Its me the ISTP, nah maybe its INTP

[rfossr]

In 7th grade I took the mbti and was ISTP, along with only two other kids in my grade (70+ kids), one had severe learning diasbilities and talked extremely slow, the other always took everything apart and was good at drawing, i wasn't like them at all.
Then in 12th grade I took the test again and got the same thing ISTP. I was still playing sports but started to get into music. Got a guitar and learned how to play.
Now: just a week ago i had to take some intelligence testing and mental health tests and stuff and when my results came back i was INTP.
I don't know what to think now. I was always an active child who excelled in school. Now my room is filled with books on psycholody and social influence and ways to get rich and self improvement books. I still play golf but no other sports. I can make up stories easily and enjoy humor.
Any ideas?

 

[Asterion]

There's not much info here really, that description could fit either INTP or ISTP.

Intuitives - more imaginative, don't tend to talk about what is, but rather, what could have been, or what could be. eg. an intuitive may think about what a builder was thinking when he put that building there, or rules put in place for a sport.

Sensors - more concrete, like to discuss topics that affect them directly, they would tend to discuss something entirely 'on topic'. They might talk about a footy game, something that they feel, or in the building case, they might talk about a person they knew who worked there.

If you talk to enough of each different type, you get a pretty good feel for them. Either type can be imaginative, or concrete, it's just that some types prefer one aspect over the other.

 

[rfossr]

king despair, im getting closer to thinking i'm an N, but heres some more info:
i often trying to answering the question WHY? like why are they doing that, why did he say that, why is that set up that way
and i can be very spontaneous and often people need me to explain my humor or comments, this makes me think im N, but the fact that i love sports and the outdoors and driving my car keeps me thinking maybe i'm S, also i tend to be able to make things out of nothing, like little inventions, so their is still doubt. I don't know too much about the MBTI but i really want to figure out what "personality type" i have, if this info helps please respond
cheers

 

[VagrantFarce]

Let's quickly look at functions:

Both types have dominant Introverted Thinking: they want to get down to the bottom of things, figure things out for themselves, and understand their experiences in an ordered, logical manner.

ISTPs primarily interact with the world via "Extraverted Sensing": they're right here, right now, "live for the moment" types. They want to make a physical impact, be loud and impressive, and enjoy chaotic, "hands-on" activities.
ISTPs become introspective primarily through "Introverted Intuition": they enjoy shifting perspective and meaning, finding the right framework of variables that helps fix a problem or clarify a point. They understand meaning and context in terms of the assumptions that people bring into the world.

INTPs primarily interact with the world using "Extraverted Intuition": they're natural brainstormers, jumping from one idea to the other, constantly making new connections between things and following them wherever they go.
INTPs become introspective primarily through "Introverted Sensation": they can be sticklers for detail, but only selectively: unlike Extraverted Sensing, they might dwell on the significance of small details that mean very little to everyone else, and to the exclusion of other, seemingly more important details.

Both types have Inferior Extraverted Feeling: they want to join in and be a part of others lives, but they feel conflict between what they choose to focus on (informed by either Si or Ni) and what others might tolerate or find interesting. They might dwell on how other people are stupid, and feel unable to play the same social "game" that everyone else plays. They might become uncharacteristically overemotional, and interpret the actions or intentions of others as somehow malicious. By choosing to embrace their extraverted functions, they can let go of their own individualistic obsessions and find a new way to relate to others.

Anyway, stuff to chew on. Sorry it's a bit rough.

 

[Jeffster]

ISTPs become introspective primarily through "Introverted Intuition": they enjoy shifting perspective and meaning, finding the right framework of variables that helps fix a problem or clarify a point. They understand meaning and context in terms of the assumptions that people bring into the world.

INTPs become introspective primarily through "Introverted Sensation": they can be sticklers for detail, but only selectively: unlike Extraverted Sensing, they might dwell on the significance of small details that mean very little to everyone else, and to the exclusion of other, seemingly more important details.

Both types have Inferior Extraverted Feeling: they want to join in and be a part of others lives, but they feel conflict between what they choose to focus on (informed by either Si or Ni) and what others might tolerate or find interesting. They might dwell on how other people are stupid, and feel unable to play the same social "game" that everyone else plays. They might become uncharacteristically overemotional, and interpret the actions or intentions of others as somehow malicious. By choosing to embrace their extraverted functions, they can let go of their own individualistic obsessions and find a new way to relate to others.

How do you know?

 

[VagrantFarce]

How do you know?

GEE I DUNNO

 

[BlackCat]

How do you know?

How do you not know?

 

[rfossr]

im thinking that im maybe like 60% N and 40% S if thats even possible.

 

[Jeffster]

GEE I DUNNO

I didn't think so.

How do you not know?

Because I have not seen compelling evidence.

 

[rhinosaur]

im thinking that im maybe like 60% N and 40% S if thats even possible.

Yes, I think that's possible. There is nothing wrong with calling yourself IxTP or InTP. In my opinion, MBTI is most useful if you think about it as a kind of loose framework or sketch of a person's personality. Many people straddle the boundary between two types.

 

[Jeffster]

Many people straddle the boundary between two types.

That's hot.

 

[Craft]

im thinking that im maybe like 60% N and 40% S if thats even possible.

I don't know if MBTI allows that.

@OP

Check what you always look forward to in conversations. I, myself, always try to force it in the theoretical(religion,political theories, personal development thereos etc.) discussion.

 

[VagrantFarce]

I didn't think so.



Because I have not seen compelling evidence.

You want evidence? Read a book. Look and listen to people. Put 2 and 2 together. This is all theory inferred from subjective observation and anecdotal evidence, and what I was describing was a theoretical archetype. You won't find empirical, objective evidence, because there's no way to accurately measure any of this.

 

[Jeffster]

You want evidence? Read a book. Look and listen to people. Put 2 and 2 together. This is all theory inferred from subjective observation and anecdotal evidence, and what I was describing was a theoretical archetype. You won't find empirical, objective evidence, because there's no way to accurately measure any of this.

Some assumptions are necessary to form archetypes, of course. But not to the degree which you and others take them. If you stick to the traits that are actually observable, the theory holds up better. The more that you make blanket statements about thought processes that are entirely speculation and not observable, the farther away you get from anything that's actually useful.

The set-in-stone function order theory makes too many assumptions in proportion to the amount of actual "subjective observation and anecdotal evidence." It gets into an "all elephants are pink" zone very quickly. You don't even have to go further than this very forum to find plenty of anecdotal evidence that contradicts that theory. If it can't even hold up in a group as small as the one assembled on this website, I have serious doubts about it holding up in the population at large.

 

[Oaky]

I don't know if MBTI allows that.

Well why not?

I made a few diagrams back to show proper correlation between movement of
the functions. Think of it like liking broccoli.

Some love it. Some like it. Some are neutral. Some don't like it. Some hate it.

It's quite analogue as to how much one loves it or hates it. It's not 'black and white'

Here's 2 of the diagrams I made:

 

[Craft]

Here's 2 of the diagrams I made:

Sorry, I don't quite understand your diagrams. How is the INTX not INTX?

 

[VagrantFarce]

Some assumptions are necessary to form archetypes, of course. But not to the degree which you and others take them. If you stick to the traits that are actually observable, the theory holds up better. The more that you make blanket statements about thought processes that are entirely speculation and not observable, the farther away you get from anything that's actually useful.

But they're not entirely speculation, they're based on descriptions that people give. They're identifiable in the way that people come to decisions, what authorities they appeal to in argument, how they express themselves in general. Jung didn't just decide to invent them out of thin air, because HURF DURF

The set-in-stone function order theory makes too many assumptions in proportion to the amount of actual "subjective observation and anecdotal evidence." It gets into an "all elephants are pink" zone very quickly. You don't even have to go further than this very forum to find plenty of anecdotal evidence that contradicts that theory. If it can't even hold up in a group as small as the one assembled on this website, I have serious doubts about it holding up in the population at large.

Your assumption (and almost everyone else's on this forum) is that the function order seeks to define a person's entire personality and ability - that we can somehow group all behaviour and experiences into these eight categories. In reality, what the function order is able to illustrate is how people naturally think and make decisions, what criteria they fall back on and what helps them grow- and it does it surprisingly well, in my opinion. These things don't sum up a person entirely, but that doesn't mean that they're without merit -they're just one small part of the picture.

 

[Oaky]

Sorry, I don't quite understand your diagrams. How is the INTX not INTX?

Introversion and extraversion would be equal if one is borderline P/J because the dominant function is both the introverted and extraverted function.

 

[Craft]

Introversion and extraversion would be equal if one is borderline P/J because the dominant function is both the introverted and extraverted function.

You mean Ti versus Te? I really don't get it...

 

[Oaky]

You mean Ti versus Te? I really don't get it...

Ti, Te, Ni and Ne would all be dominant if one is INTX which would actually mean he is XNTX.