Type me now that it's been a year

[Starry]

Well, regardless if I'm right or wrong, perhaps the following will help you out identifying your type. I will quote from the book: How everyday stress brings out our hidden personality. Was that really me? by Naomi L. Quenk.

Mentioning [MENTION=10082]Starry[/MENTION] for obvious reasons.

I will add my own commentary in spoilers.

Extraversion and Introversion

Strictly speaking, there are no introverts and extraverts pure and simple, but only introverted and extraverted function-types, such as thinking types, sensation types, etc. there are thus at least eight clearly distinguishable types. (1976a, p. 523).

When we come to analyze the personality, we find that the extravert makes a niche for himself in the world of relationships at the cost of unconsciousness (of himself as subject); while the introvert, in realizing his personality, commits the grossest mistake in the social sphere and blunders about in the most absurd way. These two very typical attitudes are enough to show -- quite apart from the types of physiological temperament described by Kretschmer -- how little one can fit human beings and their neuroses into the strait jacket of a single theory. (1954, p118)

We can therefore formulate the occurrences as follows: in the introvert the influence of the object produces an inferior extraversion [a], while in the extravert an inferior introversion takes the place of his social attitude. And we come back to the proposition from which we started: "The value of the one is the negation of value for the other." (1966, p58)

[a] Pi -> Pe (IxxJ) (irrational introverted dominants) or Ji -> Je (IxxP) (rational introverted dominants),
Pe -> Pi (ExxP) (irrational extraverted dominants) or Je -> Ji (ExxJ) (rational extraverted dominants)

Sensation (Sensing)

But the sensation type remains with things. He remains in a given reality. To him a thing is true when it is real. Consider what it means to an intuitive when something is real. It is just the wrong thing; it should not be, something else should be. But when a sensation type does no have given reality -- four walls in which to be -- he is sick. (1976b, p.19)

The specifically compulsive character of the neurotic symptoms is the unconscious counterpart of the easy-going character of the pure sensation type, who, from the standpoint of rational judgement, accepts indiscriminately everything that happens... This coercion overtakes the sensation type from unconscious, in the form of compulsion.... If he should become neurotic, it is much harder to treat him by rational means because the functions which the analyst must turn to are in relatively undifferentiated state. (1976a, p. 365) [a]

[a] P-dom (Pe or Pi) with no corresponding Aux (Ji or Je), but this is true for most Perceiving-dominant types in general, except Sensing is focused on sensation of course.
So example of types are the ESxP and ISxJ types, because they are both dominant perceiving types. The problem in MBTI is, making them (introverts) a J, just appears that way outwardly (the irony here is, if their Aux isn't engaged they will appear P-like). So they are dominant a P-type (internally/introverted). When one realises this, we need to identify if it was internally or externally, once realised the perceiving function's position.

The next question would be, so what is introverted sensing vs extraverted sensing? I think an example of introverted sensing would be coming from one's own body (think own health as an example), versus extraverted sensation that would be what can be experienced from externally, reality outside of one's mind. Of course this needs to be discussed, so that we can get clarity on the issue.

S(e or i)-dominants = Irrational Dominants

Intuition

The intuitive is always bothered by the reality of things; he fails from the standpoint of realities; he is always out of the possibilities of life. He is the man who plants a field and before the crop is ripe is off again to a new field... Give the intuitive four walls in which to be, and the only thing is how to get out of it, because to him a given situation is a prison which must be undone in the shortest time so that he can be off to new possibilities. (1976b, p. 19) [a]

[a] this would be both ENxP and INxJ types, hardly finishes something before moving on to the next. As explained, similar to (sensation types) above. Except, cannot accept the reality, what is right in front of them.
N(e or i)-dominants = Irrational Dominants

Thinking

If you know that thinking is highly differentiated, then feeling is undifferentiated. What does that mean? Does it mean these people have no feelings? No, on the contrary. They say, "I have very strong feelings. I am full of emotion and temperament." These people are under the sway of their emotions, they are caught by their emotions, they are overcome by their emotions at times. If, for instance, you study the private lives of professors it is a very interesting study. If you want to be fully informed as to how the intellectual behaves at home, ask his wife and she will be able to tell you a story! (1976b, p.18)

In the pursuit of his ideas [the introverted thinker] is generally stubborn, headstrong and quite unamenable to influence. His suggestibility to personal influences is in strange contrast to this. [a] He has only to be convinced of a person's seeming innocuousness to lay himself open to the most undesirable elements.... His style is cluttered with all sorts of adjuncts, accessories, qualifications, retractions, saving clauses, doubts, etc., which all come from his scrupulosity. (1976a, p. 385)

The feeling of the introverted thinking type is extraverted. He has the same kind of strong, loyal and warm feeling described as typical for the extraverted thinking type, but with the difference that the feeling of the introverted thinking type flows toward definite objects. (1976b, pp. 18, 19)

The more the feelings are repressed, the more deleterious is their secret influence on thinking that is otherwise beyond reproach... The self assertion of the personality is transferred to the formula. Truth is no longer allowed to speak for itself; it is identified with the subject and treated like a sensitive darling whom an evil-minded critic has wronged. (1976a, p. 350)

Because of the highly impersonal character of the conscious attitude, the unconscious feelings [of the introverted thinker] are extremely personal and oversensitive, giving rise to secret prejudices -- a readiness, for instance, to misconstrue any opposition to his formula as personal ill-will, or a constant dependency to make negative assumptions about other people in order to invalidate their arguments in advance -- in defence, naturally, of his own touchiness. His unconscious sensitivity makes him sharp in tone, acrimonious, aggressive. Insinuations multiply. His feelings have a sultry and resentful character -- always a mark of inferior function. (1976a, p.350)

I have frequently observed how an analyst, confronted with a terrific thinking type, for instance, will do his utmost to develop the feeling function directly out of the unconscious. Such an attempt is foredoomed to failure, because it involves too great a violation of the conscious standpoint. Should the violation nevertheless be successful, a really compulsive dependence of the patient on the analyst ensues, a transference that can only be brutally terminated, because, having been left without a standpoint, the patient has made the standpoint the analyst.... In order to cushion the impact of the unconscious, an irrational type [c] needs a stronger development of the rational auxiliary function present in consciousness (and vice versa). (1976a, p. 407)

[a] I think they refer to the INTP type here, but I could be wrong.
Ti -> Fe or Ti x x Fe (IxTP)
[c] P(e or i)-dom (N or S) with corresponding J-Aux (T), vice versa would be J-Tert (F), which would mean ExxP or IxxJ types.

Feeling

Disappointment [is] the strongest incentive to differentiation of feeling... [it] can supply the impulse either for a more or less brutal outburst of affect or for a modification and adjustment of feeling, and hence for its higher development. This culminates in wisdom if feeling is supplemented by reflection and rational insight. Wisdom is never violent: where wisdom reigns there is no conflict between thinking and feeling. (1970b, p 334)

It is true that feelings, if they have an emotional character, are accompanied by physiological affects; but there are definitely feelings which do not change the physiological condition. These feelings are very mental, they are not of an emotional nature. That is the distinction I make. Inasmuch as feeling is a function of values, you will readily understand that this is not a physiological condition. It can be something as abstract as abstract thinking. You would not expect abstract thinking to be physiological condition. Abstract thinking is what the term denotes. Differentiated thinking is rational; and so feeling can be rational in spite of the fact that many people mix up the terminology. (1976b, p. 30)

If you have a value which is overwhelmingly strong for you it will become an emotion at a certain point, namely, when it reaches such an intensity as to cause a physiological enervation. (1976b, p. 26) [a]

The reverse is true of the feeling type. The feeling type, if he is natural, never allows himself to be disturbed by thinking; but when he gets sophisticated and somewhat neurotic he is disturbed by thoughts. Then thinking appears in a compulsory way, he cannot get away from certain thoughts. He is a very nice chap, but he has extraordinary convictions and ideas, and his thinking is of the inferior kind. He is caught by this thinking, entangled in certain thoughts.... On the other hand, an intellectual, when caught by his feelings, says, "I feel just like that," and there is no argument against it. Only when he is thoroughly boiled in his emotion will he come out of it. He cannot be reasoned out of his feeling, and he would be a very incomplete man if he could. (1976b, pp. 18, 19)

She begins consciously to feel "what other people think." Naturally, other people are thinking all sorts of mean things, scheming evil, contriving plots... (1976a, p. 391) [a]

[a] rational-dominant, Ji or Je-dom, Fi or Fe-dominant. Fi, who outbursts will feel unnatural to them if they appear Fe-like.

Anyway, my opinion is open to criticism I need to learn too... Although I hate discussing my own ideas and thoughts with others. I blame you e5! :backout:

This is super good/useful chubber

 

[Frosty]

You feel more Je than Pe to me tbh.

I sort of feel you as an ESTJ 3. But thats not... Im not going to place a bet on that or anything.

 

[Dreamer]

You and I share some perspectives [MENTION=27952]Merced[/MENTION], but I do agree with @Eskimo 2 that you seem more Je than Pe. BUT! I'm not going to rule out ENFP at this point because we both know that behavior has little to do with someone's ultimate typing They can help steer us in a general direction this way or that, but that's really about all they can do.

I'll have to come back to this thread when I get a chance. There are some really interesting bits about your personality and in the answers you've provided in the OP, I feel those are more directed from life experience and personal circumstance rather than a particular type. I'll give some concrete evidence that leads me to a general feel for you, as I know you also appreciate

Be back in a bit, gotta run!

 

[Merced]

Well, regardless if I'm right or wrong, perhaps the following will help you out identifying your type. I will quote from the book: How everyday stress brings out our hidden personality. Was that really me? by Naomi L. Quenk.

Mentioning [MENTION=10082]Starry[/MENTION] for obvious reasons.

I will add my own commentary in spoilers.

This took a little to digest. I want to make sure I'm understanding the passage as thoroughly as possible.

Extraversion and Introversion

Strictly speaking, there are no introverts and extraverts pure and simple, but only introverted and extraverted function-types, such as thinking types, sensation types, etc. there are thus at least eight clearly distinguishable types. (1976a, p. 523).

When we come to analyze the personality, we find that the extravert makes a niche for himself in the world of relationships at the cost of unconsciousness (of himself as subject); while the introvert, in realizing his personality, commits the grossest mistake in the social sphere and blunders about in the most absurd way. These two very typical attitudes are enough to show -- quite apart from the types of physiological temperament described by Kretschmer -- how little one can fit human beings and their neuroses into the strait jacket of a single theory. (1954, p118)

We can therefore formulate the occurrences as follows: in the introvert the influence of the object produces an inferior extraversion [a], while in the extravert an inferior introversion takes the place of his social attitude. And we come back to the proposition from which we started: "The value of the one is the negation of value for the other." (1966, p58)

[a] Pi -> Pe (IxxJ) (irrational introverted dominants) or Ji -> Je (IxxP) (rational introverted dominants),
Pe -> Pi (ExxP) (irrational extraverted dominants) or Je -> Ji (ExxJ) (rational extraverted dominants)

So this is saying that, especially when you've narrowed your type down to say xBCD, the inferior function should be examined and holds more weight than even your dominant in identification.

Sensation (Sensing)

But the sensation type remains with things. He remains in a given reality. To him a thing is true when it is real. Consider what it means to an intuitive when something is real. It is just the wrong thing; it should not be, something else should be. But when a sensation type does no have given reality -- four walls in which to be -- he is sick. (1976b, p.19)

The specifically compulsive character of the neurotic symptoms is the unconscious counterpart of the easy-going character of the pure sensation type, who, from the standpoint of rational judgement, accepts indiscriminately everything that happens... This coercion overtakes the sensation type from unconscious, in the form of compulsion.... If he should become neurotic, it is much harder to treat him by rational means because the functions which the analyst must turn to are in relatively undifferentiated state. (1976a, p. 365) [a]

[a] P-dom (Pe or Pi) with no corresponding Aux (Ji or Je), but this is true for most Perceiving-dominant types in general, except Sensing is focused on sensation of course.
So example of types are the ESxP and ISxJ types, because they are both dominant perceiving types. The problem in MBTI is, making them (introverts) a J, just appears that way outwardly (the irony here is, if their Aux isn't engaged they will appear P-like). So they are dominant a P-type (internally/introverted). When one realises this, we need to identify if it was internally or externally, once realised the perceiving function's position.

The next question would be, so what is introverted sensing vs extraverted sensing? I think an example of introverted sensing would be coming from one's own body (think own health as an example), versus extraverted sensation that would be what can be experienced from externally, reality outside of one's mind. Of course this needs to be discussed, so that we can get clarity on the issue.

S(e or i)-dominants = Irrational Dominants

Intuition

The intuitive is always bothered by the reality of things; he fails from the standpoint of realities; he is always out of the possibilities of life. He is the man who plants a field and before the crop is ripe is off again to a new field... Give the intuitive four walls in which to be, and the only thing is how to get out of it, because to him a given situation is a prison which must be undone in the shortest time so that he can be off to new possibilities. (1976b, p. 19) [a]

[a] this would be both ENxP and INxJ types, hardly finishes something before moving on to the next. As explained, similar to (sensation types) above. Except, cannot accept the reality, what is right in front of them.
N(e or i)-dominants = Irrational Dominants

Out of these two descriptions, I identify more with the ENxP/INxJ description. Is there more information I can look into?

Thinking

If you know that thinking is highly differentiated, then feeling is undifferentiated. What does that mean? Does it mean these people have no feelings? No, on the contrary. They say, "I have very strong feelings. I am full of emotion and temperament." These people are under the sway of their emotions, they are caught by their emotions, they are overcome by their emotions at times. If, for instance, you study the private lives of professors it is a very interesting study. If you want to be fully informed as to how the intellectual behaves at home, ask his wife and she will be able to tell you a story! (1976b, p.18)

In the pursuit of his ideas [the introverted thinker] is generally stubborn, headstrong and quite unamenable to influence. His suggestibility to personal influences is in strange contrast to this. [a] He has only to be convinced of a person's seeming innocuousness to lay himself open to the most undesirable elements.... His style is cluttered with all sorts of adjuncts, accessories, qualifications, retractions, saving clauses, doubts, etc., which all come from his scrupulosity. (1976a, p. 385)

The feeling of the introverted thinking type is extraverted. He has the same kind of strong, loyal and warm feeling described as typical for the extraverted thinking type, but with the difference that the feeling of the introverted thinking type flows toward definite objects. (1976b, pp. 18, 19)

The more the feelings are repressed, the more deleterious is their secret influence on thinking that is otherwise beyond reproach... The self assertion of the personality is transferred to the formula. Truth is no longer allowed to speak for itself; it is identified with the subject and treated like a sensitive darling whom an evil-minded critic has wronged. (1976a, p. 350)

Because of the highly impersonal character of the conscious attitude, the unconscious feelings [of the introverted thinker] are extremely personal and oversensitive, giving rise to secret prejudices -- a readiness, for instance, to misconstrue any opposition to his formula as personal ill-will, or a constant dependency to make negative assumptions about other people in order to invalidate their arguments in advance -- in defence, naturally, of his own touchiness. His unconscious sensitivity makes him sharp in tone, acrimonious, aggressive. Insinuations multiply. His feelings have a sultry and resentful character -- always a mark of inferior function. (1976a, p.350)

I have frequently observed how an analyst, confronted with a terrific thinking type, for instance, will do his utmost to develop the feeling function directly out of the unconscious. Such an attempt is foredoomed to failure, because it involves too great a violation of the conscious standpoint. Should the violation nevertheless be successful, a really compulsive dependence of the patient on the analyst ensues, a transference that can only be brutally terminated, because, having been left without a standpoint, the patient has made the standpoint the analyst.... In order to cushion the impact of the unconscious, an irrational type [c] needs a stronger development of the rational auxiliary function present in consciousness (and vice versa). (1976a, p. 407)

[a] I think they refer to the INTP type here, but I could be wrong.
Ti -> Fe or Ti x x Fe (IxTP)
[c] P(e or i)-dom (N or S) with corresponding J-Aux (T), vice versa would be J-Tert (F), which would mean ExxP or IxxJ types.

Feeling

Disappointment [is] the strongest incentive to differentiation of feeling... [it] can supply the impulse either for a more or less brutal outburst of affect or for a modification and adjustment of feeling, and hence for its higher development. This culminates in wisdom if feeling is supplemented by reflection and rational insight. Wisdom is never violent: where wisdom reigns there is no conflict between thinking and feeling. (1970b, p 334)

It is true that feelings, if they have an emotional character, are accompanied by physiological affects; but there are definitely feelings which do not change the physiological condition. These feelings are very mental, they are not of an emotional nature. That is the distinction I make. Inasmuch as feeling is a function of values, you will readily understand that this is not a physiological condition. It can be something as abstract as abstract thinking. You would not expect abstract thinking to be physiological condition. Abstract thinking is what the term denotes. Differentiated thinking is rational; and so feeling can be rational in spite of the fact that many people mix up the terminology. (1976b, p. 30)

If you have a value which is overwhelmingly strong for you it will become an emotion at a certain point, namely, when it reaches such an intensity as to cause a physiological enervation. (1976b, p. 26) [a]

The reverse is true of the feeling type. The feeling type, if he is natural, never allows himself to be disturbed by thinking; but when he gets sophisticated and somewhat neurotic he is disturbed by thoughts. Then thinking appears in a compulsory way, he cannot get away from certain thoughts. He is a very nice chap, but he has extraordinary convictions and ideas, and his thinking is of the inferior kind. He is caught by this thinking, entangled in certain thoughts.... On the other hand, an intellectual, when caught by his feelings, says, "I feel just like that," and there is no argument against it. Only when he is thoroughly boiled in his emotion will he come out of it. He cannot be reasoned out of his feeling, and he would be a very incomplete man if he could. (1976b, pp. 18, 19)

She begins consciously to feel "what other people think." Naturally, other people are thinking all sorts of mean things, scheming evil, contriving plots... (1976a, p. 391) [a]

[a] rational-dominant, Ji or Je-dom, Fi or Fe-dominant. Fi, who outbursts will feel unnatural to them if they appear Fe-like.

Are these two sections strictly talking about the Ti-Fe axis? They seem a little... incohesive.

Anyway, my opinion is open to criticism I need to learn too... Although I hate discussing my own ideas and thoughts with others. I blame you e5! :backout:

I'm gonna look more into Quenk's work before making an argument for or against this. These interpretations of functions are new to me. Thanks for posting it (in such a nice format too!)

 

[Merced]

Merced, how do you behave in times of stress? How are you like when the world turns their back on you? What makes you go crazy?

Hmm... stress. Sometimes I completely drop something if it stresses me out. As someone who's indecisive, I am pretty good at cutting my losses. I hate wasting my time. At times where I can't just walk away from something stressing me out, I try to bulldoze through it. Solve the problem as fast as possible. A time that comes to mind is the day of a DECA competition last year. No one was prepared besides me. Others were missing stuff for their slideshows or missing rides or had incomplete paperwork... My boyfriend at the time, an INTJ, was missing his fucking shoelaces. I remember being so enraged at everyone and then just fixing it. Practically ran laps around my high school in a business suit with heels on. After I had solved everything for everyone, I cried on the bus ride to competition because I sincerely felt like I lost an internal battle. I won 2nd place out of about 40 people though. And everyone was grateful, so it wasn't like I did all that for nothing. DECA was always a source of stress for me... I definitely cared about it way more than anyone else participating. Guess that's why I always got better results.

That sorta segways into the next question? I don't really get it. Betrayal isn't something that deeply affects me. I trust people until I'm given a reason not to. Since it's not hard to get the benefit of the doubt from me, it's not hard to lose it either. My issues with the INTP... I was pretty distraught over it. I think that situation touched much more on my core fears rather than my functions though, haha. In a way, I assume everyone will turn on me. Not in a "oh everyone is out to get me" way. I just acknowledge that people are looking out for themselves before anyone else. I try to be strategic with who I let turn on me though. Ah, but that's another enneagram thing.

Being trapped will instantly drive me insane. Be it literally, like how I was locked in a hospital room for a week... Or socially, like how it was after my falling out with the INTP... Or environmentally, like how I'm currently living in the South despite all my family living on the west coast... There is no hell comparable to heaven without a door. This isn't the stereotypical "I don't like commitment, teehee" Ne bullshit either. I actually like commitment. I can sit still. What I can't do is be presented a problem and have no solutions. The last few months have been awful for that very reason. I had this problem but nothing I was doing worked. I just had to sit there and let things happen like a fucking chump instead of fixing things. No moving forward, no reasonable thinking, just me trying to be 'patient'.

 

[Pionart]

Hmm... stress. Sometimes I completely drop something if it stresses me out. As someone who's indecisive, I am pretty good at cutting my losses. I hate wasting my time. At times where I can't just walk away from something stressing me out, I try to bulldoze through it. Solve the problem as fast as possible. A time that comes to mind is the day of a DECA competition last year. No one was prepared besides me. Others were missing stuff for their slideshows or missing rides or had incomplete paperwork... My boyfriend at the time, an INTJ, was missing his fucking shoelaces. I remember being so enraged at everyone and then just fixing it. Practically ran laps around my high school in a business suit with heels on. After I had solved everything for everyone, I cried on the bus ride to competition because I sincerely felt like I lost an internal battle. I won 2nd place out of about 40 people though. And everyone was grateful, so it wasn't like I did all that for nothing. DECA was always a source of stress for me... I definitely cared about it way more than anyone else participating. Guess that's why I always got better results.

That sorta segways into the next question? I don't really get it. Betrayal isn't something that deeply affects me. I trust people until I'm given a reason not to. Since it's not hard to get the benefit of the doubt from me, it's not hard to lose it either. My issues with the INTP... I was pretty distraught over it. I think that situation touched much more on my core fears rather than my functions though, haha. In a way, I assume everyone will turn on me. Not in a "oh everyone is out to get me" way. I just acknowledge that people are looking out for themselves before anyone else. I try to be strategic with who I let turn on me though. Ah, but that's another enneagram thing.

Being trapped will instantly drive me insane. Be it literally, like how I was locked in a hospital room for a week... Or socially, like how it was after my falling out with the INTP... Or environmentally, like how I'm currently living in the South despite all my family living on the west coast... There is no hell comparable to heaven without a door. This isn't the stereotypical "I don't like commitment, teehee" Ne bullshit either. I actually like commitment. I can sit still. What I can't do is be presented a problem and have no solutions. The last few months have been awful for that very reason. I had this problem but nothing I was doing worked. I just had to sit there and let things happen like a fucking chump instead of fixing things. No moving forward, no reasonable thinking, just me trying to be 'patient'.

Notice how you mention emotions a lot (I bolded what I could see of those)? Typical of Fi. You are ENFP (to the best of my knowledge, I mean, of course. I don't want to sound like I really really know what I'm doing because I don't :/ ). For the Ne, notice how in there is a lot of metaphors? "drop something", "cutting my losses", "benefit of the doubt", "falling out", "no hell comparable to heaven without a door". Not that metaphors are the only thing that Ne speaks about. "Solve the problem as fast as possible" strikes me as a Te way of evaluating something, but being quick-minded is probably typical of Ne-doms. And "nothing I was doing worked" may indicate a weaker Te. The bit about you being the only prepared one might be where any speculation about being an Si type comes from - yes, it was due to Si, but the kind of Si that an ENFP can have too. Overall, I don't see too much terminology that would indicate Si, plus the fact that, especially for a female, being an ENFP is wayyy more common on typology forums than being an Si type. The thing about people typing people as Ns on here isn't because Ns are smarter or superior or anything, it's just because it actually is way more fkn common. Typology isn't really something that is interesting to most of those who focus on the world of the senses, although it could be, but so far it has mainly an Intuitive fan-base.

Hopefully my approach of isolating terms is better than the haphazard guessing that I'm guessing others are engaging in?

 

[Hiraeth]

Notice how you mention emotions a lot (I bolded what I could see of those)? Typical of Fi. You are ENFP (to the best of my knowledge, I mean, of course. I don't want to sound like I really really know what I'm doing because I don't :/ ). For the Ne, notice how in there is a lot of metaphors? "drop something", "cutting my losses", "benefit of the doubt", "falling out", "no hell comparable to heaven without a door". Not that metaphors are the only thing that Ne speaks about. "Solve the problem as fast as possible" strikes me as a Te way of evaluating something, but being quick-minded is probably typical of Ne-doms. And "nothing I was doing worked" may indicate a weaker Te. The bit about you being the only prepared one might be where any speculation about being an Si type comes from - yes, it was due to Si, but the kind of Si that an ENFP can have too. Overall, I don't see too much terminology that would indicate Si, plus the fact that, especially for a female, being an ENFP is wayyy more common on typology forums than being an Si type. The thing about people typing people as Ns on here isn't because Ns are smarter or superior or anything, it's just because it actually is way more fkn common. Typology isn't really something that is interesting to most of those who focus on the world of the senses, although it could be, but so far it has mainly an Intuitive fan-base.

Hopefully my approach of isolating terms is better than the haphazard guessing that I'm guessing others are engaging in?

Those metaphors you’ve mentioned except for maybe the last one are a part of everyday language that I and many people use. They aren’t abstract enough and are common phrases in the English language. Ne-doms would use zanier metaphors than that, I would think. Not saying she doesn’t use Ne, but I don’t think those metaphors in particular are a good representation of Ne.

 

[Pionart]

Those metaphors you’ve mentioned except for maybe the last one are a part of everyday language that I and many people use. They aren’t abstract enough and are common phrases in the English language. Ne-doms would use zanier metaphors than that, I would think. Not saying she doesn’t use Ne, but I don’t think those metaphors in particular are a good representation of Ne.

It's possible to use those phrases without being an Ne type, just like it's possible for anyone to mention their emotional state, but basically from what I understand the figurative use of language is associated with the Intuition function, however Ni is more conceptual in its use of terms. And by the way, many people are Ne types, and you might be included in that for all I know (it's quite likely in fact). Now, if you were to say that ALL people use these terms then that would be a different matter, because this is meant to be a typology i.e. able to categorise an individual into one of 16 categories based on their function use. But, yeah, it would be expected that many people would use the terms...

--

Run down of my own post for comparison:

Ni terms: possible, being, from what I understand, associated, conceptual, different matter, expected, likely, categorise
Fe terms: use those phrases, many people, included
Ti terms: for all I know
Se terms:

Unsure: emotional state (Fe or Ni?), meant (not sure), in fact (Se?), Intuition function, Ni, Ne types (Ni for the last 3?), basically (Ti or Ni)

Just a draft run down, but that's basically how I would do it.

 

[Merced]

It's possible to use those phrases without being an Ne type, just like it's possible for anyone to mention their emotional state, but basically from what I understand the figurative use of language is associated with the Intuition function, however Ni is more conceptual in its use of terms. And by the way, many people are Ne types, and you might be included in that for all I know (it's quite likely in fact). Now, if you were to say that ALL people use these terms then that would be a different matter, because this is meant to be a typology i.e. able to categorise an individual into one of 16 categories based on their function use. But, yeah, it would be expected that many people would use the terms...

--

Run down of my own post for comparison:

Ni terms: possible, being, from what I understand, associated, conceptual, different matter, expected, likely, categorise
Fe terms: use those phrases, many people, included
Ti terms: for all I know
Se terms:

Unsure: emotional state (Fe or Ni?), meant (not sure), in fact (Se?), Intuition function, Ni, Ne types (Ni for the last 3?), basically (Ti or Ni)

Just a draft run down, but that's basically how I would do it.

It's no surprise that we share many opinions on how MBTI should be interpreted.

But wouldn't your method of typing be more efficient if it analyzed chunks as opposed to single tidbits? Vocabulary is pretty versatile and aspects like syntax can change a sentence's meaning instantly. I think if you look at larger portions, you could be more thorough.

 

[Pionart]

It's no surprise that we share many opinions on how MBTI should be interpreted.

But wouldn't your method of typing be more efficient if it analyzed chunks as opposed to single tidbits? Vocabulary is pretty versatile and aspects like syntax can change a sentence's meaning instantly. I think if you look at larger portions, you could be more thorough.

Well yeah I would want to get it more thorough. One example is that I think an Fe type may be more likely to speak about the emotional states of others rather than themself, to sort of say what the other person would be saying. Thus it is not a reflection of their conscious processes but their unconscious processes. Still, when the context is talking about one's own emotional reactions, I think this is mainly Fi territory.

I'm trying to keep it simple by just analysing words/small phrases. I think if it works, then it works, but so far I haven't applied it enough. I just saw a really cool connection when I first applied it, which was that when I looked at a post by myself and an NFP and looked at what terms seemed to be subjective in nature, our terms were completely different in nature. They had a lot of moral and emotional terms (Fi) and mine were largely conceptual. But yeah, context would be important, like I could speak of "introverted intuition" and probably have a different thing in mind, or use it in a different way, compared to an Ne type.

Could you please give me an example of how you would analyse a post for its language use? I'd like to see a concrete example of what you have in mind.

 

[thoughtlost]

[MENTION=27952]Merced[/MENTION],

Hey, I saw that you tagged me. I have been away from MBTI for a while (my focus has been on socionics) so I'll try to fit how I see you into that (from the little I know of you... I have been away from talking to you guys on vent/discord for a long time now). But in relation to socionics, it seems like you'd be an ENFj. You have high energy and have pretty big ideals for yourself. I could say more, but this is enough if you decide to look into socionics.

For enneagram, I can think of you as a 3w2 or a 2w3. Both sound ok to me (so which you feel is really you will make sense to me!) If not, then I could see you being a 6w7 too... but it looks like you're settled with 2w3 so I am happy with that.

mmmmbti: lol. Yeah, I see that people have given you different types ...MBTI is much harder since each individual has their own understanding of the types, so from my understanding, I'd be comfortable calling you an extrovert. I don't think you're ENTP, ENTJ, ESTJ, or ESTP. So that leaves me with ENFP, ESFP, ESFJ, or ENFJ... and that's all I got so far haha. I'll have to think about it a bit more, but I am like 91.2% positive your type is somewhere in there.

 

[Merced]

Well yeah I would want to get it more thorough. One example is that I think an Fe type may be more likely to speak about the emotional states of others rather than themself, to sort of say what the other person would be saying. Thus it is not a reflection of their conscious processes but their unconscious processes. Still, when the context is talking about one's own emotional reactions, I think this is mainly Fi territory.

I'm trying to keep it simple by just analysing words/small phrases. I think if it works, then it works, but so far I haven't applied it enough. I just saw a really cool connection when I first applied it, which was that when I looked at a post by myself and an NFP and looked at what terms seemed to be subjective in nature, our terms were completely different in nature. They had a lot of moral and emotional terms (Fi) and mine were largely conceptual. But yeah, context would be important, like I could speak of "introverted intuition" and probably have a different thing in mind, or use it in a different way, compared to an Ne type.

Could you please give me an example of how you would analyse a post for its language use? I'd like to see a concrete example of what you have in mind.

Do you remember that time on Discord where I aggressively interviewed that ISFJ fellow and then you took sentences out of their response by placing which function was behind the statement? It's sorta like that. Can't necessarily give you an example right now because I think a big part of picking apart words is making sure they are directly answering a question.

 

[Pionart]

Do you remember that time on Discord where I aggressively interviewed that ISFJ fellow and then you took sentences out of their response by placing which function was behind the statement? It's sorta like that. Can't necessarily give you an example right now because I think a big part of picking apart words is making sure they are directly answering a question.

Ok, well yeah, so I have two methods at the moment that I'm working on: the first one I made, where I would use a full sentence/paragraph and give it a function was one way, but I found it to be far too error-prone and subjective in its analysis. Like, it seems to work for myself, and even when I record myself on video and then watch it back, I can see where the sections seem to indicate which function is being focused on, but I think I really failed to apply it too well to other people. That's why I'm liking this other approach at the moment where I isolate words and small phrases. It seems far more concrete in how it works, and is a lot easier to apply.

Basically what I do, or would do, is: look for words that are subjective in nature, i.e. which reference an individual's viewpoint. Then I look at which words are judgements and which are descriptions, and then I make the judgement call between T/F and N/S from there. Then I would do the same for the objective terms that they use.

So, I think both methods should work, but the one which isolates terms is going to be much easier to apply, which is why I want to focus on that at the moment. That other methods I have, I've recently became skeptical of whether it applies at all, because of how difficult it's been to use, and my tendency to read into things in a way which doesn't measure up to reality. So that might receive a surge of energy at a later date, but my focus -now- is the subjective/objective terms approach.

 

[Forever]

@Merced you give me no INFJ vibes lol.

still fun to talk to at times, but we do not relate.

Personality does really come out during card games too that we played online together... I mean very strong Te/Ne streak you have


I could see you ESTJ but not as ripened as EJCC

 

[Merced]

Ok, well yeah, so I have two methods at the moment that I'm working on: the first one I made, where I would use a full sentence/paragraph and give it a function was one way, but I found it to be far too error-prone and subjective in its analysis. Like, it seems to work for myself, and even when I record myself on video and then watch it back, I can see where the sections seem to indicate which function is being focused on, but I think I really failed to apply it too well to other people. That's why I'm liking this other approach at the moment where I isolate words and small phrases. It seems far more concrete in how it works, and is a lot easier to apply.

Basically what I do, or would do, is: look for words that are subjective in nature, i.e. which reference an individual's viewpoint. Then I look at which words are judgements and which are descriptions, and then I make the judgement call between T/F and N/S from there. Then I would do the same for the objective terms that they use.

So, I think both methods should work, but the one which isolates terms is going to be much easier to apply, which is why I want to focus on that at the moment. That other methods I have, I've recently became skeptical of whether it applies at all, because of how difficult it's been to use, and my tendency to read into things in a way which doesn't measure up to reality. So that might receive a surge of energy at a later date, but my focus -now- is the subjective/objective terms approach.

Language, especially the English language, is very much contextual. By isolating words, you are leaving out meaning, passing over aspects of dialect, and miscalculating word weight. Issues with interpretation using the first method is not the method's error, it's the piece you are interpreting.

I strongly believe that you cannot fully and/or accurately type someone without some sort of probing. Observation is simply not enough to determine someone's inner thoughts process, their functions. Using method A on someone's post about pasta would not work. It may put you in the right direction, but it will not give you a full size view.

Hop on Discord sometime. We can try it together.

 

[chubber]

INTJ portrait (to help dispel all those INTJ myths)

INTJ

1. Introverted intuition - Your dominant attitude of consciousness

Your general attitude towards life is governed by subjective factors with subjective determinants being the decisive ones rather than the external conditions. Your intuition (known as unconscious perception) is in line with your general attitude of consciousness (introverted) and is also concerned with your own, subjective, perception of external reality/objects. Such subjective perceptions are psychological and are not a physical reality.

These inner objects appear to your intuitive perception as subjective images of things. However, these contents are not accessible to experience through sensation. For you the subjective factor becomes the decisive factor and your perception is never limited by the external possibilities. Because intuition excludes the co-operation of sensation the images appear as though detached from the subject, as though existing in themselves without relation to the person.

As an introverted intuitive you move from image to image, chasing after every possibility without establishing any connection between the event and yourself. Your introverted intuition captures the images which arise prior to experiencing it in reality. It comes from the inherited foundations of your unconscious mind. Your introverted intuition provides information for the understanding of general occurrences: it can even foresee new possibilities in more or less clear outline, as well as the event which later actually transpires.

However, as an introverted intuitive you stop at perception; perception is your principal activity. The problem arises when you try to relate yourself to your vision; the symbolism is unadapted to the actual present-day reality. You remain unintelligible and your language is too subjective for anyone to understand you. Your argument may lack convincing reason. Your voice is like the 'voice of one crying in the wilderness'.

As a result, you may feel frustrated and become impulsive and unrestrained either by exhibiting psychosomatic symptoms or by obsessing about your ties with other objects or people.

Since your main activity is directed within, nothing is outwardly visible but reserve, secretiveness, lack of sympathy, or uncertainty, and an apparently groundless perplexity. When anything does come to the surface, is received with prejudice. Accordingly you are mostly underestimated, or at least misunderstood. To the same degree as you fail to understand yourself you are also powerless to understand why you are so constantly undervalued by public opinion.

You may not see that your outward-going expression is enchanted by the abundance of subjective events. What happens there is so captivating, and of such inexhaustible attraction, that you may not appreciate the fact that your way of communicating it does not portray your experience as it comes to you. People may lose patience with your fragmented communication, lack of conviction and warmth of expression. In fact you may show quite a brusque, repelling demeanour towards the outer world, although you are quite unaware, and have not the least intention of showing it.

All of this happens because is hard for you to translate your inner experience into intelligible language. Life may present itself with overwhelming external difficulties, which have a very sobering effect on your inner world and occasionally bring to light a more human expression. Viewed from a higher standpoint, you are the living evidence to the fact that this world is not purely external but also it exists within. Your life teaches more than your words.

2. Extraverted thinking - Your auxiliary function

Your dominant attitude (introverted intuition) is supported by the auxiliary function of extraverted (objective) thinking. Extraverted thinking grounds you and ultimately helps you analyse what your introverted intuition brings in order to give it a rational form. As an extraverted thinker your life is mainly ruled by reflective thinking. This means that every important action you take proceeds from intellectually considered motives. The aim of your interactions is to bring your life activities into relation with intellectual conclusions, which are always orientated by objective data (whether objective facts or generally valid ideas). Your decisions are based on either the actual objective reality or on the objectively orientated, intellectual formula. By this formula are good and evil measured, and beauty and ugliness determined. All is right that corresponds with this formula; all is wrong that contradicts it; and everything that is neutral to it is purely accidental.

Because to you this formula seems to correspond with the meaning of the world, it also becomes a world-law whose realisation must be achieved at all times and seasons, both individually and collectively. You are demanding that others submit to and obey this formula. Any person who refuses to obey is wrong - he is resisting the world-law, and is, therefore, unreasonable, immoral, and without a conscience. This moral code forbids you to tolerate exceptions; this ideal must, under all the circumstances, be realised. In your eyes it is the purest conceivable formulation of objective reality, and, therefore, must also be generally valid truth, quite indispensable for the salvation of man.

Your position has nothing to do with a great love for your neighbour, but rather from a higher standpoint of justice and truth. Everything that appears to invalidate this formula is mere imperfection, an accidental miss-fire, something to be eliminated on the next occasion, or, in the event of further failure, then clearly a sickness.

If as an extraverted thinker you expand your formula to accommodate feeling-type decisions you may play a useful role in social life, either as a reformer or as a propagator of important innovations. But the more rigid the formula, the more you can develop into a grumbler, a crafty reasoner, and a self-righteous critic, who would like to impress both yourself and others into one schema. The majority of extraverted thinkers fall between these two extremes.

The more extreme the tests score the more dictatorial and tyrannical the extraverted thinking is in its manifestation. Usually it is the nearest relatives who have to taste the most disagreeable results of your extraverted formula, since they are the first to be unmercifully blessed with it. But above all you yourself are the one who suffers the most.

In the first place, all forms dependent upon feeling will become repressed in your type, for instance, aesthetic activities, taste, artistic sense, the art of friendship, etc. Irrational forms such as religious experiences, passions and the like can be obliterated even to the point of complete unconsciousness. Those forms dependent on feeling with have to lead an existence that is largely unconscious. Sometimes the forms of life repressed by your intellectual attitude is largely unconscious. Sometimes the forms of life repressed by your intellectual attitude can reach a definite intensity turning into neurosis. In most cases, however, it does not go so far, because you will instinctively mitigate it via reasoning. In this way a safety-valve is created.

Such feeling tendencies or functions as are excluded from any participation and kept in a relatively undeveloped state and sometimes greatly distorted as they cannot be entirely eliminated. A part of the feeling remains insubordinate, and therefore must be repressed. When repression succeeds it works subconsciously in opposition to your aim, even producing effects whose causation is a complete enigma to you. For example, purely ethical reasons may lead you into critical situations, which sometimes appear decided by other than ethical motives. Your need to save the day often leads you to employ means which only tend to precipitate what you most desire to avoid. Extraverted idealists, in their desire to assist humanity is so consuming that they will not shrink from any lying and dishonest means in the pursuit of their ideal. This is sanctioned by the formula "the end justifies the means". This is how a suppressed feeling-function, operating seductively and unconsciously, could bring you into trouble with others or society.

Other manifestation of suppression of feeling is an extreme rational, impersonal attitude where you can do a very considerable wrong to your own personal interests. You may neglect your health, lose social position, you may be wronged morally and financially, all in the service of an ideal. Your immediate family may see you as dictatorial, whiles the outer world will you as humane and kind.

Your unconscious feelings can be highly personal and oversensitive, giving rise to the prejudices, e.g. a tendency to defend by making negative guesses regarding the qualities of others in order to invalidate their arguments beforehand. As a result of this unconscious sensitiveness, your expression and tone frequently can become sharp, pointed, aggressive, and insinuated. The suppressed feelings bring resentment: no matter how generous your sacrifice is your corresponding feelings are petty, suspicious, cross-grained, and conservative.

The more prejudice in your thinking the more feelings are repressed and in return the more rigidly dogmatic your intellectual stand point. Thinking in an extreme extroverted thinker can gain the religious character of absoluteness. It becomes, as it were, an intellectual superstition. Everything else is repressed but thought forms a counter-position, giving rise to paroxysms of doubt. As a defence against doubt, the conscious attitude grows fanatical. Fanaticism, after all, is merely overcompensated doubt. For example an extreme irrationality develops, in opposition to the conscious rationalism, or it becomes highly archaic and superstitious, in opposition to a conscious standpoint imbued with modern science.

Your thought as the thought of the extraverted thinking type is positive, i.e. it produces. It either leads to new facts or to general conception. Your judgement is generally synthetic. Even when you analyse you construct, because you always advance beyond analysis to a new combination, or a further conception which re-unites the analysed material in a new way or you add something further to the given material. You always have to substitute a fresh value for the one that is demolished.

This quality is due to the fact that thought is the main channel into which your energy flows, a constant pondering and brooding upon things past and gone, in an effort to analyse and digest them.

3. The introverted Feeling Type - Your tertiary function

As an introverted feeling type you have a preference for externalising your thinking versus feeling, but this doesn't mean that you are an emotionless being. In fact regardless of how powerful your emotions are you often get lost in translation, because your feeling function is introverted and the thinking is extraverted for all to see. Therefore to many people you will appear detached, clinical and flat in your emotional repertoire.

This situation happens because introverted feeling is concerned mostly with subjective preconditions and not much with being in line with commonly shared expressed feelings about objective reality. Therefore your expressed feelings often depreciate the reality out there in an effort to stand above it and give a reality to the underlying images. It is as if you strive after an inner intensity and the objects in reality contribute only as a stimulus. This introverted feeling makes you silent and difficult to access, it makes you shrink from the brutality of reality on order to give depth of feeling to the inner subjective experience/image. You tend to put forward negative-feeling judgements or assume an air of profound indifference, as a measure of self-defence.

In your relationships with people you generally limit your emotional investments in a small number of individuals - more focused and more discriminating in your approach. This is perhaps why you show little interest in social networking and typically invest yourself emotionally in your family along with very few friends. Your introverted feeling type may also propel you to invest a great deal of time in acquiring self-knowledge and to understand who you are as unique individual.

4. Extroverted Sensation - Your inferior function

Sensation - sometimes called repressed function, it is most unconscious of the four functions. It is also the most difficult to access, understand, and integrate. Extraverted Sensing makes you less attuned to the details or concrete elements of life. While you take in plenty of sensory data from the outside world, you intuitively synthesise without the necessarily. registering particular environmental details. Your dominant function, the introverted intuition, will interpret the sensory information. This is why you may often seem oblivious to the details of your surroundings.

However, you are not unaffected by, or insensitive to, your physical environment but still absorbing and subconsciously registering a breadth of environmental stimuli. You are quite permeable and sensitive to the environment. This is why you know things without realising how you came to know them. This apparent passive absorption of information can also make you susceptible to over stimulation in noisy chaotic circumstances.

Sometimes this disconnect from the world may make you feel like a stranger in the world, even when it comes to experiences such as trying new foods, drugs, or physical activities. Doing so can seem too risky or unpredictable to you. It depends on you to become more open to novelty.

Conclusion

Your personality strength is deep perception. You are naturally attuned to "the big picture" and cannot help but see how everything is interconnected. Your ability to perceive deep patterns and causal relationships has helped you achieve mastery in your work.

With your dominant function - introverted intuition your typical mode of operation is quite impressionistic. Rather than noticing or concerning with the details of the world around you. Your existence is more cerebral or dreamlike which can lead you to feel estranged from their physical environment. People get a sense about you that you seem to "live in your own world." Immersed in your own mind and interests, you can be oblivious to social norms or other practical aspects of life. While incredibly "book smart," you may fall short when it comes to social or "street smarts" due to your introverted feeling function.

Further complicating your social life is your extraverted thinking. This makes you loathe unfamiliar social situations. You find it painfully difficult to engage in any measure of "small talk" with strangers. This further intensifies their sense of being "different" from their peers.

As you get older you may find yourself in need to find balance of challenge and stimulation and a sense of progress toward a meaningful goal. In a state of flow you strive to "becoming one with" the activity. This is most likely to emerge when you perform activities that engage your dominant and auxiliary functions.

Maybe you can see the correlation between INTJ and 5w4. How Te, being conscious, the opposite affect is Fi complete loss. And why INTJs are one of the types that has the most difficult time, communicate with others. And why they are misunderstood, not believed, undervalued, overlooked, "appear dumb" to others. Yet everybody has their own subjective view on what "intelligence" is. So if someone isn't immediately intelligent to them, they are cast to be "not valued".

You can also see how Socionics' sub-type is also represented and why Socionics is one step up in being more accurate, by embracing sub-types. Where as in MBTI, it is just one form, yet there are multiple versions described in MBTI and no clarity from the beginning.

And also why Ni-types are often described by others as "crazies".

 

[tchudak]

INTJ portrait (to help dispel all those INTJ myths)



Maybe you can see the correlation between INTJ and 5w4. How Te, being conscious, the opposite affect is Fi complete loss. And why INTJs are one of the types that has the most difficult time, communicate with others. And why they are misunderstood, not believed, undervalued, overlooked, "appear dumb" to others. Yet everybody has their own subjective view on what "intelligence" is. So if someone isn't immediately intelligent to them, they are cast to be "not valued".

You can also see how Socionics' sub-type is also represented and why Socionics is one step up in being more accurate, by embracing sub-types. Where as in MBTI, it is just one form, yet there are multiple versions described in MBTI and no clarity from the beginning.

And also why Ni-types are often described by others as "crazies".

May I ask you where this description is from? It was a quite enlightening and interesting read, and I would like to see other types descriptions from this same source.

I would like your take on something: What do you think of INTJs who claim to be artistically driven (or perhaps even humanities driven in general) and not so much scientific (in the literal sense, i.e. having preferences in fields of math, physics, chemistry etc)? Also, your impressions on INTJs who consider themselves to be sensitive and over-emotional (for a INTJ standard).

 

[chubber]

May I ask you where this description is from? It was a quite enlightening and interesting read, and I would like to see other types descriptions from this same source.

The contents of this report have been adapted from the "Personality Types" by GC Jung and the e-book "16 Personality Types" by Dr A.J. Drenth.

I would like your take on something: What do you think of INTJs who claim to be artistically driven (or perhaps even humanities driven in general) and not so much scientific (in the literal sense, i.e. having preferences in fields of math, physics, chemistry etc)? Also, your impressions on INTJs who consider themselves to be sensitive and over-emotional (for a INTJ standard).

The sensitive context can be derived from reading the Te quote, again.

Humanity driven, sure, again, just because Te appears, critical, doesn't mean they don't care. Read Te quote again.
After all, it is about personality, not interests. Being in a field where objectivity is welcomed, it would be easier for said person, because of those that are in the field, would in most instances, expecting that in the environment. Still doesn't prevent them from being alienated from society's point of view when idealistic goes to the extreme. Again, read example above.

 

[tchudak]

The contents of this report have been adapted from the "Personality Types" by GC Jung and the e-book "16 Personality Types" by Dr A.J. Drenth.



The sensitive context can be derived from reading the Te quote, again.

Humanity driven, sure, again, just because Te appears, critical, doesn't mean they don't care. Read Te quote again.
After all, it is about personality, not interests. Being in a field where objectivity is welcomed, it would be easier for said person, because of those that are in the field, would in most instances, expecting that in the environment. Still doesn't prevent them from being alienated from society's point of view when idealistic goes to the extreme. Again, read example above.

I"n the first place, all forms dependent upon feeling will become repressed in your type, for instance, aesthetic activities, taste, artistic sense, the art of friendship, etc [...]"
Wouldn't this exert try to demonstrate that INTJs are not inclined to "feeling" subjects such as arts? Of course I'm all too aware of generalizations and that exceptions may occur, but the way I perceive it, to me it seemed that "artistic" isn't something that would come naturally to an INTJ, which lead me to think about INTJs who work in artistic fields, and where that artistic inclination could possible come from.

Second thing, perhaps I didn't make myself very clear when I asked you about sensitivity. I was asking about individuals who claim to feel strong emotions associated with F types, or INTJs who consider their Fi to be very well developed. I personally find myself having a hard time understanding when they say they have a well developed Fi or especially when an INTJ states that he/she is emotionally moody. Reading both the Te and Fi sections of the text, I didn't find much clue about it, especially emotional moodiness/sensitivity/empathy etc. As said "repressed in your type [...] the art of friendship" where empathy would play a decisive role, imo.

Finally, I would like to ask you what you consider to be a solid common feature of INTJ that distinguishes this type from others, i.e., what you find to be the most INTJ feature above all.
Thank you in advance for your input.

 

[chubber]

I"n the first place, all forms dependent upon feeling will become repressed in your type, for instance, aesthetic activities, taste, artistic sense, the art of friendship, etc [...]"
Wouldn't this exert try to demonstrate that INTJs are not inclined to "feeling" subjects such as arts? Of course I'm all too aware of generalizations and that exceptions may occur, but the way I perceive it, to me it seemed that "artistic" isn't something that would come naturally to an INTJ, which lead me to think about INTJs who work in artistic fields, and where that artistic inclination could possible come from.

You're missing the context, which is mentioned further above, key word, extreme cases, the more Te is used, the less Fi will be present, which will present the things you are pointing out. Think of the scale being tipped.

Second thing, perhaps I didn't make myself very clear when I asked you about sensitivity. I was asking about individuals who claim to feel strong emotions associated with F types, or INTJs who consider their Fi to be very well developed. I personally find myself having a hard time understanding when they say they have a well developed Fi or especially when an INTJ states that he/she is emotionally moody. Reading both the Te and Fi sections of the text, I didn't find much clue about it, especially emotional moodiness/sensitivity/empathy etc. As said "repressed in your type [...] the art of friendship" where empathy would play a decisive role, imo.

Are you trying to figure out if these types are indeed INTJ? Possibly. A possibility would be that they are older and allowing individuation to happen, or they are using less Te, if they are more empathetic than typical Te person, perhaps they are indeed ExFP type where Fi is Auxilary, thinking that they are an IxTJ type. There are many more and I don't know the complete context of the particular person you have in mind.

Finally, I would like to ask you what you consider to be a solid common feature of INTJ that distinguishes this type from others, i.e., what you find to be the most INTJ feature above all.
Thank you in advance for your input.

the critical type (Te sub-type), that can't explain themselves, they are having difficulty understanding themselves, while having difficulty understanding others. The Ni sub-type would be far less critical, again, are we talking about a healthy individual, because if the auxiliary function isn't present then, unhealthy. Which means, Fi will return in the emotional moody state, all comes back eventually to balance the missing function out. Might take days, weeks to appear.

My understanding is that Ni swings to Se in stress mode, and Fi will be present when Te lacks or none supportive of Ni. This happens usually in the presence of F(i/e)-dominant types, where one is walking on eggshells and Te is suppressed in their presence. Tertiary Fi will come back to bite.

So context is key.