Thoughts on my type version 2.0

[greenfairy]

I was reading some Keirsey last night and saw a lot of NF in your posts based on his description of the Idealist type.

There's a lot of good comments in that thread on PerC. It's debatable to me that there's even such a thing as personal ethics per se because those are limited to birthplace and historical context. And then a universal ethics is either a set of values that everyone normally believes everywhere, or values that they should believe everywhere normatively. But such finer distinctions are rarely made on forums where nobody has read a book on ethics, just a webpage or two at wikipedia.

As far as my ethics go, it is mostly applying objectively true impersonal principles to social areas based on what produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people, balancing the needs of individuals against each other. It probably looks NF, but the thing is I think some amount of idealism is necessary and true and fits neatly into this objective way of looking at things. Like we all recognize the value of something, like being free from political oppression. To that end, that ideal, we act in accordance. An ideal is simply a vision of a positive situation which one would like to manifest. It might be possible or it might not, but it is logical to get as close to this situation as possible within reason. If you think of ideals as "perfection," then it is like an asymptote you move ever closer to but never reach. But you still go toward it, even though you know it is technically unattainable. If you modify your idea of perfection to be the best possible situation that could occur, it is completely attainable, and everyone acts to that end (of producing the best possible situation) whether they are consciously aware of it or not. That is just the way humans work.

Anyway, that's kind of a long winded explanation, but it serves to put idealism within the context of rationalism. I think I am more NT than NF because reason has the final say in everything.

And if my value/ethical system is not significantly different than other INTP's, I see no reason to think it has anything to do with Fi and everything to do with developed Fe (and maybe developing Fi as a shadow function). But good point about the NF idealism, a lot of it does apply to me- just within a rational context.

This is only confirming my INFJ call for you. It's not about being 100% this or that, and the scales tip toward J. But if you think more in terms of Ti (objectivity and logic) then I'd look into the concept of a NiTi loop which I've seen played out quite often.

I may look into this Ni-Ti loop thing.

 

[Mal12345]

As far as my ethics go, it is mostly applying objectively true impersonal principles to social areas based on what produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people, balancing the needs of individuals against each other. It probably looks NF, but the thing is I think some amount of idealism is necessary and true and fits neatly into this objective way of looking at things. Like we all recognize the value of something, like being free from political oppression. To that end, that ideal, we act in accordance. An ideal is simply a vision of a positive situation which one would like to manifest. It might be possible or it might not, but it is logical to get as close to this situation as possible within reason. If you think of ideals as "perfection," then it is like an asymptote you move ever closer to but never reach. But you still go toward it, even though you know it is technically unattainable. If you modify your idea of perfection to be the best possible situation that could occur, it is completely attainable, and everyone acts to that end (of producing the best possible situation) whether they are consciously aware of it or not. That is just the way humans work.

Anyway, that's kind of a long winded explanation, but it serves to put idealism within the context of rationalism. I think I am more NT than NF because reason has the final say in everything.

And if my value/ethical system is not significantly different than other INTP's, I see no reason to think it has anything to do with Fi and everything to do with developed Fe (and maybe developing Fi as a shadow function). But good point about the NF idealism, a lot of it does apply to me- just within a rational context.

INTP, in your case, contains the helper function Ti. But what's important is the external drive toward an apparently Kantian personal and social perfection. The reward lies in seeing this accomplished. And I, as an INTP, know that my reward is not external, it lies in the beauty of an internal system (such as pure mathematics).

 

[greenfairy]

Interesting point. And I do find a lot of reward in my internal system as well. But I don't think it is reasonable to think all INTP's are completely detached from the well being of their fellow humans.

 

[Mal12345]

Interesting point. And I do find a lot of reward in my internal system as well. But I don't think it is reasonable to think all INTP's are completely detached from the well being of their fellow humans.

I didn't say that. However, wouldn't that be pathological, schizoidal? I hardly think all INTPs are schizoidal.

 

[greenfairy]

Yes; I'm just having trouble distinguishing the difference between other people's ideas of INTP detachment and what I have said, because it looks the same to me (obviously the reason I started the thread).

I mean, like I said, ethics and all that isn't my main driving force in life, it is probably secondary. First I want to know truth, and second I want to live in a happy world with happy people and have good relationships.

 

[Mal12345]

Yes; I'm just having trouble distinguishing the difference between other people's ideas of INTP detachment and what I have said, because it looks the same to me (obviously the reason I started the thread).

I mean, like I said, ethics and all that isn't my main driving force in life, it is probably secondary. First I want to know truth, and second I want to live in a happy world with happy people and have good relationships.

Detachment can be just for show, or it can be a desire of those who intensely dislike people and want to escape from society into a more Platonic realm of Reason, to escape into a hermite-like existence. Detachment can also be of a more healthy variety, a sort of Buddhist detachment from life that doesn't require escaping.

"Truth" is too general a term to be meaningful here. Truth can be intellectual (metaphysical, philosophical) or mystical (religious or otherwise).

 

[greenfairy]

I want to know truth in all of those areas, and it is a huge driving force for me.

I do think I live in a pretty detached way, kind of like in the Buddhist sense. I'm also pretty detached with people. I care about people a lot, I just don't really like to or know how to show it unless I'm in an intimate relationship with someone. I've been accused of emotionally neglecting people. And romantically I'm so detached sometimes I've wondered if there's something wrong with me (despite my expectation of rejection- maybe it's because I reject other people).

*My romantic behavior is far more like INTP than INFP, and that was one thing that convinced me of my type.

 

[Mal12345]

I want to know truth in all of those areas, and it is a huge driving force for me.

I do think I live in a pretty detached way, kind of like in the Buddhist sense. I'm also pretty detached with people. I care about people a lot, I just don't really like to or know how to show it unless I'm in an intimate relationship with someone. I've been accused of emotionally neglecting people. And romantically I'm so detached sometimes I've wondered if there's something wrong with me (despite my expectation of rejection- maybe it's because I reject other people).

*My romantic behavior is far more like INTP than INFP, and that was one thing that convinced me of my type.

How much does SimulatedWorld's description of the NiTi loop fit you?

"ISTP/INFJ: Ti/Ni or Ni/Ti--Schizoid Personality Disorder. These types are socially incompetent for lack of trying, because they see little to no value in significant interaction with others. They live in their own abstract worlds, constantly second-guessing themselves as Ti poses a framework for a problem and Ni shoots it down as too definitionally precise. Without any real external input, these two functions will dream up all sorts of elaborate systems and implications for them, only to repeat their own self-defeating behavior, never bothering to emphasize putting any of its intense ideas into practice. Frequent disregard for rules, laws and other forms of behavioral standards is common, as no function provides any significant sense of external influence. If Se/Fe were doing its job, the user would recognize the value of connecting with others and of paying attention to their needs, preferences, habits and appearances."

The INTP is more the Schizotypal type, come to think of it. Like Einstein.

 

[Mal12345]

I want to know truth in all of those areas, and it is a huge driving force for me.

I do think I live in a pretty detached way, kind of like in the Buddhist sense. I'm also pretty detached with people. I care about people a lot, I just don't really like to or know how to show it unless I'm in an intimate relationship with someone. I've been accused of emotionally neglecting people. And romantically I'm so detached sometimes I've wondered if there's something wrong with me (despite my expectation of rejection- maybe it's because I reject other people).

*My romantic behavior is far more like INTP than INFP, and that was one thing that convinced me of my type.

Here is a webpage that is more specific to your post, concerning rejection sensitivity:

http://www.excelatlife.com/articles/fear_of_rejection5.htm

It's more helpful to deal with specific identifiable issues than to try typing oneself according to some vague and confusing typology.

 

[greenfairy]

I don't know really. It's kind of a confusing description. I do try, I'm just socially awkward. And in putting my ideas into practice sometimes the details and risks seem overwhelming, so since I've already visualized it for the future, sometimes my unconscious mind imagines I've already done it because I can see it. It's kinda weird.

I actually don't think there's something wrong with me, I'm just really unusual because it's like my attachment to people is directly proportional to what I mentally think is appropriate to the situation. I have to give myself permission to feel attached to people, and it's an unconscious thing. And even then if they were to reject me, that would all go away and I would walk away and not look back. Because it's illogical to be attached to people who don't want you. And it's not really that I am closed off either; I can have a lot of fun and be affectionate with people, and see us as friends. We just might always be just friends, even if we act like a couple.

 

[Mal12345]

I don't know really. It's kind of a confusing description. I do try, I'm just socially awkward. And in putting my ideas into practice sometimes the details and risks seem overwhelming, so since I've already visualized it for the future, sometimes my unconscious mind imagines I've already done it because I can see it. It's kinda weird.

I actually don't think there's something wrong with me, I'm just really unusual because it's like my attachment to people is directly proportional to what I mentally think is appropriate to the situation. I have to give myself permission to feel attached to people, and it's an unconscious thing. And even then if they were to reject me, that would all go away and I would walk away and not look back. Because it's illogical to be attached to people who don't want you. And it's not really that I am closed off either; I can have a lot of fun and be affectionate with people, and see us as friends. We just might always be just friends, even if we act like a couple.

That sounds very different from my interpersonal interactions and judgments.

 

[greenfairy]

Here is a webpage that is more specific to your post, concerning rejection sensitivity:

http://www.excelatlife.com/articles/fear_of_rejection5.htm

It's more helpful to deal with specific identifiable issues than to try typing oneself according to some vague and confusing typology.

I'm definitely going to read this. It sounds like me.

But, inferior Fe is said to be like this.

 

[Mal12345]

I'm definitely going to read this. It sounds like me.

But, inferior Fe is said to be like this.

And yet previously you wrote:

" it is mostly applying objectively true impersonal principles to social areas based on what produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people, balancing the needs of individuals against each other. It probably looks NF"

It probably does, as well as IJ. But then you treat it as secondary, although you said "mostly" in the quote.

 

[greenfairy]

That sounds very different from my interpersonal interactions and judgments.

Hmm. I know people of one type can show the traits differently, but I think even if I was completely healthy I would behave more like INTP. And sexually I am more NT than NF. I know a lot of NT's do show an emotional connection sexually, but that is the typical domain of the NF's. They need to feel emotionally connected to be intimate, or being intimate increases their emotional connection. Whereas I behave like a stereotypical guy. I do feel a sense of intimacy with people, and it makes me feel closer to them; it's just not romantic. My romantic feelings are completely separate. And during the experience I connect more on a spiritual level than emotional. And it really wouldn't bother me to have a special experience with someone and then not see them again. I know the way I am describing this is probably not like the type descriptions, but it is the general idea behind it.

http://www.keirsey.com/personalityzone/lz35.asp
http://www.keirsey.com/personalityzone/lz34.asp

 

[greenfairy]

And yet previously you wrote:

" it is mostly applying objectively true impersonal principles to social areas based on what produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people, balancing the needs of individuals against each other. It probably looks NF"

It probably does, as well as IJ. But then you treat it as secondary, although you said "mostly" in the quote.

No I mean mostly as in most of what it consists of. That's how it works. I just don't think about it all the time.

 

[SoraMayhem]

And sexually I am more NT than NF. I know a lot of NT's do show an emotional connection sexually, but that is the typical domain of the NF's. They need to feel emotionally connected to be intimate, or being intimate increases their emotional connection. Whereas I behave like a stereotypical guy.

Guess I've been doing it wrong then.

 

[greenfairy]

Guess I've been doing it wrong then.

Well like I say, this is me and not everyone. But the underlying principles behind my behavior are more like what I've read for INTP. Not saying every NT should be like me and everyone else is NF.

This has just been my impression of the differences based on what I've read and observed in other people.

 

[Mal12345]

Hmm. I know people of one type can show the traits differently, but I think even if I was completely healthy I would behave more like INTP. And sexually I am more NT than NF. I know a lot of NT's do show an emotional connection sexually, but that is the typical domain of the NF's. They need to feel emotionally connected to be intimate, or being intimate increases their emotional connection. Whereas I behave like a stereotypical guy. I do feel a sense of intimacy with people, and it makes me feel closer to them; it's just not romantic. My romantic feelings are completely separate. And during the experience I connect more on a spiritual level than emotional. And it really wouldn't bother me to have a special experience with someone and then not see them again. I know the way I am describing this is probably not like the type descriptions, but it is the general idea behind it.

http://www.keirsey.com/personalityzone/lz35.asp
http://www.keirsey.com/personalityzone/lz34.asp

The word "spiritual" really stands out here.

Which of these seven Jungian archetypes do you identify with most?

The hero: Rescuer, champion
The maiden: Purity, desire
The wise old man: Knowledge, guidance
The magician: Mysterious, powerful
The earth mother: Nature
The witch or sorceress: Dangerous
The trickster: Deceiving, hidden

http://changingminds.org/explanations/identity/jung_archetypes.htm

 

[SoraMayhem]

Well like I say, this is me and not everyone. But the underlying principles behind my behavior are more like what I've read for INTP. Not saying every NT should be like me and everyone else is NF.

I was just making a point that NFs can have NSA sex, one night stands, and FWB-style relationships.

 

[greenfairy]

The word "spiritual" really stands out here.

Which of these seven Jungian archetypes do you identify with most?

The hero: Rescuer, champion
The maiden: Purity, desire
The wise old man: Knowledge, guidance
The magician: Mysterious, powerful
The earth mother: Nature
The witch or sorceress: Dangerous
The trickster: Deceiving, hidden

http://changingminds.org/explanations/identity/jung_archetypes.htm

Yeah I thought it would. It's such a charged word that people have all kinds of associations with. What I mean is in a tantric way, of the divine energy in me connecting with the divine energy in someone else. We are divinity because we are alive and have spirits. Sacred harmony between feminine and masculine forces on the physical plane. And I can do this with anyone, and we don't have to be in a relationship.

I'll look at those and get back to you.

I just wanted to clear that up and not be thrown into the NF bag just because I have a sense of spirituality.