• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Mistyped TypeCentral Members

violet_crown

Active member
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
4,959
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
853
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Lark not being Te goes against everything I understand about typology.

I'm not going to engage too deeply with the overall conversation. I've been here before, made my thoughts known, and will leave it at that. I am hoping, though, that you might be willing to expand on this comment some, Jon.


To be fair, NTJ's and STJ's can be equally dogmatic in character. Both are also prone to live internally at equal rates, and etcetera.

These observations are not unrelated.
 

violet_crown

Active member
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
4,959
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
853
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I think he's ESTJ or ISTJ. he's too damn stern to be an Fe dom. Fe doms mince their words, try to make their message come across as pleasant and unimposing and try to appeal to your feelings to convince you of the rightness or something (either by appealing to nobler motives or guilt tripping, with varying degrees of subtly). compare him to [MENTION=13646]Haven[/MENTION], a true ESFJ male. they are nothing alike.

Yeah, but you throw him up against someone like puremercury, and we're talking what and what. Fe-doms are as rigid as Te-doms, because ultimately Fe is a rational function. Both in the Jungian sense of being a judging function, and in the more venacular one of being oriented towards seeking to optimize one's pursuit of a particular end under a certain set of constraints. Fe seeks to effect social order in keeping with whatever they've been led to believe is best for the cohesion and perpetuation of the group. In other words, taking your example of the soft-spoken and accomodating Fe-dom, that individual is behaving in that way because somewhere along the way they've picked up on the fact that they're more likely to get what they want catching flies with honey rather than vinegar. Additionally, if you're talking about an Fe-Si woman, then she might take that tactic not only because she believes it to be more effective, but because she subscribes to certain notions about femininity and how a woman ought to behave.

So let's back this up and talk about the likelihood of a "stern" ESFJ man. First of all, that fundamental concern with social order is necessarily bound up with social role and therefore hierarchy. If you're Fe and believe, for whatever reason, that you are in a superior position to those around you, then it is encumbent upon you to act out that role. You do the things a leader ought to whether that means leading discussion or identifying and preventing people from being led astray from The Correct Path. You might view yourself as something of a shepherd, in other words. An Fe-Si user is also going to try to enforce compliance with that status quo again in a way befitting their role. That means if you're the man in charge, you're fully in rights to squash challenges to that position in anyway you see fit. And, as you pointed out, since Fe's best weapons are emotional ones, that's typically how they're going to do their damage. They undermine the person to undercut their ideas and put them in their "proper" place. An Fe-Si man will do it aggressively (as they believe befits a man), while an Fe-Si woman will do it more surreptitiously (as in their mind befits a woman). It's all the same game, however.

My point with all this is that I reject the notion that dominant Fe-usage necessarily equates to accomodating, or precludes any number of presentations. It's gonna be contingent on a) what the particular ends of the Fe-user are, b) how they interpret their role within the context they're acting in, and c) how they interpret that role in light of their view of society's normative construction. If the stars align correctly with regards to these three points, you could have a right prick of an EFJ on your hands.
 
W

WALMART

Guest
I'm not going to engage too deeply with the overall conversation. I've been here before, made my thoughts known, and will leave it at that. I am hoping, though, that you might be willing to expand on this comment some, Jon.


I am.

I think of Te users as butchers of information. They enjoy taking a piece and cutting it up into all their little parts - assessing relevance, accepting, rejecting or abstracting as they go along. They are the 'readers' of the MTBI spectrum, the type that enjoy mulling over articles and publications to help grow objective knowledge. This is probably why they piss excellence: they are both capable of and enjoy devouring others' thoughts and established protocol to help grow their own capabilities. They're the most skilled debaters, and most efficient at expanding their database of cited, verifiable sources. Once you'd mentioned to Lark that he seemingly 'pushes back the darkness'. I agree, that this is a feature of many Te users.

Having churned out this thought, I am personally confident Lark is Te/Fi.


Also, when thinking of this, I cannot help but come to the conclusion that Te/Si is super "objective" while Te/Ni is more subjective-thought friendly. This carries whole hosts of implications I don't feel like getting into (but mostly of why SJ's are SJ's and NT's are NT's).
 

violet_crown

Active member
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
4,959
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
853
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
So that was a fairly dense response, but I wouldn’t expect any less from you, my friend. I almost feel guilty about having to parse out something so well-constructed. :alttongue:

They are the 'readers' of the MTBI spectrum, the type that enjoy mulling over articles and publications to help grow objective knowledge. This is probably why they piss excellence: they are both capable of and enjoy devouring others' thoughts and established protocol to help grow their own capabilities.

This is where you and I appear to part ways. First of all, all kinds of types read for all kinds of reasons, and as far as that goes Te-doms are not exactly the end all be all. As an Te-dom, I’m kinda like a Navy Seal when it comes to books—I get in, obtain what knowledge I’m looking for, and I get out whether the book’s over or not. I’m looking for enough information to generate a sufficient theoretical understanding to act on what I know, because I know that whatever Ni model I’m working with is ultimately gonna be retooled the moment that it touches the ground. Thus it’s as good of a use of my time to obtain my knowledge through direct experience (says tert Se), as it is through theoretical understanding of a concept. This is especially true given that I know I can fairly capably translate those Se data points back into abstract principles as valid as what any expert can come up with. This is a rough description of how an ENTJ builds competence.

They're the most skilled debaters, and most efficient at expanding their database of cited, verifiable sources. Once you'd mentioned to Lark that he seemingly 'pushes back the darkness'. I agree, that this is a feature of many Te users.
Now, everything that you’ve just described in the above sounds to me like it has a lot to do with Si/Ne and less to do with Te. Especially the use of the database. Coincidently, that aligns fairly well with my experience of people who are the bonafied book worm sort. They are generally NPs or SJs. I add as a caveat that INTJs can be fairly high bandwidth in their own right (i.e., prone to seeking and capable of assimilating a high density of information), but my understanding is that it’s a different kind of exercise for them. Seeking out a signal in the noise until they can edge around their Se issues and test the validity of their models practically.

I’m digressing a bit, but the point remains the same—the whole concept of “databasing” and the need for such is fundamentally Si. Si needs that database because one of its primary functions is as a mapping tool. It builds static internal representations that advance only through processing data and adding it on to the existing edifice. The implication of that is that Si has a very precise understanding of the proper place of things. You move one thing and they know their grid has been altered, which I understand to be a very unsettling experience for an Si-user. They generally do their damndest to “make things right” (aka restore the status quo that they’re familiar with), because it takes some time and processing for them to fabricate a new grid.

This brings us back around to my comment about Lark. Just to put the whole thing into perspective, I’m gonna put the quote below:

Wind-up Rex said:
Hmm. I feel that's a little bit of an oversimplification of Si as a process. It without question makes reference to tradition and past experience, because it is about anchoring oneself in what is known. But if you have a guy like @Lark who's well-read, and has managed to amass a fairly respectable bank of knowledge the knowncan encompass a great deal. Especially since Si lends the ability to recall one's bank of knowledge with a great deal of care and accuracy.

So, to me, your anecdote about him doesn't prove very much, because it hasn't disproven the idea that Lark's beliefs and viewpoints aren't Si derived. My own observation of him on the forum is that he seems to use books as a way to "push back the darkness" as it were, and when confronted with new information he'll refer back to information that's he's already mapped out as a way to make an assessment of what's in front of him. Again, when you have a person with a lot of information at their disposal, that can be a fairly rich process, but it's still quintessentially Si.

Anyways, I’ve taken a long walk to make the point that for reasons grounded pretty substantially in the theory of the functions, extreme “bookishness” would correlate more with an Si-preference than a Te-preference. An ENTJ is going to use a book as a starting point, or as a support for our own ideas. We’re not so slavishly attached to this school of thought or that author or whatever the fuck because at the end of the day who fucking cares? Appeals to authority mean nothing to me, and people who constantly do that kind of shit just look like jackasses. You wanna show me something, then show me that you can dance with me. Someone who shows themselves not only incapable of dealing in the moment, but tries to make those that do feel foolish is behaving in a way so alien to me that one of us has clearly misidentified ourselves. I mean just look at the nature of the conversation that we’re having right now. If people who were of very diverse perspectives were all telling me something, I’d at least have to slow my roll and assess the validity of the claim. And if I did opt to dismiss it, I’d set about undercutting the validity of the content of the claim, rather than the person that claim originated from. Unless they’re already deep in the grip of Fi, no ENTJ is gonna make a difference of opinion personal in that way.

I’m just sayin. Ginkgo was spot on the observations of his initial post. If the individual he was describing is an ENTJ then that is one deeply disturbed, warped, and malicious individual we’re talking about. If the individual is an ESFJ, otoh, then the frame shifts a little bit. While we’re still not talking about someone who’s at an ideal level of mental health, we’re at least back at a place where that individual’s actions are understandable even if they’re not your cup of tea.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
I am.

I think of Te users as butchers of information. They enjoy taking a piece and cutting it up into all their little parts - assessing relevance, accepting, rejecting or abstracting as they go along. They are the 'readers' of the MTBI spectrum, the type that enjoy mulling over articles and publications to help grow objective knowledge. This is probably why they piss excellence: they are both capable of and enjoy devouring others' thoughts and established protocol to help grow their own capabilities. They're the most skilled debaters, and most efficient at expanding their database of cited, verifiable sources. Once you'd mentioned to Lark that he seemingly 'pushes back the darkness'. I agree, that this is a feature of many Te users.

Having churned out this thought, I am personally confident Lark is Te/Fi.


Also, when thinking of this, I cannot help but come to the conclusion that Te/Si is super "objective" while Te/Ni is more subjective-thought friendly. This carries whole hosts of implications I don't feel like getting into (but mostly of why SJ's are SJ's and NT's are NT's).

That's one of the more interesting posts I've read in a while, I was going to ask what your source was when you opened that sentence with "I think of" but irrespective of sources what you right after that seems sound to me and coincides with my experience.

The finally sentence is interesting, I can understand why you dont want to get into it but I'll look out for any thread in which you do discuss it in a bit more depth, hit me up with a PM if you post a thread about it at a later date and I'll subscribe it.

I actually am inclined to think perhaps the inverse of what you've said, given that I consider sensing as being about detail, perhaps missing the bigger picture and intuition about the bigger picture and perhaps missing the detail, however in turn I consider objectivity as being about the bigger picture and subjectivity about the detail.

Although beyond that it gets a lot more complex, I could get into discussions of scale, intersubjectivity, phenomenology, post-modern deconstruction etc. but it might bore and those are things so closely associated with Feeling driven pseduo-intellectualism and what I think of as academic navel gazing that I find them to be as enraging as engaging.
 

Animal

So carnal it's spiritual
Joined
Mar 9, 2013
Messages
650
MBTI Type
SeFi
Enneagram
4
I'm new to the site, though some may know me from PerC. I don't know MBTI/Jung/Socionics well enough to comment confidently on anyone's type, but I'm curious what people make of mine. Feel free to let me know any observations as they pop up. Whether I agree or not, this process may help me to figure out different angles in terms of assessing others, and if that is the case, I may contribute my opinions in the future.
 

Elfboy

Certified Sausage Smoker
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Messages
9,625
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
[MENTION=11928]Vetani[/MENTION]
I'm starting to see you as Sx/Sp. you're more focused and realistic than any Sx/So I've met and you seem to be adept at acquiring resources for the sake of finding the right guy. in other words, as is the case with most Sx/Sp's, your Sp serves your Sx well
[MENTION=8031]Ginkgo[/MENTION]
you don't seem like an Sx dom to me. your energy is much more calm, low key and earthy; Sx doms put out a lot more raw energy and have a sort of fiery desperation to them. Sp/Sx would work well for you in my opinion
[MENTION=14498]Cloud of Thunder[/MENTION]
similar to Gingko, you're much more subtle, subdued and calm. Sx dom 3s are dramatic, demand attention and behave almost like stage performers in their everyday life. I think you're Sp/Sx (you strike me as modest, realistic and grounded in reality)
[MENTION=3325]Victor[/MENTION]
if I had to guess your type, I'd say INFJ 4w5>1w9>6w5 Sp/Sx
[MENTION=16405]LeaT[/MENTION]
you strike me as ENFP 6w5 or 5w6>1w9>4w5 Sx/Sp or Sp/Sx
- your posting style has a 6-ish over analysis aspect to it with a touch of defensiveness
- lots of your posts seem like edited Ne mind dumps which, over time, have gotten progressively more accurate (I do the same thing)
- you don't strike me as either dominant Ti or dominant Fi
- so that leaves ENFP and ENTP and you are clearly not an ENTP
- I don't really see the 8 in you. I think what you think is 8 is really Fi/Te, 1 and strong Sx

I'm new to the site, though some may know me from PerC. I don't know MBTI/Jung/Socionics well enough to comment confidently on anyone's type, but I'm curious what people make of mine. Feel free to let me know any observations as they pop up. Whether I agree or not, this process may help me to figure out different angles in terms of assessing others, and if that is the case, I may contribute my opinions in the future.

- I still see you as either 7 fixed or an 8 with a strong 7 wing. you are too fucking diva to not have a strong 7 influence in there XD
- you say you use Fe, but your is incredibly ENFP. I think you use more Fi than you think you do
- I could see you as a core 3w4. your responses to people's idiot comments are very competency triad-esque and you are without a doubt core Id and not 3w2, so that leaves 3w4. you don't get defensive like a 6 would, but you also make an attempt to explain yourself in an impartial, credible manner. unlike most of the people on PerC though, I could see 8 being a a strong possibility for you though, especially after you detailed your response to reading a proper 8 description
[MENTION=14503]disco[/MENTION] Biscuit
I don't remember if I've told you this or not yet, but you have a very 3-ish vibe.
[MENTION=15607]The Great One[/MENTION]
surprisingly, after talking with you at length, I think you are Sp/Sx. your Sp dominance is obvious and you have too much swag and lustful craving of intimacy and passionate lovemaking to be Sx last. your variants are weird though, because you don't come across like an Sp/Sx at all.
[MENTION=2]Ivy[/MENTION]
I think you're a 1w9 rather than 4
[MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION]
you seem ENFP rather than INFP. your posts have a considerable amount of Te and you detach yourself far too easily for me to believe you are Fi dom
 

Kierva

#KUWK
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Messages
2,469
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
[MENTION=11928]Vetani[/MENTION]
I'm starting to see you as Sx/Sp. you're more focused and realistic than any Sx/So I've met and you seem to be adept at acquiring resources for the sake of finding the right guy. in other words, as is the case with most Sx/Sp's, your Sp serves your Sx well

I will say that I don't quite understand the variants... got any links for me to learn more?
 

Animal

So carnal it's spiritual
Joined
Mar 9, 2013
Messages
650
MBTI Type
SeFi
Enneagram
4
- I still see you as either 7 fixed or an 8 with a strong 7 wing. you are too fucking diva to not have a strong 7 influence in there XD
Haha best comment ever - when you said this on PerC I was also smiling. I'm considering 7 wing too. Question: would you say that 8w7s are more likely to pick a lot of fights? I seek out conflict on the internet when I'm in the mood, or go on my political page for instance, but I don't exactly go around starting fights irl, and I relate to "drawing a line in the sand." That is why I said 9 wing at first, but more and more I am seeing 7-wing too - I certainly have a strong connection to mind, a more out-there personality than 8w9s, and mental energy. Curious about your thoughts.

- you say you use Fe, but your is incredibly ENFP. I think you use more Fi than you think you do
Interesting - I can see Fe and Fi both - problem is, I see a lot more Ti than Te. Any thoughts? Have you seen Te?

- I could see you as a core 3w4. your responses to people's idiot comments are very competency triad-esque and you are without a doubt core Id and not 3w2, so that leaves 3w4. you don't get defensive like a 6 would, but you also make an attempt to explain yourself in an impartial, credible manner. unlike most of the people on PerC though, I could see 8 being a a strong possibility for you though, especially after you detailed your response to reading a proper 8 description
Fair assessment. =) I also had a hard time *not* seeing myself as a competency type, but I think reactivity is a bigger problem, unfortunately. :unsure: Just for kicks, if I were a 3 would you have a theory on my tritype?

Also- if I had a 7 fix, just curious, you'd think it's 847 or 874? Or would you propose triple-id?

Haha, I'm picking your brain a lot here. =p
 

Entropic

New member
Joined
Aug 20, 2012
Messages
1,200
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
8w9
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
@Elfboy, I wish I was an ENFP XD Unfortunately I think my posts have too much of black and white inferior Te tyranny for it to be legitimate analysis though. Would you think I'm a phobic or counterphobic 6 if I'm a 6? I can see why people think 1w9 like they seem to think core 4 and well integrated and I don't know what else people see. Meh, I am not sure I agree with the motivations for 1, especially after speaking to some 1s in depth. Their thinking constantly strikes me as very foreign. I'm too reactive to be a 9 though, yes, you're correct.

As for image being last, I think I would have waffled less on my gut fixation if my image was second. Part of the reason why it was difficult for me is probably because I part feel a strong connection to 1 from my 4, part because I feel a strong connection to 8 from my 5, part because Fi can kind of be 1-ish in terms of logic because there is a certain aspect of Fi that overlaps with the fear of corruption i.e. if I don't live up to my own morals I suck. Probably enhanced due to 5 competency being very similar to 1 competency.

Anyway, I am open to being a 1 fix if someone can provide a really strong argument for it, but after introspecting for a long time about this I think for now, 8w7 is probably correct.
 

Faceless Beauty

Transient
Joined
Aug 20, 2012
Messages
177
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
9w8
I'm new to the site, though some may know me from PerC. I don't know MBTI/Jung/Socionics well enough to comment confidently on anyone's type, but I'm curious what people make of mine. Feel free to let me know any observations as they pop up. Whether I agree or not, this process may help me to figure out different angles in terms of assessing others, and if that is the case, I may contribute my opinions in the future.

I think everything else is fine, but I see you as head last with a 3w4 fix over a 4w3 fix. The 3 influence is quite strong in you, and a lot of the competent vibes you give off or the statements you make seem like that of a 3w4 fixer.
 

Animal

So carnal it's spiritual
Joined
Mar 9, 2013
Messages
650
MBTI Type
SeFi
Enneagram
4
I think everything else is fine, but I see you as head last with a 3w4 fix over a 4w3 fix. The 3 influence is quite strong in you, and a lot of the competent vibes you give off or the statements you make seem like that of a 3w4 fixer.

Interesting. I had that typing for a short time (8wX-3w4-5w6)... I can definitely see an argument for it. Feel free to point out anything you want if it would make a case. I went with the 4-fix because of *very very 4ish* stuff in my past which I related to in Naranjo - stuff so deep that I even said "wait, could I be a core 4?" haha.. and his 3 description didn't really suit me on a deep level... but I relate to many other type 3 descriptions more than 4 descriptions. Open to all opinions or observations.

By the way, I see you returned to your 9w8 typing, and I think that is accurate for you. Not sure if I have 'solid evidence' but it always felt right to me. The rest of your current tri-type feels accurate to me as well.
 

Faceless Beauty

Transient
Joined
Aug 20, 2012
Messages
177
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
9w8
Interesting. I had that typing for a short time (8wX-3w4-5w6)... I can definitely see an argument for it. Feel free to point out anything you want if it would make a case. I went with the 4-fix because of *very very 4ish* stuff in my past which I related to in Naranjo - stuff so deep that I even said "wait, could I be a core 4?" haha.. and his 3 description didn't really suit me on a deep level... but I relate to many other type 3 descriptions more than 4 descriptions. Open to all opinions or observations.

By the way, I see you returned to your 9w8 typing, and I think that is accurate for you. Not sure if I have 'solid evidence' but it always felt right to me. The rest of your current tri-type feels accurate to me as well.

I think that if you identified with something written by Naranjo on a deep level and because of things in the past, then maybe 4w3 is a better fit. :p I can't really say because a lot of the aspects of 3 that you relate to just might be surface attributes that most others are seeing.

And 9w8 works in it's own little way I suppose.
 
W

WALMART

Guest
This is where you and I appear to part ways. First of all, all kinds of types read for all kinds of reasons, and as far as that goes Te-doms are not exactly the end all be all. As an Te-dom, I’m kinda like a Navy Seal when it comes to books—I get in, obtain what knowledge I’m looking for, and I get out whether the book’s over or not. I’m looking for enough information to generate a sufficient theoretical understanding to act on what I know, because I know that whatever Ni model I’m working with is ultimately gonna be retooled the moment that it touches the ground. Thus it’s as good of a use of my time to obtain my knowledge through direct experience (says tert Se), as it is through theoretical understanding of a concept. This is especially true given that I know I can fairly capably translate those Se data points back into abstract principles as valid as what any expert can come up with. This is a rough description of how an ENTJ builds competence.


I quoted the word "readers" so I would not lock myself into the thought that they are strictly readers of books, they are readers of reality in general. They are mechanizations of thought, highly cause-and-effect oriented, knowing many things have underlying principles and contexts. I believe this is what draws them to politics, social injustice and other subjects full of high dynamic ranges.


I'd planned on looking up threads started by TJ's to show some veracity to my claims but I'm far too lazy. Essentially, I've noticed TJ's on a much larger margin start topics and threads pieced around other's observations or studies. Appeal to information is highly prevalent.


Now, everything that you’ve just described in the above sounds to me like it has a lot to do with Si/Ne and less to do with Te. Especially the use of the database. Coincidently, that aligns fairly well with my experience of people who are the bonafied book worm sort. They are generally NPs or SJs. I add as a caveat that INTJs can be fairly high bandwidth in their own right (i.e., prone to seeking and capable of assimilating a high density of information), but my understanding is that it’s a different kind of exercise for them. Seeking out a signal in the noise until they can edge around their Se issues and test the validity of their models practically.

I’m digressing a bit, but the point remains the same—the whole concept of “databasing” and the need for such is fundamentally Si. Si needs that database because one of its primary functions is as a mapping tool. It builds static internal representations that advance only through processing data and adding it on to the existing edifice. The implication of that is that Si has a very precise understanding of the proper place of things. You move one thing and they know their grid has been altered, which I understand to be a very unsettling experience for an Si-user. They generally do their damndest to “make things right” (aka restore the status quo that they’re familiar with), because it takes some time and processing for them to fabricate a new grid.


Anyways, I’ve taken a long walk to make the point that for reasons grounded pretty substantially in the theory of the functions, extreme “bookishness” would correlate more with an Si-preference than a Te-preference. An ENTJ is going to use a book as a starting point, or as a support for our own ideas. We’re not so slavishly attached to this school of thought or that author or whatever the fuck because at the end of the day who fucking cares? Appeals to authority mean nothing to me, and people who constantly do that kind of shit just look like jackasses. You wanna show me something, then show me that you can dance with me. Someone who shows themselves not only incapable of dealing in the moment, but tries to make those that do feel foolish is behaving in a way so alien to me that one of us has clearly misidentified ourselves. I mean just look at the nature of the conversation that we’re having right now. If people who were of very diverse perspectives were all telling me something, I’d at least have to slow my roll and assess the validity of the claim. And if I did opt to dismiss it, I’d set about undercutting the validity of the content of the claim, rather than the person that claim originated from. Unless they’re already deep in the grip of Fi, no ENTJ is gonna make a difference of opinion personal in that way.


Yeah, that's about my perception of Si/Ne vs Se/Ni in general. It just sounds so unappealing, I've been trying to establish paradigms that kind of pull away from 'traditional' MBTI thought. I guess it's moot if the shoe fits.
 

Animal

So carnal it's spiritual
Joined
Mar 9, 2013
Messages
650
MBTI Type
SeFi
Enneagram
4
I think that if you identified with something written by Naranjo on a deep level and because of things in the past, then maybe 4w3 is a better fit. :p I can't really say because a lot of the aspects of 3 that you relate to just might be surface attributes that most others are seeing.

And 9w8 works in it's own little way I suppose.

Haha yeah.. I know I "seem" very 3 or 3-fixed, and also, I know that sometimes things really ARE that obvious, so I am open to hear impressions. But I guess until something punches me in the gut the way Naranjo's 8, 5, and 4 did, I'd have to hear a *really convincing argument* to reconsider my tritype =,) But, still, it's cool to hear how I come off or what people might observe about me that I fail to notice from inside. There can be merit to it.

Are you still not sure about your type?
 

Faceless Beauty

Transient
Joined
Aug 20, 2012
Messages
177
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
9w8
Haha yeah.. I know I "seem" very 3 or 3-fixed, and also, I know that sometimes things really ARE that obvious, so I am open to hear impressions. But I guess until something punches me in the gut the way Naranjo's 8, 5, and 4 did, I'd have to hear a *really convincing argument* to reconsider my tritype =,) But, still, it's cool to hear how I come off or what people might observe about me that I fail to notice from inside. There can be merit to it.

Are you still not sure about your type?

I am not sure about my head fix, my instincts, and my MBTI type, but that's about it. :p
9w8 works because I read more about 9s indolence, which I really see in myself a lot more than 6s need to know that "the ground won't cave in under their feet" so to speak.
 

Animal

So carnal it's spiritual
Joined
Mar 9, 2013
Messages
650
MBTI Type
SeFi
Enneagram
4
I am not sure about my head fix, my instincts, and my MBTI type, but that's about it. :p
9w8 works because I read more about 9s indolence, which I really see in myself a lot more than 6s need to know that "the ground won't cave in under their feet" so to speak.

Makes sense. I'll let you know if I think of anything. =) I'm about to look into Naranjo's book on instincts.
 

Faceless Beauty

Transient
Joined
Aug 20, 2012
Messages
177
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
9w8
Makes sense. I'll let you know if I think of anything. =) I'm about to look into Naranjo's book on instincts.

I've read through types 1 and 6 so far, and I know that type 1 is definitely not me for a fact in his Character and neurosis, haha.

What book is that? I should look into it sometime.
 

The Great One

New member
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
3,439
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
6w7
[MENTION=5684]Elfboy[/MENTION]

Exactly what I was thinking: I also think I'm Sp/sx. I've noticed that Sp/sx people with strong Fe can easily look like they are a social variant first. Good examples are Hugh Hefner and George Clooney.
 

Vergil

New member
Joined
Mar 9, 2013
Messages
38
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Hey! I just found this thread.
I don't think I'm mistyped, but opinions never hurt.

INTRO:
Ex-PerC member.
Some people know me here. But a few others have seen me post. I'd like to see what everyone has to say.
[MENTION=5684]Elfboy[/MENTION], [MENTION=16405]LeaT[/MENTION], [MENTION=16406]Faceless Beauty[/MENTION], [MENTION=10984]DJ Arendee[/MENTION], [MENTION=4945]EJCC[/MENTION]

:p

forgive me if you do not like being summoned.
 
Top