I'm unsure of my cognitive functions (Ti, Ni)

[Mal12345]

Probably INTP.

Watch out for this Steph guy, he has a huge smart-ass streak going.

 

[Amalie Muller]

Would you please expand on your reasoning and the process by which you came to that conclusion? It helps my comprehension.

No sorry.

A) I don't think that would be much fun.

B) I'm about to sit down and watch Doctor Who.

 

[stephsharik]

The part where you accused me of "cherry picking" was out of line. I gave mention to everything in that post. If I missed anything, that's not due to cherry picking, that's called "over-looking." I made an effort. Now please go off yourself.

Overlooking is a fluke. It happens once or twice. Cherrypicking is consistently off the mark.

And lol. I'll off myself when I'm good and ready, not when some sensitive douche projects his/her insecurities at me over the internet.

 

[stephsharik]

Watch out for this Steph guy, he has a huge smart-ass streak going.

Yeah and it's the result of me realizing that nobody on these websites knows what they're talking about.
No unanimity, no consistency.
So I'm just not gonna bother myself with it anymore.
<3

 

[Mal12345]

Yeah and it's the result of me realizing that nobody on these websites knows what they're talking about.
No unanimity, no consistency.
So I'm just not gonna bother myself with it anymore.
<3

YAY!

 

[stephsharik]

The part where you accused me of "cherry picking" was out of line. I gave mention to everything in that post. If I missed anything, that's not due to cherry picking, that's called "over-looking." I made an effort. Now please go off yourself.

Watch out for this Steph guy, he has a huge smart-ass streak going.

YAY!

PS. I'm always a smartass.

 

[Amalie Muller]

Yeah and it's the result of me realizing that nobody on these websites knows what they're talking about.
No unanimity, no consistency.
So I'm just not gonna bother myself with it anymore.
<3

Perhaps if you were a little friendlier, people may be more happy to help you and share their knowledge?

But yes, everyone on sites like this has a different level of knowledge, and you have no way of knowing who really knows what they are talking about, or who only think they do.

This is why you must do the work yourself. Threads like this cannot give you a proper answer.

 

[stephsharik]

The part where you accused me of "cherry picking" was out of line. I gave mention to everything in that post. If I missed anything, that's not due to cherry picking, that's called "over-looking." I made an effort. Now please go off yourself.

Watch out for this Steph guy, he has a huge smart-ass streak going.

YAY!

Perhaps if you were a little friendlier, people may be more happy to help you and share their knowledge?

But yes, everyone on sites like this has a different level of knowledge, and you have no way of knowing who really knows what they are talking about, or who only think they do.

This is why you must do the work yourself. Threads like this cannot give you a proper answer.

I understand that. But because I am a naturalist and not an extreme idealist I don't trust my subjective understanding and experience. I was looking for some perspective. A "second opinion", if you will.
Notice that the moment I turned into a jackass when I stopped taking y'all seriously.
But if it makes you feel better, you did help a bit.

Basically I'm back to my starting point, when I first took the test and even got interested in typology.
I'm an NT. That's something to go on.

 

[Amalie Muller]

I understand that. But because I am a naturalist and not an extreme idealist I don't trust my subjective understanding and experience. I was looking for some perspective. A "second opinion", if you will.
Notice that the moment I turned into a jackass when I stopped taking y'all seriously.
But if it makes you feel better, you did help a bit.

Basically I'm back to my starting point, when I first took the test and even got interested in typology.
I'm an NT. That's something to go on.

Well yes, I think you're probably INTP. Not an Ne dom, because they repress Si, and you don't appear to. But with higher Ne than Si (so INxP).

I don't see much Ti, but you appear to have Fe rather than Fi, and inferior Fe at that. (INFJs tend to thank people who try to help them, for example, while TPs often criticize the value of the help.)

 

[Arctic Hysteria]

You don't at all sound like an INFJ to me. Either an INTP, or a depressed INTJ.

 

[Mal12345]

I'm not sure if I'm ti-dom with or an ni-dom. Both appear to be equally strong.

I've read a lot about the cognitive functions, but I'm on the fence here. It seems that my CFs are all jumbled.

 

[Amalie Muller]

I understand that. But because I am a naturalist and not an extreme idealist I don't trust my subjective understanding and experience. I was looking for some perspective. A "second opinion", if you will.
Notice that the moment I turned into a jackass when I stopped taking y'all seriously.
But if it makes you feel better, you did help a bit.

Basically I'm back to my starting point, when I first took the test and even got interested in typology.
I'm an NT. That's something to go on.

Naturalism is a weird philosophy! What makes you so confident the natural world is all there is?

Jungian typology is not a science. It is a theory to explain the human psyche (not the physical brain, etc.) so it may not be for you.
I

 

[Mal12345]

Well yes, I think you're probably INTP. Not an Ne dom, because they repress Si, and you don't appear to. But with higher Ne than Si (so INxP).

I don't see much Ti, but you appear to have Fe rather than Fi, and inferior Fe at that. (INFJs tend to thank people who try to help them, for example, while TPs often criticize the value of the help.)

I agree, but not in the sense that you've actually done any Jungian analysis. Only because Perceiving (as in the last letter) is easily bored by novelty and must move onto the next thing. The problem with [MENTION=20071]stephsharik[/MENTION] is that he doesn't give any specific examples, only generalities. But that in itself indicates a bias toward one function in particular.

 

[Amalie Muller]

I agree, but not in the sense that you've actually done any Jungian analysis. Only because Perceiving (as in the last letter) is easily bored by novelty and must move onto the next thing. The problem with [MENTION=20071]stephsharik[/MENTION] is that he doesn't give any specific examples, only generalities. But that in itself indicates a bias toward one function in particular.

Well of course. "Analysis" is, as I'm sure you know, for wimps.

 

[Mal12345]

Well of course. "Analysis" is, as I'm sure you know, for wimps.

Big tongue? Or as you would spell it, "tounge"?

 

[Amalie Muller]

Big tongue? Or as you would spell it, "tounge"?

Never measured it.

 

[stephsharik]

You don't at all sound like an INFJ to me. Either an INTP, or a depressed INTJ.

Out of curiosity, why would depression be a factor?

 

[stephsharik]

Naturalism is a weird philosophy! What makes you so confident the natural world is all there is?

Jungian typology is not a science. It is a theory to explain the human psyche (not the physical brain, etc.) so it may not be for you.
I

Between Naturalism, Dualism, and Idealism, I go with Naturalism because there is no evidence for the other options.

I know that typology isn't scientific, but that doesn't disqualify its usefulness.

 

[stephsharik]

I agree, but not in the sense that you've actually done any Jungian analysis. Only because Perceiving (as in the last letter) is easily bored by novelty and must move onto the next thing. The problem with [MENTION=20071]stephsharik[/MENTION] is that he doesn't give any specific examples, only generalities. But that in itself indicates a bias toward one function in particular.

What kind of specific examples would you like? I intentionally avoided giving them, since memory is unreliable and I didn't want to skew the example to support a specific cognitive function. I also wanted to avoid outlying examples that were not representative of my personality.
In other words, (setting aside the fact that I tend speak in generalities rather than specifics) I was doing my best to avoid bias.
The most unbiased (bias being mine) evaluation I received was the first five times I took the Myers Briggs test and kept getting INTJ.
Then I discovered Cognitive Functions and everything sort of went downhill from there.

 

[stephsharik]

And lastly, I apologize for being snarky and rude.
In criticizing, I was not criticizing the value of the input, per se. I criticize to get more perspective, to explore other angles. I evaluate each response that follows to get a bigger picture understanding.

I feed the discussion more and detailed information to see how it will evolve and what the end result would be.