For #1, one of three things could've happened...
1. I did a shitty job describing him
2. People did a shitty job typing him
3. He tested wrong
(4. A combonation)
His strengths reported from the humanmetrics test were:
Granted, I'm an INSANELY strong P, and I managed to score J on that test. So eNTP is also possible.
The others were pretty good!
1. Yea. To me, sounds like an unbalanced ESFP operating mostly on Se-Te. When he puts himself in an position of authority above you is it strained, as in it's not usually like him, or seems almost out of proportion to the situation? Does his authority seem naturally confident or does it seem aggressively so? Does he care that he's losing all that money?
2. I thought INTP due to a possible concentration of Ti-Si, the Si turning to repetitive tasks that he's used to, and that it might make a person OCDish. The intense outer defense isn't necessary of INTJs due to Fi giving them inner strength of their convictions and dealing with people-- even if they don't know how to deal with people, the confidence is usually there. If underdeveloped, INTPs' Fe wouldn't know how to respond to most people and have that 'outer defense' you mentioned. And the social skills, I think INTJs would sooner put themselves out there in order to infiltrate the environment with Te and learn how to adapt, so they make themselves better socially than INTPs. INTPs' Ne is only focused on their perceptual environment, so it's no shield against people and doesn't care to put itself out there other than to gather information for Ti.
He is quoted as saying, "I think that using logic to justify everything is good, and I seem to do that more than most people."
This also made me think Ti primary. INTJs would likely use their perception (Ni) to justify everything.
3. Mostly thought ETP. But the overall theme felt Se-Ti and not Ne-Ti. I'd think ESTPs would likely realise and apologise for hurting someone's feelings b/c it's more obvious (in an Se sense) and in their face than for an ENTP. More, but eh.
4. The most annoying (to type...) of all. Not being able to deal with her problems with others? An Fe Dom...? Hmm, seems more like an ESFP wouldn't know how to deal with their problems with others, if they were that unbalanced and cared enough to do it, rather than an EFJ. I don't think ESFJs would risk (most SJs don't like risk either) their placement in a group or they'd be discreet about all that back talking or just tell their most trusted friends. I'd think an EFJ would cut off ties with anyone once they've determined they didn't like them. I could see an EFP not giving a fuck about the consequences (possibly b/c they also can't see them). Does she like to keep those people around just to toy with them and have more stories to make fun of them with to her other friends?
This thread offers unusual distinction into some of the predominant stereotypes that infiltrate judgment on type classifications (mine, at least) while perhaps unveiling further some of the qualitative descriptions some mechanically associate with type.
1. Initially, I deduced my ESTP description on the basis of WHO the individual interacted with and HOW. Phrases like "he's a dick", or that he "talk[s] shit to dealers and frequently loses money" created a visualization of a fast-talking, socially-adroit individual who was simultaneously comfortable with impulsive gambling while tailoring conversation to his immediate advantage.
In doing so, I glossed over what I concluded to be less expressive details (quality of his friendship; fashion sensibility) and, in the end, fabricated an inaccurate evaluation against certain "false positive" criteria. The error was in my inability to aptly select reasonable evidence from unimportant data.
Just a quick example of the processes that fueled my misconceptions.
In the end, I think the MBTI creates an arena where circular rationale is encouraged. Cenomite's thread provides a microcosm into this system of judgment.
Why do we assume the NT is intelligent? Because most NTs have been observed to be intelligent.
Why is the SF popularly assumed to carefree? Because many SFs have been observed as carefree.
Statements of personal value (intelligent v. unintelligent) often infect judgment to the extent that passive observation becomes an experiment in identifying certain "context clues" that combine to illustrate common experience with Type A v. Type B.
Originally Posted by greed
Pretty much exactly, yeah.. the elements you posted seemed to scream Se-dominant, which is why I guessed ESTP.. with ENTJ as another possibility based on the rest of the description.
Thank you. Deconstructing methodology into individual motivators makes for interesting retrospection.
Uber -- which elements stood out to you? What did you employ to distinguish reliable data from background noise?
Well, the stereotypes described seemed all too obvious, so I was hesitant to jump to conclusions and make an ass out of myself.
But as for the first one, he certainly doesn't seem cooperative and rule-bound like an ESTJ, but something of a maverick. So why not ESTP? Well, the authoritative element suggested ENTJ, a "strategic initiator," as Keirsey now calls it.
The second one was just so obviously a stereotypical INTJ. It was basically a picture of Sheldon Cooper in The Big Bang Theory. Borderline autistic and in a world of his own.
The third had Ne written all over it. And coupled with the insensitivity and interest in computer programming, had to be a T.
The fourth is pretty much a bitchy mother type, a preppy, sorority sister, an organized ditz, an evil Catholic school girl, AKA ESFJ.
It just goes to prove that the stereotypes are real and should be believed in.