User Tag List

First 2345 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 42

Thread: What's my Type?

  1. #31
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kai View Post
    You're not wrong. The details are important to sensors, because we build our frameworks and system with these things. It's where the whole linear thing might come into play. Considering that sensors are constantly being described as practical orientated, it does not really make sense that they only deal with facts if you think about it. Facts stand alone don't have practical value, but they can be useful in a game of trivia.
    LOL. Yes, I guess it depends on what you consider to be a detail. I always assumed details (in the context of MBTI) were things you could perceive with physical senses, not the details of how words or concepts works. If details could include details of concepts or rules... then there are more sensors than I thought.
    It reminds me of a conversation I had a long time ago with an INFP on INFPgc chatroom. Me and another ISFJ were being accused of being rigid, not wanting to change, shooting down their plans etc. However if they looked at it from our perspective, they would quickly see that we're not against change but unneccessary change. This is true for the ISTJs as well. We essentially operate on the motto: "If it's not broken, don't try and fix it" and "If you are going to change the system, provide me with good justification."
    Actually, I once said that was the reason I didn't like SJs. Because they were against ALL change, where as I was only against unnecessary or negative change.
    Think about it this way: Does it seem so unusual as an idea that an ISFJ might adapt to their partners needs, changing their frameworks because they believe that it will improve things?
    Actually, yes. A lot of people on here with SFJ spouses imply that they struggle with them precisely because they refuse to do that and stick stubbornly to a traditional framework that isn't comfortable for them.

    Then again... I have no way of knowing that those people were SFJs other than the word of the person who claimed it, which might very well have been biased.

    How do people operate without reasoning anyway? There's always some motivation behind actions. Most people would agree that people seek meaning for their actions, otherwise we would be in a state of apathy. For some this is religion, for others it'd be creating meaning for ourselves.
    Yep. That's a good point. Although interestingly enough, I'm in a state of apathy right now... because I'm struggling to find any meaning in action. I used to have the motivation of pleasing my teachers, but now there's no meaning.
    Yep. Therefore it's best to take the MBTI model with a pinch of salt and use it as a basic model and then refine it with real life experiences, while trying to maintain being objective as possible when doing so.
    That's hard for me to accept, though. Aren't real life experiences kind of confined to a narrow sphere that might not be applicable to other contexts? I have trouble accepting individual experience as meaningful. To me, experiences seem to make people biased for and against particular traits based on how they've been impacted by them, not objective.


    When I first came to MBTI I thought I was an ISXX because I had totally rejected intuition within me, because I do not see myself as a creative nor imaginative individual. Having been with an INFJ friend, I could see that while there was many similarities, there was also lots of differences and she concluded the same. She also wanted to become a writer, I'm not so good with words.
    Well, I don't really think intuition is about being creative or imaginative. I always thought it was more about thinking in terms of patterns rather than details, and feeling attuned to the mental/reflective side of life rather than the physical/active side.
    Regarding Si and Ni. It's interesting to hear about your friends experiences, do you mind elaborating a little more on that? Otherwise I could be an ISFP, except there's the major problem that I identify Ne as my weakest function. Brainstorming and going off tangent is difficult for me. I've tried improving Ne by engaging in the whole Seaside - Ocean - Dolphins etc, but you would quickly realise that I'm always operating within a framework than allowing myself to go into something completely unrelated to the original point.
    ISFPs don't have Ne. The functional order is Fi, Se, Ni, Te. It's ISFJs that have Ne as the forth. Si, Fe, Ti, Ne. I think it's assumed that you're much more likely to use the four functions in your type, than the four in your shadow.

    Actually, my Ne is terrible as well. NPs say things that go over my head all the time. I get NJ humor (usually dry humor) rather well, but NP humor eludes me.

    There's also the fact that I do identify much with Se as a function. In fact until recently I had a fair amount of bias for SPs as I essentially associated it with hedonism.
    Yeah, me too. I had exactly the same bias until I met some ISFPs on here.

    T
    hat coupled with some experiences with unstable SPs basically made them out to be rather... dubious. But I've always known that this is just prejudice. One thing that interests me most about psychology is actually how susceptible we are to bias created from self-defensive mechanisms, as it's something I aim to reduce within myself.
    This is the bane of my existence. I create so much of this.
    Thankfully I met a wonderful ESFP who happens to be a christian. Personally I think her religion provides her with a sense of stability and ethical positions like "To be kind to people etc". It's wonderful as she is so kind and quirky at the same time, somebody who is willing to accept people as long as they are reasonably within christian morals. So in some ways that has dismissed my prejudice against ESFPs.
    Eh... I actually have a prejudice against Christians, but it's because parts of their morality seem unjust to me. It's mostly because I'm personally affected by some of it due to an unfortunate... situation I've found myself in. So I ally myself with those who disagree with Christians as a way of protecting myself and finding acceptance.

    But I agree with your assessment of SFPs... they can be very kind, quirky, and accepting.

    There are lots of things that I keep and lots of things I've rejected based on whether I view them as truth. I explaind earlier in this post about how SJs react to change in beliefs and values. However in practice I'm more willing to conform unless I view there as being an obvious major problem with society.
    Well, you kind of have to conform. I may openly express disagreement here, but in real life? I'll swallow my pride and act precisely according to the rules, as long as I don't have a personal need to do something that's against the accepted rules. But I'll do that secretly rather than publicly.
    Just to give a little background on how I have potentially come to create my model of reality in bullet points.

    - Rejection from school at early age.
    - Development of perfectionism in order to be accepted.
    - Refusal of falling to peer-pressure to engage in 'immoral acts'
    - Social Anxiety producing shyness. Don't fit with 'mainstream' crowds.
    - Observance of negative treatment towards outcasts.
    - Stronger development of protection for the underdogs.
    - Development of moral relativism. Remaining neutral in arguements.
    [Why do people bully? Why did they persecute people for believing the world was round in the past? etc]
    - Decision to find my own system of what is truth.


    This is the framework that I have adopted and it can hold true for other sensors. You could also say that I was influenced by a close INFJ friend during my adolescent years (13-19).

    I've changed a few times for example: I used to think that shopping and small talk is superficial, but then I met an ISFP who loves shopping and clothing, and I could never describe her as shallow. Regarding that of small talk, I discovered that topics that aren't interesting to me as usually deemed as small talk. But it's extremely possible for some one to go into lots of depth with shopping etc. Someone mentioned small talk as being a method of exchanging greetings/acknowledgement of the other person rather than conversation and I think that's extremely true.
    That framework you described is pretty much a carbon copy of mine. And about small talk... I used to assume it was shallow and superficial because it was often associated with those things. But after getting into more conversations with people using it, I found it really wasn't so bad. It only sucks if you can't keep up with it because you don't know the subject (in this case shopping). Ironically, there's very little difference between "intellectual" and "shallow" conversation besides the topics you're expected to know about.

    It's all good! You do make insightful posts, for example that one about the limitations of MBTI. For me personally I find it best to operate in a scientific method way when dealing with the theory.

    My parents personally hate that I do this, but I use extreme examples to counter a theory being 100% correct and thus it needs refining. Another example: I operate on the belief that function ordering is not rigid and fluid, however the first two functions along with the inferior are usually good indicators of type. Then BlackCat came along and pwned me by telling me that his inferior is actually well developed.
    Scientific method? How can you apply that to MBTI? It's not observable... is it?

    LOL, I actually do that all the time. Some of the NPs really hated it, though, so I stopped, at least on here.

  2. #32
    Senior Member Snow Turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,335

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    LOL. Yes, I guess it depends on what you consider to be a detail. I always assumed details (in the context of MBTI) were things you could perceive with physical senses, not the details of how words or concepts works. If details could include details of concepts or rules... then there are more sensors than I thought.
    This is what I wrote to someone in the past when describing Si. I've also described it as a camera in the past.

    A database full of impressions. Similarities and contrasts are examined so even if there isn't a sharp memory recollection, my memory is okish, there will be a vague feeling about the whole thing. For example I remember from a long time conversation something about a man and a relationship when talking to an INFP but I can't remember all the details, it's just the impression that was left with me....

    .... But yeah Si is interested in taking in impressions and creating an internal world of how things operate. Think it's useful for an SJ to remember "what does this really mean, and is this the true reality" so that they actually have a proper idea of what reality is like and not just an impression of what reality is like. Questioning the self is always useful."

    Actually, yes. A lot of people on here with SFJ spouses imply that they struggle with them precisely because they refuse to do that and stick stubbornly to a traditional framework that isn't comfortable for them.

    Then again... I have no way of knowing that those people were SFJs other than the word of the person who claimed it, which might very well have been biased.
    It depends on the framework/values that the SJ has adopted. I like to believe the new generation of SJs are different to the old generation personally because we've been exposed to much more variation in culture etc. That's the only explanation I could come up with regarding myself.

    Yep. That's a good point. Although interestingly enough, I'm in a state of apathy right now... because I'm struggling to find any meaning in action. I used to have the motivation of pleasing my teachers, but now there's no meaning.
    Teenage angst. Wohooo!
    Only messing~

    That's hard for me to accept, though. Aren't real life experiences kind of confined to a narrow sphere that might not be applicable to other contexts? I have trouble accepting individual experience as meaningful. To me, experiences seem to make people biased for and against particular traits based on how they've been impacted by them, not objective.

    Scientific method? How can you apply that to MBTI? It's not observable... is it?
    You can't prove with certainty that I do exist, that I'm not just part of your mind. Think about the abstract topics that people can't prove entirely such as love. It's the reason I spend so much time on these forums reading, I absorb information from other peoples and make comparisons and then run through what the likely truth. It's all statistical, it's similar to how I'd imagine psychology works since there are many things that can't be falsified within the field.

    Personally I believe while it's impossible to be 100% objective when dealing with introspection or taking on personal accounts from other people, it's possible to be reasonably objective and accurate and then there's the whole factor of knowing which individuals have an accurate self-image of themselves rather than an idealised self image. I don't think it's impossible to reduce human bias within the self.

    Well, I don't really think intuition is about being creative or imaginative. I always thought it was more about thinking in terms of patterns rather than details, and feeling attuned to the mental/reflective side of life rather than the physical/active side.
    Like I said this was my basic understanding of MBTI when I first started. At least I definitely don't identify with Ne as a function despite thinking that intuitives described on MBTI as always more cooler. Sensors are described as simpletons from my perspective, and then we're told that we are useful as the worker bees.

    ISFPs don't have Ne. The functional order is Fi, Se, Ni, Te. It's ISFJs that have Ne as the forth. Si, Fe, Ti, Ne. I think it's assumed that you're much more likely to use the four functions in your type, than the four in your shadow.
    Yep I meant that Ne is my worst function. Technically if I'm an ISFP according to theory Te would be my worst function. It's an explanation to the problem of being an ISFP. Not to mention I'm an enneagram 6w5, SIC. But hey there might be no correlation.

    Eh... I actually have a prejudice against Christians, but it's because parts of their morality seem unjust to me. It's mostly because I'm personally affected by some of it due to an unfortunate... situation I've found myself in. So I ally myself with those who disagree with Christians as a way of protecting myself and finding acceptance.

    But I agree with your assessment of SFPs... they can be very kind, quirky, and accepting.
    I don't agree with the idea of hell and punishment, but they do have alot of other decent values. Hope I've clarified things. Off to bed now.

  3. #33
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kai View Post
    This is what I wrote to someone in the past when describing Si. I've also described it as a camera in the past.

    A database full of impressions. Similarities and contrasts are examined so even if there isn't a sharp memory recollection, my memory is okish, there will be a vague feeling about the whole thing. For example I remember from a long time conversation something about a man and a relationship when talking to an INFP but I can't remember all the details, it's just the impression that was left with me....

    .... But yeah Si is interested in taking in impressions and creating an internal world of how things operate. Think it's useful for an SJ to remember "what does this really mean, and is this the true reality" so that they actually have a proper idea of what reality is like and not just an impression of what reality is like. Questioning the self is always useful."
    I guess I use Si (or a simulation) sometimes, then. I guess the main capacity I thought SJs lacked was the awareness that there could be a real meaning other than one they'd internalized, and especially the ability to question themselves under normal circumstances.

    It depends on the framework/values that the SJ has adopted. I like to believe the new generation of SJs are different to the old generation personally because we've been exposed to much more variation in culture etc. That's the only explanation I could come up with regarding myself.
    Huh, you know it could be. It's also possible that several "SJs" are only perceived as SJ because they're clearly holding to outdated standards (like gender roles) and imposing them on people against their will. That kind of closed-mindedness might simply be what happens to people when they're not exposed to a lot of variation in culture, type notwithstanding.
    Teenage angst. Wohooo!
    Only messing~
    I totally get it.
    You can't prove with certainty that I do exist, that I'm not just part of your mind. Think about the abstract topics that people can't prove entirely such as love. It's the reason I spend so much time on these forums reading, I absorb information from other peoples and make comparisons and then run through what the likely truth. It's all statistical, it's similar to how I'd imagine psychology works since there are many things that can't be falsified within the field.
    Actually, I've mentioned that several times. I often wonder if the "people" online are real, or if they're just really complex machines. I think they're likely to be real, but there's always a little doubt.

    Absorbing and comparing information... and then analyzing it. That's pretty much how I thought everyone learned, and that some people were just slower or faster at it than others.

    The thing that unnerves me though, is the potential for starting off with assumptions and then tending to confirm them that comes with that approach. Then again, that's always a concern in life, I suppose.

    Personally I believe while it's impossible to be 100% objective when dealing with introspection or taking on personal accounts from other people, it's possible to be reasonably objective and accurate and then there's the whole factor of knowing which individuals have an accurate self-image of themselves rather than an idealised self image. I don't think it's impossible to reduce human bias within the self.
    But what criteria do you use to determine whether a person's self-image is accurate or idealized?

    Assuming that such criteria exist... I suppose I agree that it's possible to reduce bias.

    Like I said this was my basic understanding of MBTI when I first started. At least I definitely don't identify with Ne as a function despite thinking that intuitives described on MBTI as always more cooler. Sensors are described as simpletons from my perspective, and then we're told that we are useful as the worker bees.
    So... your understanding of MBTI has changed since you started? Mine actually hasn't.

    Mine was more that Ns were open-minded, and Ss were closed-minded. I heard someone say that N/S correlates with the Big 5 Openness dimension, and they did sound rather similar, so I guess just took it for granted.
    Yep I meant that Ne is my worst function. Technically if I'm an ISFP according to theory Te would be my worst function. It's an explanation to the problem of being an ISFP. Not to mention I'm an enneagram 6w5, SIC. But hey there might be no correlation.
    Ah, yes. Te doesn't seem to be your worst function. You're pretty good at thinking. And besides, Ti would be a shadow function for ISFP, and those are usually considered the worst for a type. You're too good at Ti to be ISFP, nevermind. Everything is confirming ISFJ now.
    I don't agree with the idea of hell and punishment, but they do have alot of other decent values. Hope I've clarified things. Off to bed now.
    Yeah, they do. The 10 commandments and a lot of other things are really good. But it's just hard not to have a visceral reaction and feel personally threatened what Christians tend to think about certain social issues (due to what's written in their Bible), and then have that color my whole perception of them as unjust, irrational, unyielding, imposing, and cruel. It's one of those "defense mechanisms" I'm trying to dismantle. My paranoid, instinctive perception of them is so warped that my mental image of Christians is probably closer to the "Scarlet Crusaders" from the perspective of the Forsaken in WoW than actual people. It was actually after playing that, and realizing how similar that caricature (because most things in that game are clearly caricatures of something else) was to my own mental image, that I began to think my ideas might be exaggerated by my negative experiences.

    Yep, you have. I believe that you're ISFJ now. You're just a very erudite one. You've also helped me reexamine/question some of my assumptions that I've picked up over time. Thank you, and good night.

  4. #34
    Shaman BlackCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    7,005

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    Mine was more that Ns were open-minded, and Ss were closed-minded. I heard someone say that N/S correlates with the Big 5 Openness dimension, and they did sound rather similar, so I guess just took it for granted.
    I'm going to jump in to say KILL THIS THOUGHT. Get rid of it, hate it, make it not exist.
    () 9w8-3w4-7w6 tritype.

    sCueI (primary Inquisition)

  5. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackCat View Post
    I'm going to jump in to say KILL THIS THOUGHT. Get rid of it, hate it, make it not exist.
    I'm going to second that.
    BTW In big 5 I always measure highest on the openness scale. In every variation of the test I've ever taken.

  6. #36
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackCat View Post
    I'm going to jump in to say KILL THIS THOUGHT. Get rid of it, hate it, make it not exist.
    *kills thought*



    Okay, it's dead.

    Actually, it was dead before you got here because Kai gave me good justification for it not making sense.

  7. #37
    Senior Member Snow Turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,335

    Default

    Absorbing and comparing information... and then analyzing it. That's pretty much how I thought everyone learned, and that some people were just slower or faster at it than others.
    Yep. It took me a while to figure out ISFJ. For a long time I just read and read in bulk in an attempt to figure out the self, then one day I just decided to read all the potential profiles and did all the cognitive functions for like the 15th odd time and it sort of clicked into place. Course my introspection and type is still being doubted.

    The thing that unnerves me though, is the potential for starting off with assumptions and then tending to confirm them that comes with that approach. Then again, that's always a concern in life, I suppose.

    But what criteria do you use to determine whether a person's self-image is accurate or idealized?

    Assuming that such criteria exist... I suppose I agree that it's possible to reduce bias.
    It's not a bullet proof method but I tend to first decide how introspective the other individual is, how well they know themselves and then I start comparing their behaviour to what they have said about their values etc. Whether they are aware that they are engaging in hypocritical behaviour or not. Simple stuff like that. It helps slightly if they don't have an over inflated ego, as they are usually more modest about their abilities etc.

    You can't really do that so much online, so it becomes a case of whether they say contradictory statements/ideas. Eitherway it requires people stalking...

    Regarding the confirmation bias. I do make assumptions but I usually keep them to myself to see whether they are true or not, and if proven wrong then I just update my understanding. There have been a few horrible cases where I assumed bad things with my ESFP friend, that because her past was one of gangster behaviour and depression that she might have had sex already. That was a cringe-worthy moment for me when I discovered she was still a proud virgin, since I said that she probably had.

    But otherwise it's a case of taking all the various personal experiences. Watching if they clash, if so which opinions are more likely to be accurate/false based on previous understanding hence the importance of a correct foundation. Afterwards build up a picture with it. I'm sure that you are probably better than me at this, since I'd think you do it naturally anyway?

    So... your understanding of MBTI has changed since you started? Mine actually hasn't.
    Yep. My understanding of MBTI has changed over time, just like how I change my opinion of friends when I first meet them. I start off with a basic flawed or simple model of them, but gradually replace it with 'better' data. For example: One of my starting points for people is that they are Neutral-Good if people play Dungeons and Dragons.

    Mine was more that Ns were open-minded, and Ss were closed-minded. I heard someone say that N/S correlates with the Big 5 Openness dimension, and they did sound rather similar, so I guess just took it for granted.
    I do actually score more low on the openess dimension. Proteanmix was going on about how there are so many things that have been placed in that section besides imagination like concern for beauty etc. Some friend disagree with this but generally I feel as if stick to the same thing thus I deem myself conventional within an unconventional system.

    Just for kicks: This was an old profile I had with the PersonalDNA



    In comparison to my INFJ friend. I think.




    Ah, yes. Te doesn't seem to be your worst function. You're pretty good at thinking. And besides, Ti would be a shadow function for ISFP, and those are usually considered the worst for a type. You're too good at Ti to be ISFP, nevermind. Everything is confirming ISFJ now.

    Yep, you have. I believe that you're ISFJ now. You're just a very erudite one. You've also helped me reexamine/question some of my assumptions that I've picked up over time. Thank you, and good night.
    Hehe aww! Thanks.
    You've totally inflated my ego now. Got to pop it.

  8. #38
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kai View Post
    Yep. It took me a while to figure out ISFJ. For a long time I just read and read in bulk in an attempt to figure out the self, then one day I just decided to read all the potential profiles and did all the cognitive functions for like the 15th odd time and it sort of clicked into place. Course my introspection and type is still being doubted.
    Yeah. That's exactly what I did the first time, which is why I remembered the profiles so well. I poured over them more times than I would have a textbook when preparing for a test (I know, my priorities suck).

    I just don't question my type or allow others to question it anymore. I've been an INFJ for so long, and I've built whole ideas based on the perspective that I am one, and formed connections to people according to temperament similarities, etc. I prefer to just stick with my initial decision, because I don't want anything to change how people perceive and relate to me. I honestly can't see how people bring themselves to seriously question their type after they've been a particular type for a while.



    It's not a bullet proof method but I tend to first decide how introspective the other individual is, how well they know themselves and then I start comparing their behaviour to what they have said about their values etc. Whether they are aware that they are engaging in hypocritical behaviour or not. Simple stuff like that. It helps slightly if they don't have an over inflated ego, as they are usually more modest about their abilities etc.

    You can't really do that so much online, so it becomes a case of whether they say contradictory statements/ideas. Eitherway it requires people stalking...
    Sometimes I question whether hypocrisy is actually a bad thing. Can people really be so consistent in their behavior and values that they're not hypocrites in some way? Wouldn't that almost require never changing your values?

    Yeah, you do have to look for contradictions. That actually is one thing I do, look for contradictions in the way a thing is structured and presented vs. what's said about them on the surface.
    Regarding the confirmation bias. I do make assumptions but I usually keep them to myself to see whether they are true or not, and if proven wrong then I just update my understanding. There have been a few horrible cases where I assumed bad things with my ESFP friend, that because her past was one of gangster behaviour and depression that she might have had sex already. That was a cringe-worthy moment for me when I discovered she was still a proud virgin, since I said that she probably had.

    But otherwise it's a case of taking all the various personal experiences. Watching if they clash, if so which opinions are more likely to be accurate/false based on previous understanding hence the importance of a correct foundation. Afterwards build up a picture with it. I'm sure that you are probably better than me at this, since I'd think you do it naturally anyway?
    Well, to be honest... I have trouble not assuming things like that about SPs. They just seem like the type to do that kind of thing from the description. But yes... I try to keep my assumptions to myself as well, but my behavior towards people often reveals my assumptions even when I don't want it to.

    As a matter of fact, I don't do this. But I think I'm going to start now that you've mentioned it. I used to just assume everything people said about themselves was accurate, until they did something that gave me a reason not to believe it. Yeah, I'm probably pretty naive.

    Yep. My understanding of MBTI has changed over time, just like how I change my opinion of friends when I first meet them. I start off with a basic flawed or simple model of them, but gradually replace it with 'better' data. For example: One of my starting points for people is that they are Neutral-Good if people play Dungeons and Dragons.
    Huh. I have a tendency to continue judging people based on my first impression of them for a long time... it can change, but usually only for the worse, and only if it was clearly mistaken. I suppose that's mostly because my first impressions rarely seem mistaken to me, so I rarely need to question them. Or maybe I do, but I don't realize it... hmm.

    You know about alignment, too? You're good at this. I usually start with the assumption of Lawful Neutral rather than Neutral Good, actually. Probably because I used to be LN myself, and then felt the need to become True Neutral after spending a lot of time interacting with a Chaotic Neutral person and seeing that they weren't so bad after all (and also coming to see the flaws of my LN worldview).
    I do actually score more low on the openess dimension. Proteanmix was going on about how there are so many things that have been placed in that section besides imagination like concern for beauty etc. Some friend disagree with this but generally I feel as if stick to the same thing thus I deem myself conventional within an unconventional system.

    Just for kicks: This was an old profile I had with the PersonalDNA

    It looks like I didn't really understand Openness on Big 5. Sounds like it was more complex than I initially thought. I should probably study that.

    Anyway, that's an interesting idea... that you can stick to the same thing within a lack of convention. Is there really room for that? I mean, can you step outside the norm, and not have to become completely open to change/experience in order to gain acceptance and survive outside of it? I always kind of thought you couldn't...



    Hehe aww! Thanks.
    You've totally inflated my ego now. Got to pop it.
    Don't worry, your superego will take care of that soon enough. You're an ISFJ, after all.

    Anyway, I hate to build up your ego any more... but I get the impression that you're far more clever, and a better person, than I am. I hope there are a lot of SJs like you out there. That would really help my faith in humanity.

    EDIT: I just realized I've derailed your type thread. Sorry. :blushing:

  9. #39
    Senior Member Snow Turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,335

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    Yeah. That's exactly what I did the first time, which is why I remembered the profiles so well. I poured over them more times than I would have a textbook when preparing for a test (I know, my priorities suck).

    I just don't question my type or allow others to question it anymore. I've been an INFJ for so long, and I've built whole ideas based on the perspective that I am one, and formed connections to people according to temperament similarities, etc. I prefer to just stick with my initial decision, because I don't want anything to change how people perceive and relate to me. I honestly can't see how people bring themselves to seriously question their type after they've been a particular type for a while.
    Hehe. I dedicate way too much time to this sort of thing as well, it's all good.
    As for the whole questioning ISFJ, it's more to try and prove to myself and the other person that I'm an ISFJ as opposed to an ISFP. Besides by confirming things over and over again I build stronger arguements and justifications for my beliefs, course this can be bad if I have a biased view.

    Sometimes I question whether hypocrisy is actually a bad thing. Can people really be so consistent in their behavior and values that they're not hypocrites in some way? Wouldn't that almost require never changing your values?
    Personally I think hypocrisy is always a bad thing. It's essentially lying to others or yourself. In which case I'd just say: Why don't you just admit that you aren't as perfect as you thought you were. In most cases people that engage in this behaviour aren't really aware of themselves when they do it (myself included), so there's no real need to blame people too much for doing this sort of thing. I think being aware that humans are susceptible to bias is already a great starting point, as it forces you to examine your beliefs and actions more closely. This is why I usually like people that study psychology.

    As a matter of fact, I don't do this. But I think I'm going to start now that you've mentioned it. I used to just assume everything people said about themselves was accurate, until they did something that gave me a reason not to believe it. Yeah, I'm probably pretty naive.
    Actually I believe that too, but I also think that alot of people idealise themselves unless they're depressive in which case they might go in the opposite direction. This study has been discredited somewhat but I like it Depressive realism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    It's the reason that I've always believed there is some advantage to experiencing 'depression' or lows in life as it forces the person to examine their life more closely. At least for me, the times when I've analysed myself the most was when I was trying to figure something out about myself in order to proceed. I've essentially associated thinking with melancholy moods now. Sadness brings out contemplation and reflection, since the emotions are usually very authentic. Technically this would be true for positive emotions, but I also think that people in general are more likely to experience deep lows than deep highs. Then again I don't think I've truly experienced the whole intense but strong stable love emotion so that will be interesting, not talking about infatuation.

    Huh. I have a tendency to continue judging people based on my first impression of them for a long time... it can change, but usually only for the worse, and only if it was clearly mistaken. I suppose that's mostly because my first impressions rarely seem mistaken to me, so I rarely need to question them. Or maybe I do, but I don't realize it... hmm.
    I'm not sure whether I change my impressions since they certainly stick around me for a long time, but I'd think as long as you are aware that they are merely impressions then it's fine. Halo effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    You know about alignment, too? You're good at this. I usually start with the assumption of Lawful Neutral rather than Neutral Good, actually. Probably because I used to be LN myself, and then decayed to True Neutral after spending a lot of time interacting with a Chaotic Neutral person.
    Yep. I love DnD except my teacher infused alot of history at the higher stages where I just couldn't keep up with storyline anymore. He's a history teacher... ^^

    Lawful Neutral huh?
    That seems much more cynical of human nature than Neutral Good. The reasoning for following rules would be to not create trouble for themselves?

    Mine is essentially a reflection of what I believe of other people, that the majority of people are mostly well intentioned but they don't actually care so much for the rules. But I suppose that being good is usually associated with being fair and lawful so more people are going to follow this. I think that they are willing to break laws if it was thought that breaking the law is better for the party. Then again there's lots of cases in history that argue against this. Hm...

    The whole "Humans are capable of doing great evil or good" would suggest that people are born chaotic neutral. But I suppose it depends on what the definition of chaotic is. I'd view it as willing to break rules in order to benefit themselves - selfishness. Where as I'd define evil as selfishness with intentional harm.

    Anyway, that's an interesting idea... that you can stick to the same thing within a lack of convention. Is there really room for that? I mean, can you step outside the norm, and not have to become completely open to change/experience in order to gain
    The framework I'm operating in seems normal to me, but from the perspectives of social norms it might seem unconventional. Another possability is the beliefs you adopt, it has to become more expansive rather than specific.

    - Acceptance of change. It is still a structured framework overall despite the specifics having a lack of structure.

    Actually I'm confusing myself now. Bleh

  10. #40
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kai View Post
    Personally I think hypocrisy is always a bad thing. It's essentially lying to others or yourself. In which case I'd just say: Why don't you just admit that you aren't as perfect as you thought you were. In most cases people that engage in this behaviour aren't really aware of themselves when they do it (myself included), so there's no real need to blame people too much for doing this sort of thing. I think being aware that humans are susceptible to bias is already a great starting point, as it forces you to examine your beliefs and actions more closely. This is why I usually like people that study psychology.
    Yeah. You should admit that you're not perfect. I was thinking more in terms of the idea that you shouldn't express any value that you can't live up to. Which is a mindframe that kind of makes ideals impossible to have.



    It's the reason that I've always believed there is some advantage to experiencing 'depression' or lows in life as it forces the person to examine their life more closely. At least for me, the times when I've analysed myself the most was when I was trying to figure something out about myself in order to proceed. I've essentially associated thinking with melancholy moods now. Sadness brings out contemplation and reflection, since the emotions are usually very authentic. Technically this would be true for positive emotions, but I also think that people in general are more likely to experience deep lows than deep highs. Then again I don't think I've truly experienced the whole intense but strong stable love emotion so that will be interesting, not talking about infatuation.
    Oh, I've definitely experienced deep lows. I'm kind of glad about how I'm examining my life more closely now. I used to be so rigid, paranoid and mindless, but that was because I was repressing about 80% of my personality and overwriting it with social programming... that was awful.


    I'm not sure whether I change my impressions since they certainly stick around me for a long time, but I'd think as long as you are aware that they are merely impressions then it's fine. Halo effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Yes, you have to be careful of impressions.
    Yep. I love DnD except my teacher infused alot of history at the higher stages where I just couldn't keep up with storyline anymore. He's a history teacher... ^^

    Lawful Neutral huh?
    That seems much more cynical of human nature than Neutral Good. The reasoning for following rules would be to not create trouble for themselves?

    Mine is essentially a reflection of what I believe of other people, that the majority of people are mostly well intentioned but they don't actually care so much for the rules. But I suppose that being good is usually associated with being fair and lawful so more people are going to follow this. I think that they are willing to break laws if it was thought that breaking the law is better for the party. Then again there's lots of cases in history that argue against this. Hm...

    The whole "Humans are capable of doing great evil or good" would suggest that people are born chaotic neutral. But I suppose it depends on what the definition of chaotic is. I'd view it as willing to break rules in order to benefit themselves - selfishness. Where as I'd define evil as selfishness with intentional harm.
    Yes. I really didn't agree with or like the people around me growing up, and felt the only thing I really had in common with any of them was the desire to avoid unpredictable situations and punishment, and have an idea of how my behavior was going to be judged. That pushed me towards Lawful Neutral.
    The framework I'm operating in seems normal to me, but from the perspectives of social norms it might seem unconventional. Another possability is the beliefs you adopt, it has to become more expansive rather than specific.

    - Acceptance of change. It is still a structured framework overall despite the specifics having a lack of structure.

    Actually I'm confusing myself now. Bleh
    Correct. My own framework is normal to me, from my own perspective. I guess I just always thought the perspective of social norms was the only one that counted. Probably some of that LN thinking hanging on.

    I used to have a framework where all the specifics were structured, but now I'm moving towards one where the overall framework is structured, but with the specifics being more relaxed. It feels more natural to me, although I feel so terrified that in public I still tend to behave in a Lawful Neutral manner out of fear. I still have a long way to go. I wish I had gotten to know some people and learned how to trust a little more in real life, then maybe I wouldn't be so paralyzed to inaction by my fear of screwing up and having no way to avoid the consequences.

    I suppose the main reason I'm so afraid is because... I've managed to avoid breaking the rules in public even once since I was 8, and the last time I did, I was held down and yelled at by someone. Since I haven't exactly stepped much outside social norms in terms of action (only in terms of thought) since then, I'm terrified of what will happen if I do.

Similar Threads

  1. So what's my type ?
    By entropie in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 10-08-2008, 11:58 PM
  2. So what is my type ?
    By entropie in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-16-2008, 04:27 AM
  3. What's My Type?
    By MuraKoji in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-16-2008, 09:07 AM
  4. Results are here. What's my type?
    By UnitOfPopulation in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 01-27-2008, 09:46 AM
  5. What's my type,
    By Tigerlily in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-09-2007, 02:26 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO