Have you ever bothered to consider the origins of Myers Briggs?
The problem is that most SJ's don't value the intuition necessary for such self-analysis, so they often just take the online test results for face value.
Exactly, which was my whole point there. Except that I don't see it as a problem, really, just a common tendency, as valid as any other.
I am still bloody questioning my type, even though I've seen the ISFJ functions manifested in innumerable situations in my life. At times I seem more INTP, like online. At times I even can seem ENTP. I've considered thus far: INFJ, ISTJ, ESFJ, ISFP, and INTP. If you cared to look into functional analysis, you'd see the reasons for considering alternatives of both ESFJ and INTP as well.
And that leads me to believe you are probably not SJ either. Though I could see an ISFJ spending a little more time on this stuff than an ESTJ would. I mean, you don't really believe an ESTJ would spend this much time discussing her "personality type" on an internet forum, do you?
Come on, man! This is just laughably closed-minded and painfully ignorant. Getting on an MBTI forum and posting all the time without giving half a rat's anal cavity about Jung is like writing a book about the history of rock n' roll without mentioning The Beatles! Know your roots!
No, it really isn't at all comparable. You can make posts on a message board about current music without caring at all about the Beatles. I'm not writing a book, and the books I mostly cite for my information about typology come from people who give plenty of respect to Jung, they just don't blindly follow everything he put forth and accept it all as gospel.
You can listen to Beatles records and watch tape of their performances. You don't have to assume the music was good or bad or even culturally relevant. The evidence is right there to evaluate. Jung's functional theories are speculation and assumption. I'm not arguing that he was a dumbass, if anything I think he would be the one that would most vehemently disagree with the way his theories have been misused by people, and this forum is hotbed of people spouting things like they have every human being figured out by the time they reach their twenties.
So forgive me for not buying the hogwash that spews forth from many of them. It doesn't make me close-minded, it's quite the opposite. I am open-minded enough to think for myself and evaluate individual concepts for their own validity and not just accept whatever is shoved down my throat from people who think they know it all.
Originally Posted by incubustribute
Seriously though, I picked up Jung's writings the other day in a Borders, and let me tell you: it pains me to see so many members on here dogmatically denying the usefulness of cognitive functions. YOU WOULDN'T HAVE MBTI WITHOUT COGNITIVE FUNCTIONS!
Who are these "so many members?" I am one of the few people here who does much questioning of the Gospel of Cognitive Functions besides people that are just trolling like Victor. And I don't put the MBTI on a pedestal either, so your statement doesn't have much of an impact on me. But again, you're just speculating. Someone could have easily come up with a similar dichotomy system for typing people like Isabel Myers did without specifically citing Jung's function theories. It might have had different names, but it's entirely possible to do so. And the abundance of online personality tests using all sorts of strange systems should be further evidence of that.
I don't go around telling people how to live their life. If wrapping yourself up in Jung is what you want to do, then more power to you. But I am free to have the opinion that it's not as useful as other stuff is. That doesn't make me closed-minded, it just means I have a different opinion. I have no problem admitting my ignorance of many things. I'm not insecure about that. My advice to Linguist in this thread has been because I consider her a friend who is fun to talk to and a person I enjoy interacting with and care about. So there's nothing wrong with me weighing in with my view about something she asked for help with, and criticizing what I feel is misinformation when she's bombarded with it.
Originally Posted by Wonkavision
To all the people commenting on Linguist's type:
How much have you actually interacted with her?
Have you ever talked to her in person?
Have you talked to her in Vent, or have you only read her posts?
How much does just reading someone's posts really tell you about the person?
And how good are you at "reading people" in general, anyway?
You can disregard my opinion all you want, but I've interacted with Linguist a lot in Vent, which is much more than I can say for many of you.
And as an ENFP, I am very skilled at reading people I interact with.
That's not a myth. ENFPs really have a talent for that shit.
I don't claim to know for sure what her type is, but I've interacted with her in Vent and looked at this mystery from many angles --and I feel very confident that she is ENFJ.
All this wild speculation is pretty interesting, but at the end of the day, how much have you actually GOTTEN TO KNOW Little Linguist?
After all, its pretty ridiculous to TYPE a PERSON without actually GETTING TO KNOW the PERSON.......ISN'T IT?
Great post, dude. And as you know, I've interacted with Carolyn quite a bit. And almost all the time it's been fun. Even when we argued about the meaning of the word "West."
And I agree with your type assessment. When you don't try to over-complicate things, and you just look at what's obvious, ENFJ does seem like the best fit to me.