Typology is necessarily just categorizing characteristics, in this case characteristics of personality. Not all possible characteristics, but some very particular ones that are closely tied to how one generally thinks and reacts. In the case of MBTI, the characteristics specified are sorta-kinda like a skeleton of the personality. A real person is much more fleshed out, and can often seem to be an atypical member of their type.
My usual method of typing people is to explain the key characteristics of the typology to the person wanting to be typed, and they figure out for themselves where they fit in that. I don't use "evidence" to "deduce" or "prove" type. That's silly. You know far more about yourself than I ever will. I'd rather hand you the tools to make the judgment yourself than to judge you based on a few dozen posts.
In spite of what I wrote above, I do tend to make provisional assessments of type. Some people are just clearly one type or another, and their later self-analysis confirms that. Other people aren't so clearly one type or another, usually because they hide parts of themselves very well, and lots of different types do that so that cannot be used as evidence one way or another.
In your case, my first wild guess would be ENTP, from the way you argue about things. You are cautious about making assertions, but hold a strong belief in facts and logic: that's usually Ti. You very much enjoy banter here on the forum, and that tends to go with Ne or Se, but more likely Ne in your case. You seem assertive and outgoing in spite of your caution about making assertions, so that indicates extroversion. Put those observations together and that's ENTP. It's still just a wild guess. 108 posts (as of this writing) isn't enough to make a judgment on my part clear cut. I usually need to know someone much better than that to feel confident in my assessment. But if I met you in person, and had a few exchanges with you like the ones you've had on this forum, I'd use ENTP as a starting point, and work from there for corrections.
An alternative I considered was ENTJ, but your patterns of speech aren't assertive in the way that TJ speech is. You tend to talk around the main topic, never quite addressing it directly, but never quite abandoning it.
My typology tends to align with Dario Nardi's assessments as per EEG readings in his book The Neuroscience of Personality:
[SPOILER CUT TO SAVE SPACE]
Take a close look at the Ne and Ti descriptions. Yeah, they're still kind of vague. These are skeletons of personality, not descriptions of people.
Thank you very much for posting this. Based upon reading everything, I still think I am more of an Ni/Se user, as opposed to an Ne/Si user. I would even go on to say that I agree with Fe over Te/Ti [but yeah, I can make decent use of thinking functions when I want to].
I know this probably has nothing much to do with type, but my ESTJ Dad has said that I am too cyptic for him sometimes. Wouldn't Si/Ne and Ne/Si have a common affinity with one another over Ni/Se and Se/Ni?
But Extroversion doesn't necessarily make your first function extroverted, and vice versa with Introversion. And I think any type can enjoy banter to a certain degree. Of course, it depends on the type of banter they are into. But yeah, thanks for a half decent insight.
In the case of MBTI, the characteristics specified are sorta-kinda like a skeleton of the personality. A real person is much more fleshed out, and can often seem to be an atypical member of their type.
Out of all the years I have posted here, only one person in this forum ever struck me as similar to myself. What surprised me was, Salome picked up on it as well. Then she posted our names in the "What members are similar?" thread. It's the only time Salome posted something that impressed me. (Quasi-insult, I know.)
I think we do have a typology forum, so I don't see why it makes sense to discourage discussions about typology.
Playing a game of 'Pin The Tail On The Donkey' is not my idea of discussing typology. Discussions took place years ago: I'm talking theory and models. Now you have: "My friend Ethel likes kiwi, you like kiwi, ergo, you must be the same type as Ethel." That's not discussion, that's stupidity.
Playing a game of 'Pin The Tail On The Donkey' is not my idea of discussing typology. Discussions took place years ago. I'm talking theory and models. Now you have: "My friend Ethel likes kiwi, you like kiwi, ergo, you must be the same type as Ethel." That's not discussion, that's stupidity.
Agreed. We need to make the discussions more sophisticated and in-depth.
i do not think @Captain_Invincible is ESFP i think he gets type that because he comes across as dumb and extroverted. but he's not dumb just sometimes misinformed, and aren't we all. I lean towards either ESTP or ENTJ and i gave him my reasonings.