• 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

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
MBTI has no validity, as there is no validity in Newton' physics.

There will never be validity, there will only be compromise and that is what makes the journey count, not the answers
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
It goes something like this, Magic:

T: IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
F: IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
 

Magic Poriferan

^He pronks, too!
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
14,081
MBTI Type
Yin
Enneagram
One
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
It goes something like this, Magic:

T: IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
F: IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

That one fell a little flat...

That being said, it does remind me of testing increments, and every test I've ever taken has made me a T. So, testing is out of the question.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
I gonna make a T or F test tomorrow, Sekt oder Selters, we have to find clarity :D
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
How do you make a T vs. F test?

Sounds like a challenge.

You know me, I wont take it serious :D.

But if you provide the knowledge, I realize it in technical ways and look for advertisement sponsors and then we gonna make some money with it :D
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,145
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I've already done that plenty of times. It seems everyone overlooks all of my points regarding the rationale of proper social interaction.

Are you assuming your points are being overlooked just because we're not paying attention?

I just found it sort of ironic that, regardless of your type, much of your protests against being Fi seem to be driven by Fi-style concerns.

Do with that what you want.

This also opens up the problem of quantification again. So one thing represents Ti, and another represents Fi, but what amount of these thing must be presented to qualify someone as a Feeler or a Thinker?

To me, it's relational, not a hard quantification.

For instance, if a Thinker only used Ti as you describe, then no Thinker would ever have a concept of "flaming" or "trolling" as a violation.

Clarification:
1. I haven't usually logged in [recently] on this issue of your type. That's because I was just collecting data points.
2. When the balance swung over and the conversation happened to bring it up, I mentioned it.
3. Thus, I'm not talking about isolated events, I'm talking about a general aura of behavior surrounding your approach to situations. Use Ti all you want, there's no law against it.

As another point, Ti's also can be flamers and violators. But for other reasons than perhaps what the other-function-heavy people might have for their trolling behavior. So again, when taken in conjunction, it's possible to distinguish.

Now, since people obviously don't work this way, where is the line drawn? I certainly do what is attributed Ti, constantly.

You do?
Um... okay.

The case for me being a Feeler has never so much been the absence of Ti processes, but the highlighting of the presence of what are allegedly Fi processes in my behavior. So what do we make of this?

It would probably depending on the relationship between lots of variables in how you interact with others online.

Do I use more Fi than Ti? I would argue that this assertion is simply not true.

All right. You may argue, go ahead. ;)

I would argue, however, that every human being is guided by Feeling. Thinking does not provide motivation, by definition.

True.

TP's end up being quite passive in nature if they are not constantly being stimulated by the environment. FPs seem more driven internally by comparison.

What does this have to do with you, though?
Is your logic here, "Everyone shows F behavior regardless of being T/F -> Thus, my behavior that shows F is not indicative of being F?"
That's not much of a logic statement.
It's just a "reasonable doubt" strategy.

Interestingly, I think T's (like I said above) end up being more passive than F's when it comes to having no information to evaluate; where they have to make personal decisions or ones that are not "objective," they tend to sit and twiddle.

So again, you can still use that as data points in comparing T vs F archetypal behavior.

So this would really be an useful measure for distinguishing people. Then things are further complicated by context. For example, there are some topics in which nearly everyone comes across like a Feeler, because the focus of the topic itself does not demand much Thinking. So anyone that bothers to post in it is likely to express Feelings, like a farewell thread. So what does one make of all of these things when determining type?

You're talking in such broad generalizations that you're not committing to any hard detail here. It's an effective strategy to obfuscate the issue but it doesn't resolve anything.

I think people need to take "context" of a discussion as part of determining what's motivating a person and why they behave they way they do. But (1) context is just ONE aspect to be considered and (2) there are still nuances that play themselves out in when someone's showing T (for example) as a primary versus a tertiary and so on.

And what of the dichotomies? Is it possible that I apply more Thinking and Feeling than most people? I have to say that most attempts to prove that I am a Feeler have actually done more to make me doubt the validity of the entire MBTI.

Can't you see what you just said seems far more F than T?
"I don't agree with you; therefore, the whole theory must be wrong."
That is a pretty large leap.

I know I would never invalidate an entire system based on simply how it categorized ME.

Do you think that could be one T vs F difference? Probably not on its own... but taking in conjunction with other points? I don't know.

(I'll give you the N -- you hinged this whole comment on the possibilities rather than a derived conclusion, giving it the weight of an entire argument when it's not an argument at all -- sort of like the closing argument for a lawyer gunning for the "reasonable doubt" strategy. That's typical N at work.)

In any case, if you're a T, you're running off inferior F right now.
If you're an F, then your response is indicative of F.

(And no, I don't really care what type you are -- you simply said a lot of things in your post that I thought were worth rebutting in terms of how to approach typing.)

That being said, it does remind me of testing increments, and every test I've ever taken has made me a T. So, testing is out of the question.

Guess it's a wrap, then. :)
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
I definitely think Magic is a Ti/Fe user. Either INTP or INFJ, but he obviously has more information than I...
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
Maybe he is the long lost infp, who actually has a brain

Ouh now I really gotta go :D
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
But to speak again. Have you ever thought about a INFJ or INTJ tag @magic ?

You seem to be very fond in using professional words and technical terms, I never even heard of. That feeling I have around INTJ or INFJ most of the time.

Disclaimer: I dont analyze your style here, for I dont know nothing about you. :D
 

Magic Poriferan

^He pronks, too!
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
14,081
MBTI Type
Yin
Enneagram
One
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Are you assuming your points are being overlooked just because we're not paying attention?

I'm assuming they are being overlooked. I don't know why.

I just found it sort of ironic that, regardless of your type, much of your protests against being Fi seem to be driven by Fi-style concerns.

Do with that what you want.

What are those concerns?


To me, it's relational, not a hard quantification.

So I am Feeler if I am in a crowd of people that use more Thinking than me? I'm not sure if that is what you are saying. If it is, it still begs the question of how we determined these comparisons. How does one know that I am more or less Thinking than someone else?

Clarification:
1. I haven't usually logged in [recently] on this issue of your type. That's because I was just collecting data points.
2. When the balance swung over and the conversation happened to bring it up, I mentioned it.
3. Thus, I'm not talking about isolated events, I'm talking about a general aura of behavior surrounding your approach to situations. Use Ti all you want, there's no law against it.

I don't what this means. What is an aura? And what about using Ti being a crime?

As another point, Ti's also can be flamers and violators. But for other reasons than perhaps what the other-function-heavy people might have for their trolling behavior. So again, when taken in conjunction, it's possible to distinguish.

My point was specifically refering to the concept of a human being that uses one function only, without it's counter-part. My theory is that someone who only uses Ti would not have a concept of violations, because violation of the rules of conduct is concept inherently based around something being good or bad.

You do?
Um... okay.

That implies doubt.

All right. You may argue, go ahead. ;)

My expressions of peresonal sentiment are generally matched point for point with a logicl argument. In my considerations, I try to frame what I want within the scope of what I know is realistically feasible. I would say that I at least match my Feeling with an equal degree of Thinking.

True.

TP's end up being quite passive in nature if they are not constantly being stimulated by the environment. FPs seem more driven internally by comparison.

What does this have to do with you, though?
Is your logic here, "Everyone shows F behavior regardless of being T/F -> Thus, my behavior that shows F is not indicative of being F?"
That's not much of a logic statement.
It's just a "reasonable doubt" strategy.

It has to do with me, because people keep debating my type, so I'm trying to understand the process of distinguishing types for that purpose. My argument is somewhat like the one you just put forward. I am more specific though. I'm saying that being guided by a desire does not prove anyone is an F, because it is assumed to be true about all human beings, thus there is no distinction. Something supposedly F in nature that is more specific, or invidual, is necessary to prove that I am a Feeler. My argument does not in anyway prove that I am not Feeler, it only takes the particular issues of being guided by Feelings off of the table, because we all are.

Interestingly, I think T's (like I said above) end up being more passive than F's when it comes to having no information to evaluate; where they have to make personal decisions or ones that are not "objective," they tend to sit and twiddle.

So again, you can still use that as data points in comparing T vs F archetypal behavior.

Then this is simply a case of behavior not being apparent behind the forum, because I am very prone to analysis paralysis when I don't feel I fully grasp a situation. this would make me like a TP then. But more on topic, passive or not, even a person's choice of being passive is guided by Feeling based assessments.

You're talking in such broad generalizations that you're not committing to any hard detail here. It's an effective strategy to obfuscate the issue but it doesn't resolve anything.

I'm refering to a human being, doing what human beings do in life, in the kinds of situations human beings end up in. If that is too broad a generalization for the system, then the system has failed to serve its purpose as I understand it. I've long been curious about this question, and I think it is valid and important. How do the types account for peoples' reactions to different contexts?

I think people need to take "context" of a discussion as part of determining what's motivating a person and why they behave they way they do. But (1) context is just ONE aspect to be considered and (2) there are still nuances that play themselves out in when someone's showing T (for example) as a primary versus a tertiary and so on.

Yes, context is only a smaller part of it, but still a very important part. You can say that some things will be clearly F or T in how someone is handling the context of a situation, but just how complicated and nuanced does this get? This starts reaching dimensions like that of the nature/nurture debate. There end up being so many factors and filters that no one is capable of acheiving a level of certainty that has any application.

Can't you see what you just said seems far more F than T?
"I don't agree with you; therefore, the whole theory must be wrong."
That is a pretty large leap.

That is not what I said, but I can certainly see how that might appear rather F when anyone says that.

I know I would never invalidate an entire system based on simply how it categorized ME.

Not what I said.

It's not because people are questioning my type that I doubt the whole system. It is because in the process of arguing about my type, they end up reaching for so many different points, and making so many different assertions that are not necessarily the same as what I or what others have asserted about the system, that it leads me to asking a lot of the questions I've asked here. The fact that I feel the need to ask all of these questions, and do not get clear answers, gives me cause to doubt the strength of the entire system. So, to simplify that, the discussion of my type usaually serves as a catalyst for all kinds of issues that highlight the weakness of the MBTI.

Do you think that could be one T vs F difference? Probably not on its own... but taking in conjunction with other points? I don't know.

It might be, when someone does it.

(I'll give you the N -- you hinged this whole comment on the possibilities rather than a derived conclusion, giving it the weight of an entire argument when it's not an argument at all -- sort of like the closing argument for a lawyer gunning for the "reasonable doubt" strategy. That's typical N at work.)

I am running beyond reasonable doubt, I'm running probable doubt. Much of what I have said, like I already explained, does not disprove that I am an F. What it does do, is call into question everything that's being said to prove that I am an F. So we're back to start again. Perhaps part of your mistake is that you don't follow what my motivation is. I'm not trying to prove that I am a T at this particular point. I'm trying to figure out how any of you know anything about this. Hence my doubts about the whole system.

In any case, if you're a T, you're running off inferior F right now.
If you're an F, then your response is indicative of F.

I'm still not gathering your bases for this decree. It may have something to do with your previously incorrect intepretations of my motives and logic, though. I think about four of the things I responded to was based on your misunderstanding of why I'm doubting the system. And your intepretation of it certainly seem like something an irrational Feeler might do.

(And no, I don't really care what type you are -- you simply said a lot of things in your post that I thought were worth rebutting in terms of how to approach typing.)

I don't care that you don't care what my type is. I'm trying to understand your reasoning, regardless of how much you feel about it.

Guess it's a wrap, then. :)

That's optimistic of you.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,145
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
MP, thanks for your response;I want to think through it, and my computer connection at home won't be up until at least Wednesday, so any momentary silence on my part is based mostly on those factors...
 

ThatsWhatHeSaid

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
7,263
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
If I had to brand Magic, I would go with "sensitive INTP," but I wouldn't go F. When I read his posts (usually by accident, or when someone reports them) his arguments are presented logically and he seems to know how to divide his feelings about things from the argument at hand. Granted, I've really only read a handful of posts, but that's my impression.
 
Top