My boyfriend: ESTJ or ENTJ?

[rav3n]

First of all, you got the ESTP process incorrect before. If Se feeds Ti, then that puts Ti first, in that Se serves Ti evidence for a theory or hypothesis, let's say, why the car is putting out so much smoke.

Why does this put Ti first? And in what way is this even relevant, from the perspective of your argument that Se/Ti are somehow predictive?

Secondly, this analysis isn't capturing the essence of any personality under question here. Pod'Lair got it right by stating that their version of Se-dom focuses on the enjoyment of the senses, it is not merely engaged in the gathering of information like a computer.

It quite clearly captures the first coping strategy of the ESTP. As far as Pol'Lair, don't give a flying fuck about it.

 

[Mal12345]

Why does this put Ti first? And in what way is this even relevant, from the perspective of your argument that Se/Ti are somehow predictive?

It quite clearly captures the first coping strategy of the ESTP. As far as Pol'Lair, don't give a flying fuck about it.

I already had that notion about the Se-dom before reading Pod'Lair. I don't care for it, on the other hand, they do give some colorful descriptions of types. I take what I want and leave the rest, even if the rest is 99% of the total.

Ti comes first because Se in this case is reduced to an information-gathering function. If Se was first, Ti would be reduced to a logic-producing system. But in your analysis, they are both in the auxiliary position: information-gathering and logic-producing.

It just goes back to what I said before, you're not capturing the essence of personality here. Just elements of cognition. That's all those are.

 

[rav3n]

I already had that notion about the Se-dom before reading Pod'Lair. I don't care for it, on the other hand, they do give some colorful descriptions of types. I take what I want and leave the rest, even if the rest is 99% of the total.

Ti comes first because Se in this case is reduced to an information-gathering function. If Se was first, Ti would be reduced to a logic-producing system. But in your analysis, they are both in the auxiliary position: information-gathering and logic-producing.

It just goes back to what I said before, you're not capturing the essence of personality here. Just elements of cognition. That's all those are.

No. ESTPs lead with Se. Ti supports Se. Together, they merge to create the first coping strategy. Reliance on concrete externalities that get fed to a logic function. The logic function feeds back to Se which then reacts. Sometimes Se just reacts on its own.

But again, you're going down a rabbit hole. WTF does any of this have to do with calling either predictive or forecasting functions? You're dissembling because you don't want to admit you're wrong.

 

[Mal12345]

No. ESTPs lead with Se. Ti supports Se. Together, they merge to create the first coping strategy. Reliance on concrete externalities that get fed to a logic function. The logic function feeds back to Se which then reacts. Sometimes Se just reacts on its own.

But again, you're going down a rabbit hole. WTF does any of this have to do with calling either predictive or forecasting functions? You're dissembling because you don't want to admit you're wrong.

I appreciate your analysis in the first paragraph. But I never mentioned any functions until you brought up functions. I don't need intuition to predict things, for that I only need experience.

 

[rav3n]

I appreciate your analysis in the first paragraph. But I never mentioned any functions until you brought up functions. I don't need intuition to predict things, for that I only need experience.

Again, rabbit hole since you have Si as your secondary coping strategy which is irrelevant to ESTPs.

 

[Mal12345]

Again, rabbit hole since you have Si as your secondary coping strategy which is irrelevant to ESTPs.

I have no idea what that means. Experience does not mean "Si." Si deals in concrete symbols and imagery from the unconscious.

 

[rav3n]

I have no idea what that means. Experience does not mean "Si." Si deals in concrete symbols and imagery from the unconscious.

Accepted axiom comparisons from the past to present.

Shall we discuss Fi now, which is just as relevant to this discussion as Si. In other words, not even a tiny bit, as it relates to your erroneous assumption of predictive qualities to Se/Ti.

 

[Mal12345]

Accepted axiom comparisons from the past to present.

Shall we discuss Fi now, which is just as relevant to this discussion as Si. In other words, not even a tiny bit, as it relates to your erroneous assumption of predictive qualities to Se/Ti.

Now do you see why I don't normally deal in functions? They don't give any useful information.

 

[rav3n]

Now do you see why I don't normally deal in functions? They don't give any useful information.

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

 

[Mal12345]

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

Do I look like the warden at Shawshank prison?

I've stated on this forum many times that I have given up on function analysis. It is only useful for those who like ad hoc typing methodologies.

 

[rav3n]

Do I look like the warden at Shawshank prison?

Don't make me answer this question.

I've stated on this forum many times that I have given up on function analysis. It is only useful for those who like ad hoc typing methodologies.

Because you can't find uses for functions since you have no idea what they do and even when if you did, your synthesis is askew, doesn't mean that others can't find them useful to help people type.

Again, a rabbit hole to avoid admitting that you were wrong.

 

[Mal12345]

Don't make me answer this question.

Because you can't find uses for functions since you have no idea what they do and even when if you did, your synthesis is askew, doesn't mean that others can't find them useful to help people type.

Again, a rabbit hole to avoid admitting that you were wrong.

Then go tell the author of PersonalityPage.com who wrote that the ESTP anticipates. Because to me, JCF is a rabbit hole leading to whatever answer serves your purposes. And I'm not the one who went there first.

 

[rav3n]

Then go tell the author of PersonalityPage.com who wrote that the ESTP anticipates. Because to me, JCF is a rabbit hole leading to whatever answer serves your purposes. And I'm not the one who went there first.

Ha ha...you're basing your opinion on function theory by using a website with pink pages, one that attempts to use MBTI for love matches?

No wonder...

 

[Mal12345]

Ha ha...you're basing your opinion on function theory by using a website with pink pages, one that attempts to use MBTI for love matches?

No wonder...

That sounds vicious.

 

[rav3n]

Anyways Catzilla. Your b/f sounds either ESTJ or ESTP.

 

[Mal12345]

"you're basing your opinion on function theory by using a website with pink pages."

There's no accuracy in any of your statements from the word "go." I didn't base my opinion of JCF on a website with pink pages. You assume much. Assume assume assume. ASS-ume.

I based my opinion on watching a lot of silly attempts to make personality type calls on the basis of some cognitive functions. That is clearly a category error. It ASS-umes that personalities can be broken down into cognitive functions. Over the months on these forums I observed the disastrous reasoning that resulted, and gave up on JCF. I choose to use a webpage as a matter of convenience. Everybody should know this by now.

 

[Rosabel]

ESTJ.

 

[Catzilla]

o.o Well, then...

For example, does he tend to over-schedule his day? Does he always think that 30 minutes of work can be accomplished in 15 minutes?

No...he's not that obsessive... He's hardworking, but he doesn't OVERWORK himself by any means. He's actually pretty good at time management - he knows when he should stop and take a break and when he needs to get back to work.

I haven't considered the ESTP option, but I find ESTJ/ENTJ more likely because of his aggressive and blunt nature. While he DOES have a great "get it done" attitude, I don't believe it's his primary trait. I definitely think Te is his top function, and it shows in the way he interacts with others. He's not the type to tolerate any sort of bullshit and always calls others out on their logical mistakes. He's a take-charge kind of guy, very straightforward and logical.

 

[rav3n]

No...he's not that obsessive... He's hardworking, but he doesn't OVERWORK himself by any means. He's actually pretty good at time management - he knows when he should stop and take a break and when he needs to get back to work.

I haven't considered the ESTP option, but I find ESTJ/ENTJ more likely because of his aggressive and blunt nature. While he DOES have a great "get it done" attitude, I don't believe it's his primary trait. I definitely think Te is his top function, and it shows in the way he interacts with others. He's not the type to tolerate any sort of bullshit and always calls others out on their logical mistakes. He's a take-charge kind of guy, very straightforward and logical.

ESTPs are like this too. Stalk Halla74's posts to see if any of it resonates.

 

[Catzilla]

ESTPs are like this too. Stalk Halla74's posts to see if any of it resonates.

Alright. Yes, some attributes of his posts definitely resonate with my boyfriend (particularly, the straightforward style of humor and the "no fear" attitude). My boyfriend has ADHD though, so this definitely contributes to his spontaneous and joking nature.

Although my boyfriend generally trusts empirical data before intuition, he CAN be intuitive. I read up that ESTPs often have trouble in school due to the "theoretical" things discussed in class. This is not the case for him (he's practically a straight-A student and can write essays about theory just fine. It's just when he has to "go beyond" and find deeper meaning in physical things like art, when he has trouble. But when we're talking intuitive things like scientific theories, he can hold his own just fine in that area). It's true, he CAN have trouble trying to understand an abstract thought I'm explaining, but it's partly because I'm bad at explaining it myself. If I could find a way to explain it in a clear and concise way, he'd definitely understand better.