ETB's Ultimate Lucky Eight Archetype test!

[Eric B]

Been planning this for awhile, with all the other homemade "tests" others have been putting up. Just a matter of finding the best way to set it up.

Eight questions, eight choices.
This one goes straight to the actual archetypes or roles, which seem to have a great use in determining type. The various strengths can be out of order, and your actual lead process might actually come out as weaker than the auxiliary. Still, one will be your main "filter" you experience the world through.

The simplest, root definitions of the processes, and the basic descriptions of the roles the functions play in their different preference order places.

Self-scoring

The choices
a external concrete peception "what is"; EXPERIENCE The experience
b internal concrete perception "what was"; RELIVE The experience; also internal physical senses
c exernal abstract perception "what could be"; CONCEIVE FROM The experience, exploring possibilities
d internal abstract perception "what will be" ANTICIPATE The experience; infer universal meaning
e external true/false judgment "What's efficient"; ORGANIZE The experience; agreed upon principles
f internal true/false judgment "What's underlying"; ANALYZE The experience; universal principles
g external good or bad standard of judgment "What's appropriate"; RELATE TO The experience; interpersonal values
h internal good or bad standard of judgment "What's important"; EVALUATE The experience; universal values

The Questions
1. This is the process that has longest been my main "modus operandi".

2. This process is also very central to me, and is generally how I'm helpful to myself and others

3. This process is how I find relief, and am often playful and childish

4. This process may be very immature, but I deep down inside ultimately aspire to it. I often project my fears with it

5. This process often seems stupid, or like an attack when others use it. I use it to be stubborn and argumentative, or back up my lead process

6. I am often grumpy and cynical with this process. It nags at me, and when others use it, it makes it worse inside. I then use it to immobilize others.

7. This process makes me feel I am walking into a trap. I then use it to try to trick or double bind others, and also become comedic or clownish with it.

8. This process seems very destructive, or my undoing. It often erupts and imposes itself. It does restore some balance at times.

So let's see how this does with accuracy.

 

[Jeffster]

The choices
a external concrete peception "what is"; EXPERIENCE The experience
b internal concrete perception "what was"; RELIVE The experience; also internal physical senses
c exernal abstract perception "what could be"; CONCEIVE FROM The experience, exploring possibilities
d internal abstract perception "what will be" ANTICIPATE The experience; infer universal meaning
e external true/false judgment "What's efficient"; ORGANIZE The experience; agreed upon principles
f internal true/false judgment "What's underlying"; ANALYZE The experience; universal principles
g external good or bad standard of judgment "What's appropriate"; RELATE TO The experience; interpersonal values
h internal good or bad standard of judgment "What's important"; EVALUATE The experience; universal values


The Questions
1. This is the process that has longest been my main approach to the world - a

2. This process is also very central to me, and is generally how I'm helpful to myself and others - h

3. This process is how I find relief, and am often playful and childish - a

4. This process may be very immature, but I deep down inside ultimately aspire to it. I often project my fears with it - e

5. This process often seems stupid, or like an attack when others use it. I use it to be stubborn and argumentative, or back up my lead process - e

6. I am often grumpy and cynical with this process. It nags at me, and when others use it, it makes it worse inside. I then use it to immobilize others. - e

7. This process makes me feel I am walking into a trap. I then use it to try to trick or double bind others, and also become comedic or clownish with it. - whaaa? I have no idea, confusing question

8. With this process seems very destructive, or my undoing. It often erupts and imposes itself. It does restore some balance at times. - e


This was hard, requires too much guesswork. Like, how am I supposed to know what "process" makes me feel like I'm walking into a trap? And I don't ever intentionally try to "immobilize" or "double bind" others. I'm not even sure what the latter means.

 

[01011010]

1. This is the process that has longest been my main approach to the world.
d internal abstract perception "what will be" ANTICIPATE The experience; infer universal meaning

2. This process is also very central to me, and is generally how I'm helpful to myself and others.
e external true/false judgment "What's efficient"; ORGANIZE The experience

3. This process is how I find relief.
c exernal abstract perception "what could be"; CONCEIVE FROM The experience, exploring possibilities
f internal true/false judgment "What's underlying"; ANALYZE The experience; universal principles

4. This process may be very immature. I often project my fears with it.
a external concrete perception "what is"; EXPERIENCE The experience

5. This process often seems stupid, or like an attack when others use it. I use it to be stubborn and argumentative, or back up my lead process.
h internal good or bad standard of judgment "What's important"; EVALUATE The experience; universal values

6. I am often grumpy and cynical with this process. It nags at me, when others use it.
g external good or bad standard of judgment "What's appropriate"; RELATE TO The experience; interpersonal values

7. This process makes me feel I am walking into a trap.
b internal concrete perception "what was"; RELIVE The experience; also internal physical senses

8. With this process seems very destructive, or my undoing. It often erupts and imposes itself. It does restore some balance at times.
a external concrete perception "what is"; EXPERIENCE The experience

 

[Athenian200]

I assume we can only choose one? Some seemed like they might have fit into more than one category, but...

1. This is the process that has longest been my main approach to the world.

D

2. This process is also very central to me, and is generally how I'm helpful to myself and others

F

3. This process is how I find relief, and am often playful and childish

C

4. This process may be very immature, but I deep down inside ultimately aspire to it. I often project my fears with it

G

5. This process often seems stupid, or like an attack when others use it. I use it to be stubborn and argumentative, or back up my lead process

H

6. I am often grumpy and cynical with this process. It nags at me, and when others use it, it makes it worse inside. I then use it to immobilize others.

B

7. This process makes me feel I am walking into a trap. I then use it to try to trick or double bind others, and also become comedic or clownish with it.

A

8. With this process seems very destructive, or my undoing. It often erupts and imposes itself. It does restore some balance at times.

E

 

[garbage]

Gee.. I wonder which function lines up with each choice.. or which role corresponds with each question..


1. This is the process that has longest been my main approach to the world e

2. This process is also very central to me, and is generally how I'm helpful to myself and others d

3. This process is how I find relief, and am often playful and childish a

4. This process may be very immature, but I deep down inside ultimately aspire to it. I often project my fears with it h

5. This process often seems stupid, or like an attack when others use it. I use it to be stubborn and argumentative, or back up my lead process f

6. I am often grumpy and cynical with this process. It nags at me, and when others use it, it makes it worse inside. I then use it to immobilize others. b

7. This process makes me feel I am walking into a trap. I then use it to try to trick or double bind others, and also become comedic or clownish with it. g

8. With this process seems very destructive, or my undoing. It often erupts and imposes itself. It does restore some balance at times. c

 

[527468]

1. This is the process that has longest been my main approach to the world
d internal abstract perception "what will be" ANTICIPATE The experience; infer universal meaning

2. This process is also very central to me, and is generally how I'm helpful to myself and others
e external true/false judgment "What's efficient"; ORGANIZE The experience; agreed upon principles

3. This process is how I find relief, and am often playful and childish
c exernal abstract perception "what could be"; CONCEIVE FROM The experience, exploring possibilities

4. This process may be very immature, but I deep down inside ultimately aspire to it. I often project my fears with it
a external concrete peception "what is"; EXPERIENCE The experience

5. This process often seems stupid, or like an attack when others use it. I use it to be stubborn and argumentative, or back up my lead process
h internal good or bad standard of judgment "What's important"; EVALUATE The experience; universal values

6. I am often grumpy and cynical with this process. It nags at me, and when others use it, it makes it worse inside. I then use it to immobilize others.
g external good or bad standard of judgment "What's appropriate"; RELATE TO The experience; interpersonal values

7. This process makes me feel I am walking into a trap. I then use it to try to trick or double bind others, and also become comedic or clownish with it.
f internal true/false judgment "What's underlying"; ANALYZE The experience; universal principles

8. With this process seems very destructive, or my undoing. It often erupts and imposes itself. It does restore some balance at times.
b internal concrete perception "what was"; RELIVE The experience; also internal physical senses

My function order of use is accordingly:
Ni > Te = Ne > Ti = Fi > Se > Si > Fe

 

[NewEra]

The choices
a external concrete peception "what is"; EXPERIENCE The experience
b internal concrete perception "what was"; RELIVE The experience; also internal physical senses
c exernal abstract perception "what could be"; CONCEIVE FROM The experience, exploring possibilities
d internal abstract perception "what will be" ANTICIPATE The experience; infer universal meaning
e external true/false judgment "What's efficient"; ORGANIZE The experience; agreed upon principles
f internal true/false judgment "What's underlying"; ANALYZE The experience; universal principles
g external good or bad standard of judgment "What's appropriate"; RELATE TO The experience; interpersonal values
h internal good or bad standard of judgment "What's important"; EVALUATE The experience; universal values

The Questions
1. This is the process that has longest been my main approach to the world - e

2. This process is also very central to me, and is generally how I'm helpful to myself and others - f

3. This process is how I find relief, and am often playful and childish - a

4. This process may be very immature, but I deep down inside ultimately aspire to it. I often project my fears with it - c

5. This process often seems stupid, or like an attack when others use it. I use it to be stubborn and argumentative, or back up my lead process - b

6. I am often grumpy and cynical with this process. It nags at me, and when others use it, it makes it worse inside. I then use it to immobilize others. - h

7. This process makes me feel I am walking into a trap. I then use it to try to trick or double bind others, and also become comedic or clownish with it. - g

8. With this process seems very destructive, or my undoing. It often erupts and imposes itself. It does restore some balance at times. - d

So let's see how this does with accuracy.

 

[Eric B]

After posting, it occurred to me that I meant to point out it was more of a "matching" thing than regular "choices". Of course, one is supposed to be matched to one, but on second thought, since this is about what people see in themselves, it should have the flexibility to match whatever to whatever.
Now that people have done this, it is interesting. If you think one function is playing more than one role, that could make sense, as your dominant, for instance, of course will come to play in other areas, like finding relief.

4. This process may be very immature, but I deep down inside ultimately aspire to it. I often project my fears with it - e

5. This process often seems stupid, or like an attack when others use it. I use it to be stubborn and argumentative, or back up my lead process - e

6. I am often grumpy and cynical with this process. It nags at me, and when others use it, it makes it worse inside. I then use it to immobilize others. - e

8. With this process seems very destructive, or my undoing. It often erupts and imposes itself. It does restore some balance at times. - e

So Te is all those things? I guess you perceive it that way as part of the negative aspect of the inferior/projective. (Like most INTP's will think this way about Fe, which many call their "achilles heel' soundling much like the "undoing" role ascribed to Fi). But the key word for the aspirational is deep down inside. It may come cross that way to you now, but when it starts developing, it will start to take on more positiveness.

7. This process makes me feel I am walking into a trap. I then use it to try to trick or double bind others, and also become comedic or clownish with it. - whaaa? I have no idea, confusing question

This was hard, requires too much guesswork. Like, how am I supposed to know what "process" makes me feel like I'm walking into a trap? And I don't ever intentionally try to "immobilize" or "double bind" others. I'm not even sure what the latter means.

According to Berens, you don't normally trust the process, fearing you might make mistakes in perception or decision making. I imagine then, that because you have that sort of problem with the process, you assume others will also, so you use it to try to trick them. Yet because it might not play the same role for them, it won't work, hence, you "think it will ensure success, when it won't". Like Se is this way for me, so I might try to pass off some visible thing that's wrong (clothes not neat, for instance), thinking others won't notice, because I myself am not good at noticing. But then Se is in a different position for my wife, for instance. So it doesn't work, and it happens to be what she immobilizes with (she's good at finding fault or pointing out flaws with it), so she'll stop me dead in my tracks. The immobilizing function is also said to be what we use to try to hit people with "low blows".

Keep in mind, these are the shadows we are discussing, so they are not usually consciously used, so that's why we really have to think and look inside to see how these processes are used. For ISFP, immobilizing should be b (Si), and double-binding would be with c (Ne). I notice you did not even assign these. So you have to think how you use memory and external conceptualizing.

Also, the first two are reversed, which affects I/E, so might you have ESFP leanings? (like close on I/E).

Otherwise, we have Ni types finding relief with Ne. Beats me on that one. Or both Ti and Ne as "relief". Might there be a possible J/P conflict?

Looks like I'll have to go through all of them and make type suggestions. I guess tomorrow, when I have more time.

Or, it doesn't look good for Beebe's archetype model (with a few it does somewhat). It seemed to work for me. But again, we really have to understand the archetypes, and sort out which process is really playing which role. Otherwise, maybe some of these are further pointing to the Socionics or Lenore Thompson orders? (I'll have to check those again).

 

[01011010]

Personally, I almost always score as INTP. The divide is usually even or a tiny bit over. Yet, the only official test I was INTJ. The description seems to fit me best. Eh, who knows.

 

[Jeffster]

So Te is all those things? I guess you perceive it that way as part of the negative aspect of the inferior/projective. (Like most INTP's will think this way about Fe, which many call their "achilles heel' soundling much like the "undoing" role ascribed to Fi). But the key word for the aspirational is deep down inside. It may come cross that way to you now, but when it starts developing, it will start to take on more positiveness.

I don't know what that means. The "e" choice was the one about efficiency. I want to be more efficient than I am, and the times I am stressed I DO become more efficient, but also more irritable and dismissive of anything outside of what I'm trying to do. All of those "questions" were along those same lines.

According to Berens, you don't normally trust the process, fearing you might make mistakes in perception or decision making. I imagine then, that because you have that sort of problem with the process, you assume others will also, so you use it to try to trick them. Yet because it might not play the same role for them, it won't work, hence, you "think it will ensure success, when it won't". Like Se is this way for me, so I might try to pass off some visible thing that's wrong (clothes not neat, for instance), thinking others won't notice, because I myself am not good at noticing. But then Se is in a different position for my wife, for instance. So it doesn't work, and it happens to be what she immobilizes with (she's good at finding fault or pointing out flaws with it), so she'll stop me dead in my tracks. The immobilizing function is also said to be what we use to try to hit people with "low blows".

Yeah, again, I don't do those things, so I wouldn't know.

Keep in mind, these are the shadows we are discussing, so they are not usually consciously used, so that's why we really have to think and look inside to see how these processes are used. For ISFP, immobilizing should be b (Si), and double-binding would be with c (Ne). I notice you did not even assign these. So you have to think how you use memory and external conceptualizing.

Wait, so this isn't really about seeing how different people think? Because now you're telling me what "should be." So there are correct and incorrect answers to this "test"?

And you still didn't explain what "double binding" means.

Also, the first two are reversed, which affects I/E, so might you have ESFP leanings? (like close on I/E).

What do you mean by "the first two are reversed"?

Otherwise, we have Ni types finding relief with Ne. Beats me on that one. Or both Ti and Ne as "relief". Might there be a possible J/P conflict?

Again, don't understand the first part. If the second part is you asking me if I'm conflicted on whether I'm P or J, then no, I'm definitely P.

 

[htb]

Gee.. I wonder which function lines up with each choice.. or which role corresponds with each question..

I couldn't bring myself to take it for that reason.

Still, Eric, bravo for defining the functions. Had I the time and inclination, I would try forced-choice questions limning functions that aren't binary (one answer, say, would place significant weight on Se while the other slightly indicated Ni), and therefore more difficult to identify in the questions. Research, determining which behaviors each function is likely to produce, would be required; as would a very long test.

 

[527468]

I am still wondering the purpose.

 

[Eric B]

I am still wondering the purpose.

Well, you and others had yours; - wanted to try out mine, and make it as simplified and concise as possible.

I don't know what that means. The "e" choice was the one about efficiency. I want to be more efficient than I am, and the times I am stressed I DO become more efficient, but also more irritable and dismissive of anything outside of what I'm trying to do. All of those "questions" were along those same lines.

This is the function of extraverted Thinking we're discussing, and from what
you're saying here, it sounds like it would fit the "aspirational" (inferior) role.
The inferior is said to be largely negative until it develops in one's midlife. In traditioanl four-process theory, it is considered "the shadow". So it would make sense that it would fill all of those negative 'shadow' roles (according to eight process theory)

Yeah, again, I don't do those things, so I wouldn't know.

Well again, what role do Si and Ne play for you?

Wait, so this isn't really about seeing how different people think? Because now you're telling me what "should be." So there are correct and incorrect answers to this "test"?

"should be" according to archetype theory. This is what I'm testing here.

And you still didn't explain what "double binding" means.

It means putting yourself or someone else in a situation where they are stuck between two bad choices. Like when arguing over perceived facts, I'll try to turn them against the other person so that they all can't all be true. If one is true, he loses, yet if it's false he loses, and it has to be false for the other to be true.

What do you mean by "the first two are reversed"?

For an ISFP, the fist should be h (Fi) and the second should be a (Se). That's what defines the type. For ESFP, it is the reverse.

Again, don't understand the first part. If the second part is you asking me if I'm conflicted on whether I'm P or J, then no, I'm definitely P.

No, I was addressing other people's choices then. For an INTJ, Ti and Ne are shadows, but just change the J to a P, those functions become the preferred first two. So I asked if he might have J/P uncertainty, and he seems to have affirned that. A lot of INTP's have also been coming up with strong Ni for some reason.

 

[527468]

Well, you and others had yours; - wanted to try out mine, and make it as simplified and concise as possible.

Could I have my diagnosis now?

 

[Jeffster]

This is the function of extraverted Thinking we're discussing, and from what
you're saying here, it sounds like it would fit the "aspirational" (inferior) role.
The inferior is said to be largely negative until it develops in one's midlife. In traditioanl four-process theory, it is considered "the shadow". So it would make sense that it would fill all of those negative 'shadow' roles (according to eight process theory)

Okay, I think I understand, thanks.

Well again, what role do Si and Ne play for you?

From what I've read about "Si", it sounds as if it's mainly concerned with past memories, and differentiating things in the present based on sense impressions of the past. So, the role it plays for me is mostly giving me lots of detailed stories to tell, and hopefully some learning from my past mistakes in my decisions in the present.

"Ne" is a little tougher, I think I must use it a lot less, but from what I gather, it tends to be defined by connecting things, or recognizing patterns in some way? Probably this aids me in story telling as well, makes comedy flow better, and probably helps me communicate with people based on recognizing their patterns as ones I've witnessed before. Though some of that kinda sounds like the "Si" stuff too, so I'm not entirely sure.

"should be" according to archetype theory. This is what I'm testing here.

Yeah, I definitely disagree with the whole set-in-stone function order thing. I don't think we were designed to be THAT much alike. Which I know sounds kinda funny for anyone on a personality type forum to say, but I think within the basic types there is a lot of freedom and variance, and that leads me to believe that beyond those initial couple of processes that form the basic type, there is a ton of difference between people's internal functions.

It means putting yourself or someone else in a situation where they are stuck between two bad choices. Like when arguing over perceived facts, I'll try to turn them against the other person so that they all can't all be true. If one is true, he loses, yet if it's false he loses, and it has to be false for the other to be true.

Okay, well, like I said, I don't ever do that intentionally. And if I do it subconciously, then I'm not aware of it enough to even hazard a guess as to what process I might be using if and when I do this.

For an ISFP, the fist should be h (Fi) and the second should be a (Se). That's what defines the type. For ESFP, it is the reverse.

I thought that's what you might mean, and in that case, I think the fault lies in the wording of your questions. #1 asked what process "has longest been my main approach to the world", not which I use most often period. "Se" is the process I use most when dealing with the external world, but "Fi" is the one I have used the most overall. I was answering your question as precisely as I could, perhaps thinking there was a little more nuance to it than there actually was.

Still, I'm not dissing your test. For whatever you gather from it, if you have fun doing it, then it's all good.

 

[01011010]

Could I have my diagnosis now?

I second this. Please elaborate on the results, OP.

 

[Anentropic IxTx]

1. d
2. c
3. a
4. b
5. e
6. g
7. h
8. f

I'm really not sure about some of them.

Diagnosis?

 

[NewEra]

Yeah, I would like my results.

 

[Eric B]

From what I've read about "Si", it sounds as if it's mainly concerned with past memories, and differentiating things in the present based on sense impressions of the past. So, the role it plays for me is mostly giving me lots of detailed stories to tell, and hopefully some learning from my past mistakes in my decisions in the present.

Interesting you mention particularly "learning from mistakes". According to Berens, "Critical" (6th place) Si for the ISFP means they often prefer not to focus on the past, but when stressed can become quite critical of past performances and overuse prior experience to inform judgments. Yet at times they can 'magically' tune into past mistakes to improve tactical maneuvers. So would that match how you use it? If you're experienceing the positive side of theCritical, it is called "Discovery", and what you describe seems to fit.

"Ne" is a little tougher, I think I must use it a lot less, but from what I gather, it tends to be defined by connecting things, or recognizing patterns in some way? Probably this aids me in story telling as well, makes comedy flow better, and probably helps me communicate with people based on recognizing their patterns as ones I've witnessed before. Though some of that kinda sounds like the "Si" stuff too, so I'm not entirely sure.

Berens describes that ISFP's may be deceived into interpreting situations in an idiosyncratic way. Yet at times they can delight in playing with multiple unlikely scenarios, and may see the humorous side of their strange interpretations. You even mention "comedy", I don't know if you volunteered that, or connecting it to my description of the archetype, but that's the role Ne is "supposed" to play for you.

I thought that's what you might mean, and in that case, I think the fault lies in the wording of your questions. #1 asked what process "has longest been my main approach to the world", not which I use most often period. "Se" is the process I use most when dealing with the external world, but "Fi" is the one I have used the most overall. I was answering your question as precisely as I could, perhaps thinking there was a little more nuance to it than there actually was.

OK, Bet! You apparently interpreted "to the world" as "external world" or extraverted.
I was rushing trying to think of the best way to convey "lead" function or "the first developed, most mature". Lead means it is supposedly your main function, or as someone said in another thread, "it's not driving the car; it IS the car". It's not necessarily how much it is used; that's why as we were discussing in that thread, your auxiliary can actually come out strongest in the CP test, yet you still have the dominant attitude of the next function. Hence, why I believe archetypes (differentiating the roles the functions play) is very helpful in sorting out type. So i'll reword it.

 

[Eric B]

OK,
Jeffster: Fits professed ISFP type. Not very conscious of shadows, and "inferior" fits the roles. Upon describing real life role of Si and Ne, they do seem to fit the ISFP's Critcal/Discovery (6) and Deceiving/Comedic (7).

01011010 (INTJ)
Ni-Te-Ne/Ti-Se-Fi-Fe-Si-Se

Going by first two, would match professed INTJ, and strong Ti/Ne in perceived "relief" position would also match J/P ambiguity (could be misinterpreted lead/supporting?).
Se as both Aspirational (which is in place) and destructive? Perhaps just realizing both the positive and negative aspects of the Aspirational, which to most people totally unconscious of the "shadow" functions, seems to be the one that represents "the [entire] shadow" and the most negative part of our sconsciousness, as was mentioned.

Athenian200 (InfJ)
Ni-Ti-Ne-Fe-Fi-Si-Se-Te

Several "NiTi" 's in the community, and they usually end up going with INFJ, the professed type here. However, many INTP's have high Ni for some reason. With Ti-Ne next (perceived as supporting and relief, and up a step from 01011010; and above Fe), it looks like one of those INTP's, but with a very out of place Ni shot up to be stronger than everything else, and appear to be the lead. Most likely not ISTP (the other TiNi type) because of perceived "Deceiving" Se, which is actually the INTP's archetype for that function. Fe is also right in place for the INTP's "aspirational".
Really should reconsider!

I think some sort of further more in depth, and perhaps professional study might need to be done to sort out all this NiTi stuff. Are people really understanding Ni? I would think it's the hardest to understand. Perhaps a sort of Forer effect with people scoring "exactly me" on questions like "being attracted to the symbolic", and others that are perhaps mistaken for Ne? Perhaps, since it's the INTP's "Critical" or "grumpy old man" role, and we do use it a lot, but mostly negatively (in our stereotypical cynicism), and hence it gets scored highly? (Just using my "supporting" Ne here to explore the possibilities! It's true that everytime I have taken the CP test, and having understood Ni more than the last time, I tend to inch up some of the responses).

greed
(ENtj)

Te-Ni-Se-Fi-Ti-Si-Fe-Ne

Fits nearly perfectly, except for last three (which would be very deep in the unconsciousness anyway), so great match!

lemons (INTJ)

Ni-Te-Ne-Se-Fi-Fe-Ti-Si

My function order of use is accordingly:
Ni > Te = Ne > Ti = Fi > Se > Si > Fe

I was wondering if these just paralleled people's CP results, but while this starts out similarly, we see some differences. Either way, first two match professed type. In this test, Aspirational and "Destructive" (8th) in place. Very E heavy on top, other introverted functions and Fe perceived very lowly, so INTJ is the mostl likely.

TheChosenOne (ISTP)

Te-Ti-Se-Ni-Si-Fi-Fe-Ne

Te perceived as lead function, or function used most "to the world"? Perhaps might be misinterpretation of Opposing/Backup. It seems next three (Ti and irrational arm) are pushed back in consecutive order. Ni perceived as Aspirational can indicate either that it is ego-compatible. In any case, this would at least seem to rule out the ISTJ you were considering IIRC. It was only this strongly perceived Te that gave that impression, but Si perceived as oppositional strongly suggests against it being the lead.

Anentropic IxTx (INTP)

Ni-Ne-Se-Si-Te-Fe-Fi-Ti

Uh Oh; this don't look good! Professed "hero" Ti perceived as "destructive"? All perceived ego compatible (first four) as perception functions, and all judgment perceptions ar shadows:horor: Can't be!
:17026: You need to try that again! Untypable!!