Chameleoning

[SolitaryWalker]

I think people like you better when you are a chameleon though.

Yes, and then you prostitute your inner identity to some hollow external end..as an ENTP you may fly by fine as you dont need much of a sound inner identity..but INTPs should take good care to improvise only to the extent that their inner principles allow them.

Perhaps the reason why you're adapting less now is because your Ti is now stronger and you have a stronger inner identity now as well as you depend less on approval of others?

 

[wildcat]

I keep thinking of the poor Norma.
Anyway, she was the true INTP chameleonne.

She said: I think I am a phony.
The Marilyn thingie was an expensive price to pay to fit in.
And in the end she did not fit in.

She was the loner at parties. Used to sit at the staircase all alone by herself.
This was because of the other women. They thought she would steal their men.
Stupid bitches.

 

[Schizm]

While growing up I was a master chameleon. Over the past few years I've been doing it less and less. I think people like you better when you are a chameleon though.

"We are so alike". "______, we have so much in common."

 

[The_Liquid_Laser]

Yes, and then you prostitute your inner identity to some hollow external end..as an ENTP you may fly by fine as you dont need much of a sound inner identity..but INTPs should take good care to improvise only to the extent that their inner principles allow them.

Perhaps the reason why you're adapting less now is because your Ti is now stronger and you have a stronger inner identity now as well as you depend less on approval of others?

Actually my Ti has always been very strong. (My Dad is an INTP and I think that is why.) But Ti never gave me a solid foundation. It's always been just a way to analyse ideas. It's efficient yes, but does not give me any sense of identity.

A few years ago I significantly developed my Fi though. Now Fi is something that can really give a person a strong core. I get my identity much more from Fi than from Ti.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

Actually my Ti has always been very strong. (My Dad is an INTP and I think that is why.) But Ti never gave me a solid foundation. It's always been just a way to analyse ideas. It's efficient yes, but does not give me any sense of identity.

A few years ago I significantly developed my Fi though. Now Fi is something that can really give a person a strong core. I get my identity much more from Fi than from Ti.

I'd speculate that the reason why you did not get a strong identity from Ti because you have not learned to use it in a way to build identity. Most INTPs manage to accomplish this. This has been featured most dramatically in history in character of Socrates, Aristotle, Spinoza and recently Einstein.

That is because Ti is a function of introverted judgment, it seeks a higher purpose in nearly everything it encounters. Or as Leanor Thompson put it, an internal purpose, one that transcends the convention.

To say that Ti can be used only for analyzing is tantamount to saying that Fi is used only for empathizing. No doubt this is how F is used externally, hence the reason why EFJs tend to lack a sound inner identity, but Fi goes beyond that. To ignore this means to ignore the introverted judgment aspect of Fi and Ti.

I think that the reason why you were unable to derive a sense of inner identity from Ti is because you have externalized it. As you said, you used it only for analyzing.

I also speculate that it is not really Fi that is giving you a sense of higher purpose. It is Fe that you've developed and its working through your Ti. Ti first sent you inwards searching for the purpose and Fe backed it up with emotional energy and hence made it look like Fi.

I am not saying you dont have Fi at all, but it works from behind Fe, and therefore necessarily less influential.

Here is the order that functions tend to grow in.

Ne(0-10)
Ti(10-20) reinforce Ne
Ni
Te(the further down the list we go, the greater the gaps will be)
Fe(20-30) reinforce Ti
Fi
Si (30-40) reinforce Fe
Se

40-50, Reinforce Si, the second function of the same kind grows simultaneously as the prominent, though at a significantly slower rate.

 

[The_Liquid_Laser]

I'd speculate that the reason why you did not get a strong identity from Ti because you have not learned to use it in a way to build identity. Most INTPs manage to accomplish this. This has been featured most dramatically in history in character of Socrates, Aristotle, Spinoza and recently Einstein.

That is because Ti is a function of introverted judgment, it seeks a higher purpose in nearly everything it encounters. Or as Leanor Thompson put it, an internal purpose, one that transcends the convention.

To say that Ti can be used only for analyzing is tantamount to saying that Fi is used only for empathizing. No doubt this is how F is used externally, hence the reason why EFJs tend to lack a sound inner identity, but Fi goes beyond that. To ignore this means to ignore the introverted judgment aspect of Fi and Ti.

I think that the reason why you were unable to derive a sense of inner identity from Ti is because you have externalized it. As you said, you used it only for analyzing.

I also speculate that it is not really Fi that is giving you a sense of higher purpose. It is Fe that you've developed and its working through your Ti. Ti first sent you inwards searching for the purpose and Fe backed it up with emotional energy and hence made it look like Fi.

I am not saying you dont have Fi at all, but it works from behind Fe, and therefore necessarily less influential.

Here is the order that functions tend to grow in.

Ne(0-10)
Ti(10-20) reinforce Ne
Ni
Te(the further down the list we go, the greater the gaps will be)
Fe(20-30) reinforce Ti
Fi
Si (30-40) reinforce Fe
Se

40-50, Reinforce Si, the second function of the same kind grows simultaneously as the prominent, though at a significantly slower rate.

Well I'm not sure how much stock you put in the 8 cognitive functions test, but my fuctions turned up in an order more like this.

Ne ... excellent
Ti ... excellent
Fi ... good
Ni ... good
Te ... average
Se ... average
Fe ... poor
Si ... poor

My Fi is really developed, but my Fe is not really developed at all. Sharing, bonding through experience, social ettiquette, etc... never really did much for me and still doesn't. On the other hand I have a fairly well developed sense of personal values. My Fi is much stronger than my Fe regardless of what the theory says it is supposed to be.

I'm not really saying that Ti is only good for analyzing, because I use it a lot. It's extremely practical. But I could never define myself by my ideas. Even before I knew about MBTI I envisioned myself as a great introverted thinker, i.e. an INTP type, but eventually I realized that it really wasn't me. The ideas have to be applied in some practical manner, and I didn't have a sense of purpose about how to apply these ideas, until I developed a personal morality.

I tried getting my core from Ti, but I really think that only works for IxTP's. My identity seems to come more from wanting to have an impact on the world around me. I need a sense of purpose to do this and that comes from my Fi. Ti has always been insufficient in providing me with an identity.

P.S. I really think Socrates is an ENTP rather than INTP.

 

[Shimpei]

Do you know what I find a big chameleoning?
The fact, that for long we had had pseudo-Ns here (and on INTPc as well), because many of you think that N=intelligence, S=bluntness.
So because of the peer pressure some of you used to be hiding their S-ness because you thought that it's something you should be ashamed about.
That's a big chameleoning!

 

[Schizm]

I know an ENFJ who's a big chameleon as well.

Holy sh*t. I talked to an ENFJ for a while and the whole time I didn't realize it. I was being chameleoned. A chameleon chameleoning a chameleon.

 

[proteanmix]

BlueWing you have this way of turning everything into a discussion about philosophers, philosophy, and their type. People could be talking about ironing underwear and duckpin bowling and yet you'd find a way to make it about philosophy.

I think this is something I need to learn because I have this habit of talking to people and actually being somewhat attentive to topic. This isn't always a good thing, especially when I want people to shut up and leave me alone. If only I could learn how to stop being so relevant. I'm going to take a page out of your book and learn this valuable life skill.

Teach me.

 

[Athenian200]

I think this is something I need to learn because I have this habit of talking to people and actually being somewhat attentive to topic. This isn't always a good thing, especially when I want people to shut up and leave me alone. If only I could learn how to stop being so relevant. I'm going to take a page out of your book and learn this valuable life skill.

Teach me.

Were you being sarcastic, proteanmix? Because I would tend to think that what you described is more of a flaw than a a skill. If you really did see that as a skill, why?

 

[Totenkindly]

Holy sh*t. I talked to an ENFJ for a while and the whole time I didn't realize it. I was being chameleoned. A chameleon chameleoning a chameleon.

For some bizarre reason, I am recalling the images of Ralph Wolf and Sam Sheepdog unzipping and stepping out of their costumes, back and forth, until you have no idea who is who anymore...

(Holy fractal imagery, Batman!)

BlueWing you have this way of turning everything into a discussion about philosophers, philosophy, and their type. People could be talking about ironing underwear and duckpin bowling and yet you'd find a way to make it about philosophy.

Thanks, PM. Now we'll have to listen to an analysis of Rosseau's fetish with women's corsets while bowling a 7-10 split. *groan*

I think this is something I need to learn because I have this habit of talking to people and actually being somewhat attentive to topic. This isn't always a good thing, especially when I want people to shut up and leave me alone. If only I could learn how to stop being so relevant. I'm going to take a page out of your book and learn this valuable life skill.

:yim_rolling_on_the_

Were you being sarcastic, proteanmix?

I think she was being sarcastic and serious at once -- quite a beautiful comment, to serve two purposes at the same time.

I keep thinking of the poor Norma.
Anyway, she was the true INTP chameleonne.
She said: I think I am a phony.
The Marilyn thingie was an expensive price to pay to fit in.
And in the end she did not fit in.

Uh huh. The irony is immeasurable: She is one of the most famous women internationally in the 20th century... but it was just an image. Who was the real Norma? She died alone.

And of course, on the low-high monitoring spectrum, I am on the radical precipitous end of the low monitoring type as my Ti is preponderous bombastic over my Ne, as this in part is the reason why my inner identity is sound calcified and why my self-esteem is very high stratospheric.

Fixed!

Though, as one correction to Jennifer, INTPs who identify better with the high-monitoring type are not influenced by Ne more than Ti in a way that ENTPs are. The case is that they lack self-esteem because they were unable to build a solid inner identity. They just use their Ne to float around, they cant feel at home in the external world by adapting the way that ENTPs can and certainly cant base their self-esteem in accordance to their external situation. They still use Ti more than Ne, yet much less efficiently than their low-monitoring counterparts. (Inefficiently because they tend to have less confidence in their Ti as they havent built a sound inner identity.)

I'll think more about this, it's an interesting variation. *pondering*

 

[SolitaryWalker]

BlueWing you have this way of turning everything into a discussion about philosophers, philosophy, and their type. People could be talking about ironing underwear and duckpin bowling and yet you'd find a way to make it about philosophy.

I think this is something I need to learn because I have this habit of talking to people and actually being somewhat attentive to topic. This isn't always a good thing, especially when I want people to shut up and leave me alone. If only I could learn how to stop being so relevant. I'm going to take a page out of your book and learn this valuable life skill.

Teach me.

Here is what you seem to misunderstand. Extroversion-Adapt to your environment. Introversion-Pressure your environment to adapt to your agenda.

There was a connection between what was said and philosophy, virtually anything can be connected to philosophy. But nonetheless thats not the point. The point is that the connection was there and you were unable to see it due to your lack of proficiency with Extroverted Intuition.

An individualistic person carries on with his endeavors regardless of the external circumstances. A collectivist minded person conforms.

 

[proteanmix]

Here is what you seem to misunderstand. Extroversion-Adapt to your environment. Introversion-Pressure your environment to adapt to your agenda.

There was a connection between what was said and philosophy, virtually anything can be connected to philosophy. But nonetheless thats not the point. The point is that the connection was there and you were unable to see it due to your lack of proficiency with Extroverted Intuition.

An individualistic person carries on with his endeavors regardless of the external circumstances. A collectivist minded person conforms.

Keep it up! I'm an excellent student.

And I could add that your lack of proficiency with Extraverted Feeling inhibits you from noticing the glazed eyes and cricket choir that seems to result whenever you start to drone.

And honestly it's not so much that you do it, it's that you turn every topic into variants of the same discussion. Do you have anything else to contribute? I don't know if philosophy can or can't be connected to various topics, you just seem myopically determined to find a way to make that connection. Regardless of if people want to hear it or not, regardless of if it's relevant to the topic at hand, almost as if it's your only talking point or something or possibly the only thing you feel comfortable and confident enough to talk about at length.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

Keep it up! I'm an excellent student.

And I could add that your lack of proficiency with Extraverted Feeling inhibits you from noticing the glazed eyes and cricket choir that seems to result whenever you start to drone.

And honestly it's not so much that you do it, it's that you turn every topic into variants of the same discussion. Do you have anything else to contribute? I don't know if philosophy can or can't be connected to various topics, you just seem myopically determined to find a way to make that connection. Regardless of if people want to hear it or not, regardless of if it's relevant to the topic at hand, almost as if it's your only talking point or something or possibly the only thing you feel comfortable and confident enough to talk about at length.

There is nothing myopical about turning every discussion into a philosophy discussion because nothing escapes the province of philosophy.

If I really thought about how others would react to this, perhaps I'd notice. But again, I dont see why that should matter as I am driven only by my sense of inner/higher purpose.

I dont think about what I have to contribute. Remember, extroversion is the attitude that makes us think about how we relate to the external environment. I think about what the environment can do for me than the other way around. I post because it is entailed by a higher purpose that I have in mind and has nothing to do with the concrete, ostensible circumstances that are imposed upon us.

 

[proteanmix]

Post about Plato's/Socrates' Type moved here.