my type as INTP (I know, controversial but there you go) so my "opposite" is ESFJ right? Well as that is my shadow profile it should mean that at some level I run parallel to that type, should it not? Ergo the type is familiar to me.

What I was trying to think of was the type which I should (according to theory) have the most difficulty of finding common ground with, the type I'm most likely to find uncofortable to be around (at least at first).

Firstly you have the idea of switching around the function preferences as per figuring out your shadow. INTP becomes ESFJ, INTJ becomes ESFP and so on. But I figure that's missing something when trying to think what type would be your opposite (ie has no points of agreement).

IJ and EP are the same as they both have their perception function first.
IP and EJ are the same as they both have their judging function first.

Ergo would it not an ESFP be more the opposite of an INTP than an ESFJ would be? Shoudn't an ESFP and an INTP have more difficulty communicating and getting along?

Whaddya reckon?

Light casts no shadow.

 

[Xander]

Light casts no shadow.

If the light is all functions combined then the shadow cast by a person is those functions which they block out (to some extent). It would seem to me that people embrace their shadow though. It's the functions which are parallel to thier own, but flipped, which seem hardest to grasp.

I cannot operate like an ISTJ but I can emulate certain ENTJ characteristics.

The point being is that it would be harder for an IP to do IJ than EJ and yet their "official" 'opposite' type is their direct opposite or shadow type which for an IP is EJ.

 

[arcticangel02]

Try telling Dom. My example of ISTJ is something he doesn't like too much. In fact it's the only person I've ever known him categorically not get on with... ever!

Funny, I know and get along with three ISTJs, which is the most number of any one type I know!

 

[wildcat]

If the light is all functions combined then the shadow cast by a person is those functions which they block out (to some extent). It would seem to me that people embrace their shadow though. It's the functions which are parallel to thier own, but flipped, which seem hardest to grasp.

I cannot operate like an ISTJ but I can emulate certain ENTJ characteristics.

The point being is that it would be harder for an IP to do IJ than EJ and yet their "official" 'opposite' type is their direct opposite or shadow type which for an IP is EJ.

Interesting! Methinks you have a point there.

 

[Xander]

Funny, I know and get along with three ISTJs, which is the most number of any one type I know!

I think that this ISTJ is particularly "singular". The whole habit of completely being blind to other's expectations, wants and needs seems to rub Dom the wrong way.

Interesting! Methinks you have a point there.

It's your own thinking extrapolated ol boy. I recall you saying repeatedly that IP is EJ. Well that much is true so really the opposite of IP would not be EJ but IJ or EP... Which one you pick... or perhaps there should be two... is another argument.

 

[Mondo]

I think it's ridiculous to say that ISFP is my 'alien type'.. based on my interactions with other people though, I would say that my alien type is ESFP not ESFJ. I even took the Cognitive Processes test and then reversed my answers and got ESFP..

 

[wildcat]

I think that this ISTJ is particularly "singular". The whole habit of completely being blind to other's expectations, wants and needs seems to rub Dom the wrong way.


It's your own thinking extrapolated ol boy. I recall you saying repeatedly that IP is EJ. Well that much is true so really the opposite of IP would not be EJ but IJ or EP... Which one you pick... or perhaps there should be two... is another argument.

The ISTJ is singular, yes. Never seen such singularity enywhere else!

About the J/P ..
Yes. The E/I shift brings about the J/P shift.
Please read the elfinchilde post in the Puddingland.

There is no one or the other.
I see elfinchilde and you discuss essentially the same thing. From another standpoint perhaps.. but it only adds to understanding.

The change E/I is not in the loci!
Why do they then change it in the loci?

The ISTJ is singular, yes. Never seen such singularity enywhere else!

About the J/P ..
Yes. The E/I shift brings about the J/P shift.
Please read the elfinchilde post in the Puddingland.

There is no one or the other.
I see elfinchilde and you discuss essentially the same thing. From another standpoint perhaps.. but it only adds to understanding.

The change E/I is not in the loci!
Why do they then change it in the loci?

I did the thing numberwise.

Now, if the loci does not change the number order does not change.
It does not change.

What changes?
The viewpoint.

IJ is EP. EP is IJ.
Where?
In the loci.

What is the loci?
It is what is.

The original picture is called the negative.
A misconception.

We turn the E/I around.
Then we turn the J/P around.
A mistake.
It is already around.

 

[Xander]

I think it's ridiculous to say that ISFP is my 'alien type'.. based on my interactions with other people though, I would say that my alien type is ESFP not ESFJ. I even took the Cognitive Processes test and then reversed my answers and got ESFP..

That's what I'm saying. ESFJ is part of INTP. ESFP is further away, in terms of preferences, than ESFJ.

I'm probably explaining it poorly.

 

[Xander]

The ISTJ is singular, yes. Never seen such singularity enywhere else!

I like this term "singular". It saves on soo many insults

About the J/P ..
Yes. The E/I shift brings about the J/P shift.
Please read the elfinchilde post in the Puddingland.

There is no one or the other.
I see elfinchilde and you discuss essentially the same thing. From another standpoint perhaps.. but it only adds to understanding.

Thus far I'm with you and I'll go hunt down that elusive winged creature... once pinned to a tree she shall have no choice but to reveal her schemes to me!!!

The change E/I is not in the loci!
Why do they then change it in the loci?

I don't understand quite what point your pointing to there. As far as I grasp it E/I changes both when figuring out the shadow type and functions... are you saying it should not when finding the alien type? So INTP's alien type would not be ESFP but ISFJ?

I did the thing numberwise.

You will most assuredly lose me with that parralel operation!! Never can follow how the numbers form a matrix instead of just a list of series.

Now, if the loci does not change the number order does not change.
It does not change.

What changes?
The viewpoint.

IJ is EP. EP is IJ.
Where?
In the loci.

What is the loci?
It is what is.

The original picture is called the negative.
A misconception.

We turn the E/I around.
Then we turn the J/P around.
A mistake.
It is already around.

INTP = ENTJ???
Lost.... sooo lost....

Right, important question, what are you labelling as the loci? The word, as I udnerstand it, equates to a labelled point in space (or in this case the functions and type). Without labelling it I feel like your pointing at your screen and saying "There it is!!" but not communicating it in words on the screen and hence losing me royally!!

(Ie, I think you've got something... but I've no idea what it is yet )

 

[rhinosaur]

I write this assuming I'm ISTP.
ISTP: Ti Se Ni Fe

If I take the shadow of each function and reverse the order, I get INFP.
INFP: Fi Ne Si Te

INFPs are attractive, but I don't understand why they do some of the things they do, particularly when it comes to people. If they are happy, they can be quite pleasant, and I often find myself wanting to give them a hug. If they are unhappy, it's like they're surrounded by this vacuum of negativity, and I want to avoid them at all costs.

On the other hand, if I keep the order of the functions the same, I get my shadow function, ESTJ.
ESTJ: Te Si Ne Fi

I don't know any confirmed ESTJs in real life, but they seem to take themselves quite seriously. I get the impression that they don't exactly color outside the lines, ever. I can respect their dedication, and they might be useful as co-workers, but I can't imagine I would ever interact with them outside of a work environment.

If I keep the functions as-is, but reverse the order, I get ENFJ.
ENFJ: Fe Ni Se Ti

One of my ex-girlfriends claims ENFJ, so I have a little more experience with this type. She was quite fun, and would always be up for an adventure, but IMO was overly concerned about feelings. After a while, I got tired of her constantly needing that kind of affirmation (no, I don't hate you just because we haven't talked all day). We are still friends, and I think the relationship works quite well on that level.

 

[Xander]

I write this assuming I'm ISTP.
ISTP: Ti Se Ni Fe

If I take the shadow of each function and reverse the order, I get INFP.
INFP: Fi Ne Si Te

INFPs are attractive, but I don't understand why they do some of the things they do, particularly when it comes to people. If they are happy, they can be quite pleasant, and I often find myself wanting to give them a hug. If they are unhappy, it's like they're surrounded by this vacuum of negativity, and I want to avoid them at all costs.

On the other hand, if I keep the order of the functions the same, I get my shadow function, ESTJ.
ESTJ: Te Si Ne Fi

I don't know many confirmed ESTJs in real life, but they seem to take themselves quite seriously. I get the impression that they don't exactly color outside the lines, ever. I can respect their dedication, and they might be useful as co-workers, but I can't imagine I would ever interact with them outside of a work environment.

If I keep the functions as-is, but reverse the order, I get ENFJ.
ENFJ: Fe Ni Se Ti

One of my ex-girlfriends claims ENFJ, so I have a little more experience with this type. She was quite fun, and would always be up for an adventure, but IMO was overly concerned about feelings. After a while, I got tired of her constantly needing that kind of affirmation (no, I don't hate you just because we haven't talked all day). We are still friends, and I think the relationship works quite well on that level.

?
I thought that ISTP's shadow IS ENFJ? Are we using the same system? Do you know your working to be correct?
(An honest question, most of my "knowledge" of shadow types is based on induction.)

The ISTP-ISFP thing is probably NF vs ST. My SO is an ESTP and she really distrusts INFPs. She can't understand them.

Have you ever met an INFJ? If my thinking is correct they may well send you loopy (not that I actually know any ISTPs though, thinking about it).

 

[rhinosaur]

?
I thought that ISTP's shadow IS ENFJ? Are we using the same system? Do you know your working to be correct?
(An honest question, most of my "knowledge" of shadow types is based on induction.)

The ISTP-ISFP thing is probably NF vs ST. My SO is an ESTP and she really distrusts INFPs. She can't understand them.

Have you ever met an INFJ? If my thinking is correct they may well send you loopy (not that I actually know any ISTPs though, thinking about it).

I thought to get the shadow functions you just change the e/i around, leaving the order the same.

I know an INFJ. She did something weird to me. Like disrupted my internal wiring. I fell head over heels for that girl. We would alternate between having the most amazing chemistry and long periods of awkward silence. I've never experienced anything quite like it before or since. We could read each other intuitively, without even thinking about it or saying a word, so we both knew exactly what the other person was thinking and feeling. When interacting with other people, this was amazing, because we could have our own little sub-conversation while still talking to everyone else. When interacting with each other, it kind of got awkward. We also had different views on sex and love, which further strained the relationship. I've actually been thinking about her a lot recently, but I'm hesitant to call her and risk bringing that kind of pain back to the surface.

 

[Xander]

I thought to get the shadow functions you just change the e/i around, leaving the order the same.

As far as I am aware you take the function order for your profile, read it backwards and then match it to another profile. Your shadow, under that system, would be ENFJ.

The difference I'm applying here is that both ISTP and ENFJ use their judging function first and their information gathering function second, hence there will be some similarity. Therefore if you swap the two pairs of functions you'd get INFJ as your "alien" type. Odd that you'd match so well though. I may have to rethink this...

 

[wildcat]

I like this term "singular". It saves on soo many insults

Thus far I'm with you and I'll go hunt down that elusive winged creature... once pinned to a tree she shall have no choice but to reveal her schemes to me!!!

I don't understand quite what point your pointing to there. As far as I grasp it E/I changes both when figuring out the shadow type and functions... are you saying it should not when finding the alien type? So INTP's alien type would not be ESFP but ISFJ?

You will most assuredly lose me with that parralel operation!! Never can follow how the numbers form a matrix instead of just a list of series.

INTP = ENTJ???
Lost.... sooo lost....

Right, important question, what are you labelling as the loci? The word, as I udnerstand it, equates to a labelled point in space (or in this case the functions and type). Without labelling it I feel like your pointing at your screen and saying "There it is!!" but not communicating it in words on the screen and hence losing me royally!!

(Ie, I think you've got something... but I've no idea what it is yet )

The Nature of the Functions. That is the Elfie thread in Puddingland.

You both inspired me the same day! And because of you two I could draw the loci.
I cound not have done it without you two.

Thank you.


You are right. It is an important question, Xander.
I did draw the loci there. It is important to post in the Puddingland.
You remember what happened to the MBTIc the first time around? In the end I was the only one there.
So I put it there. The elfie thread Nature of the Functions. I have only one post there, it is easy to find. I gave instructions how to draw the loci. It is very simple. And if you have problems, you can always ask me. So please go there.

There you have two charts, A and B.

Are you, for example an NT or a TN? You have to look at both charts. Why?

NT:

Ne Ti
Ni Te

What change?
E/I
Only E/I?
No.
J/P

So we can draw two conclusions

NT is always in one place. Loci does not change.

The position of NT is the same in both charts!
And what does it mean?
Loci does not change.

You did it, Xander. You and elfinchilde.

The change of E/I is not in the loci =
the chart changes. The position in the chart does not change.

Ne Ti in the chart A is Ni Te in the chart B.
E/I change:
Ne becomes Ni. Ti becomes Te.
And thereby P becomes J.

What do I reckon? I reckon you are perfectly correct.

IJ and EP are the same as they both have their perception function first.
IP and EJ are the same as they both have their judging function first.

Main rule. NT is IJ and EP.
- - - - - TN is EJ and IP

And what is the main dividing line?
It is not between IJ and EP.
It is between NT and TN.

I owe you one, Xander and elfie!
And we have no disagreement!

 

[Jack Flak]

Ergo would it not an ESFP be more the opposite of an INTP than an ESFJ would be? Shoudn't an ESFP and an INTP have more difficulty communicating and getting along?

Two of my best friends have been ESFPs and I hate being around all ESFJs for more than one second. Mark me down as "I'm gonna have to go ahead and...Disagree with you there."

 

[wildcat]

Okay. Now that you have drawn the loci we confront your alien type.
Obviously we need two charts to see it.

Lociwise, there is one chart only.

The alien type (a good name, Xander) is the opposition locus in the other chart.
Loci is everything.

We have 16 types.
Only eight loci.
(16+8) /2 = 12.

Why did we have so few ENTPs in the INTPc?
The INTPc is a TN forum.


Say you are a Ti Ne.
You are a TN?
Maybe.
Maybe not.
It depends on the other chart.

Hence not every Ti Ne is a TN.
And here we come to the remarkable perception of elfinchilde.

Unknowingly, you and elfie have a common ground.
In the surface level, it looks your posts are entirely of different kind.

They are not.

 

[Xander]

Okay I'm soo printing that lot out Mr Wildcat. I'm thinking that you just called INTPc an ST forum... I'd agree there but the rest lost me.

I need more time to read.

 

[wildcat]

Okay I'm soo printing that lot out Mr Wildcat. I'm thinking that you just called INTPc an ST forum... I'd agree there but the rest lost me.

I need more time to read.

In our part of the world Xander is Sasha.

You Sasha.

Me plain wildcat.

always remember this
or else
a lack of stone may mark you

 

[Xander]

Mr Wildcat,

I've looked into the two charts, the extroverted version and the introverted version. I've considered the idea of NTs and TNs. I have some thoughts.

Firstly I think that such concentration on functions is not good practice. It seems to lead to a predisposition to type on tiny amounts of information and to draw assumptions as fact. This is not a criticism of you or any other, just the practice itself.

Secondly I believe that function analysis is more complex than it is being presented at present. The most prominent observable function is not necessarily the one most preferred. This can happen for a variety of reasons and yet is rarely compensated for. Again this is a criticism of the practice.

Third, no matter how long I stared at those two tables (I drew them out as you designed them... I hope) the more I considered that they only illuminate one missed axis. They are designed to show divides which just aren't always present. Similar to the false divide of being able to organise being placed within the J camp. Neither is persistently true.

What your study did get me thinking about was other type tables for development, something I think most miss in the MBTI. It is, after all, a system designed around development and not pigeon holes.

(Oh and somewhere down the line an idea for a new thread on what is Extrovert and Introvert was inspired...)