Thanks a lot for the answers!
Well... as much as I'm trying to look at everything you wrote from an unbiased perspective, I'm still leaning towards an INFP. I'm leaning quite heavily, to tell the truth. I'll try to explain why.
While the main problem with this typing seemed to lie in the fact that you can't identify with Fi as a dominant function, I think that you've been unconsciously using it for all your life. From the very start I've found your desire to become a 'proper SJ' a bit suspicious - it's not like there's anything bad about SJs, it's just that I have yet to meet an SJ who would take so much pride in being an SJ. They just... are. *shrugs* Contrariwise, in your case it all seems to me like some sort of a vision you want to fulfill because you believe it's right - but that's
all Fi. Your appreciation for history also doesn't seem any Te based to me - it sounds to me like you genuinely
love it, and because of that love you want to contribute to it by both your values and your way of life. That's Fi as well. Besides that, you mentioned somewhere earlier that you & your 'SJ-ness' are very different from the rest of your family, which actually extremely reminds me of my INFP (aspiring ISTJ
) brother. My family is so extremely unstructured, N and P that he probably just said 'enough' one day and decided to follow a different set of values. Nevertheless, they were still
values, and no matter how much of a thinker he'll become, he'll always be Fi+Ne deep inside, even if he doesn't take it seriously, just like you don't. (You talked about being an Enneagram 6w5 - having read the descriptions, I suspect my brother might be the same type. Perhaps the similarity with an ISTJ stems from this.)
I'll try to take your answers one by one and explain how I came to my conclusion.
Ruthie said:
1) What is your goal / purpose in life?
This has definitely evolved over the past 6 or 7 years. I used to want to have a supporting role in, or at least a front-row view of, history. I wanted to play a part in the events of my times, so I would always be able to look back and say "I was there," and to fully understand the events of the external world during the years of my life. I hadn't thought it through very well though...
This is all Fi+Ne, imo. It really sounds like a dream, like some sort of an NF vision. It doesn't matter if the vision concerns the future or the past; it's still a vision. The 'I haven't thought it through very well though' part seems fairly NP-ish to me as well.
Actually, it pretty much reminds me of myself as a young teenager. When I was around 13, I totally fell in love with English 19th century novels - living in the past seemed so much appealing to me than living in the present, which is in a way so ripped off imagination. I was confident that I'd be much better suited for the 19th century than the 21st. I wanted to show this love outwardly, so I started wearing 19th century-like outfits and strange hairstyles, and I couldn't care less about what others thought. Besides that, my imagination turned to the 19th century completely and I was constantly making up novels which took place there, and when we were swapping e-mails with my ENTP friend who was also into it, we managed to mimic the style of the novels with a decent mastery.
Ruthie said:
my goals are much simpler now. Now, I mostly I want a happy, stable life; I'd like marriage and children, I want to be able to spend holidays with family, go to Orioles games in the summers, and to chit-chat with the neighbors while I carry the groceries from the car to the house. I still have a bit of that be-part-of-history bug, but I think I've learned enough to believe I can feel a part of it without needing the supporting role/front-row view. Mostly now, I fantasize about being able to teach my future children about the times I've lived in, as well as the times that came before me, and to encourage them to participate in their time and to trust in the values I hope to pass down.
You said it yourself -
'I still have a bit of that be-part-of-history bug, but I think I've learned enough to believe I can feel a part of it without needing the supporting role/front-row view.' It sounds to me like you're mature enough now to be able to reconcile your dreams with reality and come up with a conclusion that is still kind of idealistic but not unrealistic. I think it's very wise of you, and I think it is a beautiful mindset.
Ruthie said:
2) Is it possible for you not to notice details in your environment? Or getting lost in thoughts to the point of being completely oblivious to your surroundings?
Not only possible, it's extremely common. Sometimes I try to make myself focus on an actual object in my environment, and even then I can rarely do it. I'm definitely very caught up in my head and most times am completely oblivious to my surroundings. But for someone with no conscious ability to be in my environment, I have a pretty high degree of coordination. I'm good at most sports that require hand-eye coordination, I can juggle, I have an almost natural grasp of physics (not to be confused with an academic grasp of physics). Also, my memory is excellent, except for visual memory, which is terrible. But I seem to remember facts even when I didn't think I actually absorbed them at the time. Things are much clearer to me in memory than in actual presence in the moment. That's why I think Si is a very high function, and Se... not so much.
Well... I don't want to disappoint you, but this is probably my main argument against you being a Si-dom. People with Si dominant and secondary have a natural grasp of details, and the details include the details in their surrounding as well. They are constantly '
in their environment'. If I'm not badly mistaken, this would be almost a definition of Si, and if it doesn't apply to you, you're probably neither a Si-dom nor a Si-secondary. Actually, I specifically asked my ISTJ boyfriend this particular question, because I found this fact very strange in your former posts; my boyfriend accuses me of 'spacing-out' all the time and he has overall a very good grasp of reality, and he answered no, it would not be possible for him not to notice his surroundings. I believe this is also the reason why other types often find SJs 'nagging' - but they can't help it, they just see discrepancies in the environment that others don't see or don't take notice of, and talking about it is as natural for them as it is for an NP to conjure up fancy theories.
I'd say that what is causing the biggest confusion here is the fact that you seem to consider Si a
judging function (you're 'living your life according to Si'), but Si is not a
judging function, Si is a
perceiving function. It plays a chief role is taking in and processing information, but it does not effect how you
judge the information. You seem to judge everything according to your firm set of 'Si values' - but Si are not values, Fi are values.
It is true that there are some qualities typically associated with the functions - for Si, it's appreciation of history and traditions etc. But the truth is, even though Si often does bring out these characteristics in its users, it is just a 'side effect' of their perception. Actually, in my opinion, all similarities and differences between people eventually boil down to the differences in their perception. This is the core of all typology, imo, not some mystical set of characteristics every type is bound to possess.
Ruthie said:
3) When you discuss theories...
I do all of those things to some extent. I usually have some idea or theory that has been bouncing around in my head for a while. I'll start by trying to iron out the dissonance in my own mind - justify the new theory in accordance with the belief system I've already established. Then I kind of anticipate what the counter-argument would be (I usually imagine my brother's likely points here). I'll collect points and facts to support the theory, and also draw analogies with other ideas, though I rarely go too deep into this. For instance, I'll draw a lot of historical or sociological analogies, but it would be highly unlikely for me to draw in ancient philosophy or art, ya know? By the time we get together, I already have a good idea of my new theory, how it fits in with a larger theory, and the necessary points to make my case. I don't really do any of this consciously... I'll just gnaw on an idea for a while until this process sort of happens.
This is a precise description of how Ne works. I construct theories in the exact same way.
As for the bolded part - you know, with my ISTJ boyfriend there's always the problem that he thinks he's got enough information to create any argument or counterargument. At the beginning of our relationship I always felt unnaturally self-conscious whenever we were discussing something, because he always did his best to break my theories into pieces with his factual arguments and I thought that he didn't appreciate my points of view and thought I was stupid. But then he specified that he didn't think I was stupid; he only thought I was
misinformed. The factual basis of the theory is always no. 1 for Si-doms. Contrastively, for types who use Ne, the search for the analogies and connections between many different (sometimes pretty random) subjects will always be the priority. Ne is primarily open ('everything is possible'); Si is primarily skeptical ('only that which is based on solid facts is possible').
Ruthie said:
Weirdly, we mostly debate political theory which is something we generally agree on. We're both pretty far to the Left, but seem to come at it from entirely different motivations. So I guess most of our debate/discussions focus on the motivations rather than the resulting conclusions.
It reminds me of debates with my old ENTP friend. We understood where the other one was coming from very well, but we still could enrich each other with an entirely different point of view. It's the Fi+Te vs. Ti+Fe, I suppose.
Ruthie said:
Also, I wouldn't consider myself intellectually curious in general. If a topic falls outside my scope of interest, I don't feel a need to learn about it.
Same here
Ruthie said:
It's also important to remember that even though most of this probably sounds N over S, this is just my intellectual life - and not as important to me as how I actually live. I feel a very strong pull to be "home" that is much more powerful than the way I come up with these theories. I don't really like new experiences or adventures, and the intellectual part - while entertaining - is such a small part of who I am.
As I've stated above, if you want to discover your
true type, you have to consider primarily the way you think, not the way you live. If your N function is higher than your S function, which I believe it is, you aren't an S. It's important to remember that any type can lead any life they choose. (That's why I'm convinced that MBTI is absolutely useless for example for career counseling, for which it is, paradoxically, used the most.) Exactly - how you think is such a small part of who you are. But in regards to typology it's vital.
Ruthie said:
You know how there are a handful of romantic comedies that deal with divorced couples getting back together? Those were always my favorites because they focused on coming back to something that was, rather than discovering something new. That feeling of wanting to be close to the past - whether my own past or just the past in general - is much stronger than the process I use to formulate ideas.
I also strongly prefer something that I know and love before something new. It's because of the strong feelings I have for the thing. I think it's the best, so why should I choose something new? I want to be loyal to the thing I like already.
I admit that when I was a teenager, I did have a lot of dreams and sought change - 'the grass was always greener on the other side' for me (I'm talking about major decisions like changing school etc.). However, after I made such a change I started to miss my old life and longed for the previous one to be restored. (I absolutely HATE getting out of touch with old friends, for example, and try to prevent it as much as possible.) But then I kind of 'matured' (I guess) and decided to be satisfied with what I had. When I lost it as well, it was terrible beyond words.
I consider myself a very nostalgic person in general, so I can definitely relate.
(And by the way, I always love it when couples get back together, and not only in romantic comedies.
'Persuasion' by Jane Austen is one of my best-loved books ever.)
4) Do you consider yourself an empirical person? Do you always trust and refer to past experiences? (I mean especially your personal experiences.)
I'd say probably yes. I have a natural skepticism of things I can't observe. I don't remember believing in Santa Claus when I was a child, never believed in any conspiracy theories, and never really entertained the possibility of UFOs, other life forms, etc... I do however have a religious faith, which is obviously based on a belief of something I cannot observe.
In fact, I meant something a little different by my question - I was rather driving at the situation when people think that something will go wrong only because they've already seen something similar and it did go wrong. But your answer is also interesting - in fact, I can very much relate to that. I've never believed in Little Jesus (the variation of Santa in my country
), I'm fairly skeptical towards conspiracy theories (it feels like people are connecting facts that in fact aren't related - talk about bad use of Ne!), and when my classmates at junior high were experimenting with magic and esoteric, I thought they were idiots.
Contrariwise, from time to time my boyfriend gets obsessed with UFOs and conspiracy theories (not mentioning that my ISTJ friend used to be the chief 'witch' in our class ><), which seem to really disturb him, far more than they could ever disturb me, because I always have the 'everything is possible, even that not everything is possible!' mindset. Inferior Ne might either completely focus on one thing or completely reject it, just as it happens with tertiary Si.
Ruthie said:
5) Is it easy for your to analyze your feelings / feelings of others? Which one do you find easier: tuning into your own feelings, or the feelings of others?
Probably my own, but it's not something I really think about. I don't struggle to figure out how I feel about something, but I don't really focus on it either. With others, I feel like I can intellectualize where they're coming from, but I can't really empathize. Usually I end up giving advice that would help me if I were in their situation but doesn't take into account how they deal with the same set of problems. So, I end up thinking I'm good at figuring people out, but I'm only good at measuring their situation against how I would feel in that situation.
This pretty much excludes Fe, if it was still an option. Again, analyzing feelings = Fi; drawing analogies = Ne. In my experience, Ni types are more capable of giving individual advice because they can focus on the single situation, but for Ne types, it's more simple to relate it to something they know. I certainly do this too, and every INFP friend of mine does it as well. That's why it always feels good to vent to them, but I can't count with them for any real advice.
Ruthie said:
6) Do you try to solve interpersonal situations with the help of reason, or you rather try to tune into feelings of those involved?
Definitely reason. I don't overvalue reason as a solution, and I see a lot of shortcomings in its use, but I'm still more comfortable using it when trying to help others than I am tuning into their feelings.
This points to Te and excludes Fe once more. You seem to be pretty comfortable with Te, no question - but I don't think it necessarily excludes the Fi dominant. Personally, I had to learn to act a little more empathetic and warm towards people because I wasn't treated well at school and thought it was unfair of others
, so I opened up a little more. But it's definitely not natural for me, and many INFPs I know seem pretty reserved to other people than closest friends, and I think we all try to give each other rather rational advice than feeling advice, because we know the other one
needs it. However, when I talk to my ISTJ friends, I use more Fi, because they need help with that.
7) Do you think that when you're deciding, feelings and reason are inseparable? Which one do you constantly put higher?
Don't know. I can be pretty impulsive when it comes to buying things - even major purchases like my house. But when it comes to personal relationships, particularly romantic relationships, I feel like I use reason pretty well. I don't get involved in relationships I know are doomed to fail from the start. I'm very cautious and don't get too caught up in romance.
This again seems like a balanced Te and Fi. I used to be pretty impulsive when it came to romance, but as I'm getting older I also use reason more and more, even though my feeling (values) always wins. 'Stereotypical INFP' is impulsive when it comes to romance, but the reality is often different.
8) Why does your brother think you're an INFJ?
I don't know that he knows functions theory. Pretty sure he just went letter by letter to determine what he thought. He thinks I'm F over T because I tease him for being overly rational. He thinks any problem can be reasoned through objectively, and I'm much more of a subjective thinker. He likes to entertain all kinds of possibilities, and I choose a side, stick with it, and build my arguments around it. Personally, I think that's more J vs. P, but he sees it as T vs. F.
I agree with your brother on the first two - it definitely sounds like F. (I really can't imagine any of my ISTJ friends teasing someone for being overly rational!
) The last one might be a J thing, but as your dominant functions are most likely neither Si nor Ni, it seems to be a Fi thing. You choose a side which corresponds to what you believe in, I assume.
Ruthie said:
As for the N vs. S, like I said, he doesn't know functions theory. If given the stark choice of N vs. S as its classically understood, I'd probably assume I'm an N also - mostly because I'm usually caught up in my head and don't notice the environment. But when you look at the functions, you can't miss the Si in me, and he would probably agree. He always gets after me for having such quirky and consistent routines, he knows I try harder than he does to "fit in," knows I prefer very realistic forms of entertainment, and he marvels at my ability to retain information, particularly dates. He also knows I'm drawn to the past and put a lot of trust in it, while he is highly skeptical of the past and is concerned by the fact that decisions are made on the basis of tradition. I don't think I fall back on tradition without thinking about it. But I would say that after I consider alternatives, I usually find tradition to be the comfortable choice and something worth defending.
Again - as I've explained in my earlier post, I think your routines in fact indicate a lower position of Si, not the highest one. The memory for dates does point to well-developed Si at a certain level, but I've observed it in INFPs as well (my dad is a historian of architecture, my brother is an archeologist, and I had at least one INFP History teacher at high school). I think you remember it because you love it and find it entertaining - well, in areas that I'm very interested in, I have excellent memory for facts as well. To sum it up, I don't think anything you wrote above is exclusive with being an INFP.
9) (Ok, this is kind of lame but) How would you describe your clothing style?
I go with comfort. I love having jobs that let me dress down, and I wish every day were casual Friday. I wear very boring colors, and feel most confident when I blend in and am dressed appropriately for a situation.
Ok... it was a lame question. Clothing style probably isn't a reliable indicator when it comes to typing people.
Ruthie said:
Very interesting questions. I'm interested to see how my answers are interpreted...
I hope my interpretation has been at least a little valuable to you. I believe that you're an INFP who sticks to traditional values because they are beautiful. But in the end, all types are wonderful in their own way, so go with anything that feels comfortable.
(But I'll always think you're an INFP, anyway!
*stubborn*)
And now, let's get back to my homework!
