User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 65

  1. #11
    Senior Member Noon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    806

    Default

    ReflecttcelfeR: simulatedworld and Eric B suggested that rather than as skill sets, it can be beneficial to view the functions as perspectives (I assumed it meant that the dominant function would be equal to the person's dominant outlook on the world).

    I struggled with trying to find my type because many functions tests suggested that I was skilled in them unevenly (unevenly as in not consistent with one single specific type), but by viewing them as perspectives, it was much easier for me to realize I am a Fi dom. I'm not sure if it will help you much, but I thought it wouldn't hurt to bring it up.

    I think one more helpful thing can be to check out this thread on double checking your type. I was able to narrow down my choices significantly by keeping in mind my Behind-the-Scenes interaction style and concrete language.

    FWIW, you strike me as an NTP type!

  2. #12
    ReflecTcelfeR
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    i have little sense of this, lol. i have about 500 ideas about how it might go, but i don't have much confidence to pin one as the most likely.
    I can relate to that! Ne speaking.

  3. #13
    Senior Member Moonstone3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    9, 5
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ReflecttcelfeR View Post
    I search for the best possible answer, coupled with a fear of not wanting to make the wrong answer, which makes me contemplate to the max. Still INTP sounding?
    Yes, absolutely! To me.

    P.S. Checked your profile. Looks very INTP, to me. You stay vague. No profile picture? I pained me to put mine up.
    Your biography: I existed. Mine is similar, if posted at all-can't remember. Check out my bible belt-I don't say where.

    Actually, I remember seeing your last type you listed, don't remember it though. I didn't think it fit.
    I could understand and agree with too many of your posts for you to be anything other than INTP.
    I could always be wrong, though.:yim_rolling_on_the_
    What is normal to one, is incomprehensible to another.

    ALL anger in this world stems from a lack of control.


    All of reality bows to the illusion of life and death.

  4. #14
    ReflecTcelfeR
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Noon View Post
    ReflecttcelfeR: simulatedworld and Eric B suggested that rather than as skill sets, it can be beneficial to view the functions as perspectives (I assumed it meant that the dominant function would be equal to the person's dominant outlook on the world).

    I struggled with trying to find my type because many functions tests suggested that I was skilled in them unevenly (unevenly as in not consistent with one single specific type), but by viewing them as perspectives, it was much easier for me to realize I am a Fi dom. I'm not sure if it will help you much, but I thought it wouldn't hurt to bring it up.

    I think one more helpful thing can be to check out this thread on double checking your type. I was able to narrow down my choices significantly by keeping in mind my Behind-the-Scenes interaction style and concrete language.

    FWIW, you strike me as an NTP type!
    That link gave a good confirmation. The temperament description for the last choice was a little difficult for me, but this is because I know about cognitive functions. Thank you. Every thing is worth something.

  5. #15
    ReflecTcelfeR
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Moonstone3 View Post
    Yes, absolutely! To me.

    P.S. Checked your profile. Looks very INTP, to me. You stay vague. No profile picture? I pained me to put mine up.
    Your biography: I existed. Mine is similar, if posted at all-can't remember. Check out my bible belt-I don't say where.

    Actually, I remember seeing your last type you listed, don't remember it though. I didn't think it fit.
    I could understand and agree with too many of your posts for you to be anything other than INTP.
    I could always be wrong, though.:yim_rolling_on_the_
    I think you may have just locked it in. I do feel better now. As much as I enjoy being alone it's nice to know someone else can relate.

  6. #16
    Senior Member Moonstone3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    9, 5
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ReflecttcelfeR View Post
    As much as I enjoy being alone it's nice to know someone else can relate.
    Abso-frickin-lutely.
    You just locked in my opinion of your type to me, as well as my security in mine.
    What is normal to one, is incomprehensible to another.

    ALL anger in this world stems from a lack of control.


    All of reality bows to the illusion of life and death.

  7. #17
    ReflecTcelfeR
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Moonstone3 View Post
    Abso-frickin-lutely.
    You just locked in my opinion of your type to me, as well as my security in mine.
    And that's how it's done. :workout:

  8. #18
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Moonstone3 View Post
    Yes, absolutely! To me.

    P.S. Checked your profile. Looks very INTP, to me. You stay vague. No profile picture? I pained me to put mine up.
    Your biography: I existed. Mine is similar, if posted at all-can't remember. Check out my bible belt-I don't say where.

    Actually, I remember seeing your last type you listed, don't remember it though. I didn't think it fit.
    I could understand and agree with too many of your posts for you to be anything other than INTP.
    I could always be wrong, though.:yim_rolling_on_the_
    Quote Originally Posted by ReflecttcelfeR View Post
    And that's how it's done. :workout:
    d'aww this whole exchange has been cute.

    and yay i'm glad you both figured out your type!!!

  9. #19
    ReflecTcelfeR
    Guest

    Default

    I'm back! What are the chances of me being an F...? This is extremely frustrating. And I changed my I to an E. I'm beginning to doubt why I even tried to type myself in the first place.

  10. #20
    Junior Member Quintessence's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    MBTI
    XNTJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Socionics
    XNTJ
    Posts
    20

    Default

    A Short Treatise on MBTI Traits, with an Emphasis on Delineation of the J/P Trait in Particular

    In reality, we are none of these things per se. We are persons who have souls that we cannot even begin to comprehend unless we open up beyond who we seem to be, leading into who we really are. These systems of personality analysis just help us do that, they don't define us. We define ourselves...

    I define myself far beyond the scope of MBTI and similar tests and assessments. Yet they do have a lot to say about how I might try to "get a grip" on myself and try to fulfill my potential. I know very well that I am introverted, but I also realize that I am extroverted under the right conditions. It is still more stressful for me than it will be for someone who is normally extroverted. That's sort of a baseline of meaning of personality that Jung has established rather beyond reasonable doubt, and it holds to this day, and it seems like it always held but it was waiting for someone like him with enough intellect and guts combined to say it.

    I think that the I/E domain is very accurate, but the other domains are more slippery. They seem less a function of nature than of nurture in some, more of the reverse in others. They seem as though they are built upon the primary I/E orientation as compensatory factors on the one hand, yet with their own functions to fulfill on the other. So, I think that we should allow ourselves more flexibility in thinking about them, because they are rather more dynamic than the I/E trait, and the I/E trait isn't as inflexible as some people seem to think.

    But the brain/mind relation does have a tendency to prefer to resolve cognitive dissonance on the foundational level by weighing down on either I or E. It is a gross economic indicator of the psyche's functioning rather than a function per se, a sort of set of other less clear functions which when all rolled up look like a preference to "reach out to the object" or to "abstract from the object", a preference either to "face the inner object" or else to "project the inner object", for example.

    But when we look at intuition versus sensation we are looking at something that seems to be similarly structured: Does the psyche find more efficiency in relating to the empirical experience, especially as it is immediately given, or does it trust the more synthetic and collective metasensation that seems to be involved? That is something that looks like it is parallel to the I/E question for the psychical economy, but it is more flexible since the domain is more specialized than the overall psychical economy, and it pertains to phenomena which are more distinct and graspable than is the question of subject/object per se. Anyone can grasp sensations, and intuitions have a sort of objective quality to them as well. Yet all these have a subjective intensity which is innately private. They are more of a mixture of subject/object while being distinct in that sensations pertain more to the part and the form when concrete and intuitions pertain to the whole and the content when abstract. So there is a lot of room here for paradigm shifting because abstract sensation and concrete intuitions are possible, though each are a little difficult to imagine. Yet one can see that intuitions may concern forms, and sensations may concern contents (matter as structural, energy as functional). That is kind of abstract in reference to our topic, but we can see that multiple approaches are possible for the same situation depending on one's outlook and paradigm when it comes to intuition and sensation, and the S can understand and compliment the N and vice versa in more tangible ways than can the E and the I. They are able to integrate aspects of the complimentary trait in a way more true to actually specializing in the other trait under certain favorable conditions, even if they are strongly specialized in one of them as opposed to the other. This is a functional reality, but is also a compensatory reality to the I/E foundation which guides it somewhat.

    I think that these two will typically mature into a baseline together so that the orientation and dominant function are pretty stable and are pretty much what Jung laid out. It seems true to what we are. Is it the best description? Probably not. It probably fits into a larger picture that is better nuanced and better related to our actual reality. Even so, I think we only gain by accepting this useful half-measure, as will all other theoretical paradigms that are competently created in earnest sincerity, and then creatively applied with with sincere self-reflection.

    That leaves us with the stragglers which are less metapsychological and less cognitive in terms of basic structure and are more concretely related to conscious will and purpose, more reducible to verifiable functionality. The thinking and feeling are clearly important and clearly more amenable to conscious will, since you can easily suppress or savor feelings, choose to ignore them or choose to follow them, let them color your decisions or choose not to, explore and delineate them or let them remain dull and blurry, shape them into structures with complex systems of peculating energy or let the exist like some sort of wild landscape that you live in with uncontrollable features and weather that you adapt to and live in, whether you like it or not. Your thoughts may be guided or pell-mell, focused or loose, tangential or to the point, complex or simple, abstract or concrete, logical or analogical, analytic or synthetic, applied or abstract. Thought and feeling are much more amenable to your choice of method, much more adaptive to situations as situations demand, much more a result of nurture than of nature in their final form (think of socialization and education, experiences and experiments).

    This brings us down to your issue. Judgment or Perception. This domain is much less a function of foundational psychical structure, or visceral/cerebrotic approaches to experience. These are more a question of cognitive style vs. efficiency. Some find that seeking closure is expedient and demanded by other necessities, some find it saliently more satisfying on emotional grounds or aesthetic ones. Yet all the same could be said for a willingness to let judgment remain labile and exploratory. But even here there could be many complex permutations of rationale which yet cloak a deep-seated motive coming from all the way in the psyche's roots, the I/E trait. This level could show a preference like this: I prefers J due to the capacity to support the somewhat Stoic pattern of psychical functioning this enables, while E prefers P because of the feedback loop with objects and others that maximizes optimal behavior patterns conducive to their well-being. In the end, it could be a mere matter of style or taste on this point, and it could compensate for deeper preferences rather than complement them.

    So I think you may safely know your J or P preference by finding out if you have either a Stoic or an Epicurean mindset with regard to handling the flow of experience in different areas, but especially with regard to emotive/cognitive features. There is probably enough variablity in this area that it could change a lot over life for some, and it could change in different areas while remaining fixed in others.

    I don't like to pinch off thoughts when it comes to something that really interests me, for example, and this is to the dismay of many who would prefer the abridged version. Yet when it comes to handling the influx of data, I am J to the max. I want to reach an assessment and feel it. But I am always amenable to updating it. So there are ways that you may understand the J or P aspect in terms of either inner or outer behavior, in terms of situational requirements or the lack thereof. It may be that you are J with regard to some features of your other three domains or are P dependent upon the way your conscious ego waxes and wanes.

    I could make a pragmatic recommendation, based on all of the above:

    Engage in experiences which shake your psyche up. Do extreme things from time to time and notice how your psyche changes in regards to areas where you are normally J or P in the ensuing periods of time. This, or at least do something extremely unusual. See how you operate in that environment. There are habitual traits people have which show some aspect of this change, such as procrastination. People will put off something until the last minute, then suddenly they are knocking it out. They are "P" with regard to getting it done, but then become suddenly "J" since their time is almost up. They are forced to show their hand. Games of strategy open windows here: when do you finally decide your move? On what basis? How does this change in various circumstances? Are you an opportunistic counter-attacker, for example? Why? Is it because you don't judge the situation to demand a given set of plans? Does an objective analysis of the position reveal that you had access to better and more forceful play but you would simply had rather not done so and so you made moves that lacked structure because your time was running low? That might reveal one way that J and P are relative to conditions. If you are an expert in the King's Gambit, you will flow through decisions in this fast paced, sharp and yet relatively unclear opening system in Chess. If you are not you will need a long period of thinking before you make your moves, none of which have a strategic view and merely are tactical reactions to what your opponent does. The former is more J, the latter more P, and this will change over time in that opening. Do you prefer the J approach in general? You will probably be attracted to openings where sharp tactics are called for since the flow of perception is regulated by necessity and clearly delineated tactical visions. Are you more P in nature? Well you may prefer a decidedly slow and strategic game, where your innate desire to gather more and more experience before closing other psychical processes is less punished by decisive play by an opponent. The exception arises for J's like me, who happen to prefer strategic maneuvering, but this is because we actually can GRASP the strategic concepts and have a strong urge to savor their aesthetics, experiencing tactical motifs as their "skin" or "currency" so to speak. I like to get "J" on the issue of which tactical motif is more productive, which line should I close or open, should I trade this knight for that bishop? It is challenging to be "J" here for non-strategic thinkers, just as it is challenging to be "J" for non-tacticians in open positions.

    J and P can be rather open ended for some who approach life in ways that have just enough complexity that a blunt assessment device cannot capture the overall texture of your functioning here. I'd say check out your condition when under pressure, especially in areas you are well versed in, but also in areas where you are not. Try to see if your J or P sticks out like an adaptive mechanism at some stage of your learning/adapting period. See how it changes its emphasis when you get better/more comfortable.

    Think of the multiverse as a party of infinite magnitude, with an infinite number of participants, and a REALLY GOOD DJ. Our lives are like mini-universes, and we are the DJ's. Play something you can live to!! :smiley_violin:

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-03-2015, 04:08 PM
  2. Questioning my type... am I INTJ, INFJ, or ISFP?
    By theanchorite in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-07-2014, 02:04 PM
  3. INTJ or ISFP? (Ni-Fi or Fi-Ni looping)
    By Nicki in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 02-09-2013, 02:49 PM
  4. INFP or ISFP?
    By Sunshine in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-03-2008, 12:08 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