Got any ideas about my type from this video?

[kensi]

Originally Posted by dissonance

if only bluewing's ISFJ profile was here...

I havn't done an ISFJ investigation all on its own to confirm myself as this type. Any idea where I can find a good functional Analysis of the behaviour aspects of this type from a functional analysis preferably ? (and not any oner of those shotty sites which point to one-dimensional characteristics)

[kensi]

Originally Posted by dissonance

(extroverted feeling seems almost obvious)

Its agood suggestion in its own right...but that however is funny that you mentioned this in the context that i have this video running in another forum (Socionics)...and there the large concensus of people think that i exhibit Fi and not Fe. (FYI) So how can it be rather obvious ?

Are you familiar with Socionics ?

[kensi]

Originally Posted by dissonance

after watching the second video --

you have an IFJ vibe to you, but i get more of an Si dom feel than an Ni dom feel.

I do understand where you are coming from with this..it's rather well worded......i just wonder if there is a secondary explanation that better accounts for the observations.

[kensi]

Originally Posted by dissonance

after watching the second video --

you have an IFJ vibe to you, but i get more of an Si dom feel than an Ni dom feel.

If i am ISFJ then there must be a lot of different subtypes to ISFJ cause i know that i am not like a lot of them. My brother, for example, is definitely an ISFJ...his Si dominance over my Si attempts are quite obvious....meaning that my Si has a rather smaller, modest position in my psyche....or so you'd think.


So lets take a look at my relationships to the other types assuming i am ISFJ:

To ENFP: reasonably good
To ENTp: avg to good...but no better.
To ESTp: illusion...good
To ENTj: opposite....good... that its bad (fwiw)
To ESFP: extinguishment...avg
To ISTP: benefit....weak
To INTP: activation....no, not true.
To INTJ: superego: avg to maybe good.
To INFP: benefit...very weak.
To ISFP: Quasi-identity: weak
To ESFJ: Mirror....weak
To ESTJ: avg
To ENFJ: weak to avg.


Those are my results of the relationships. Only the bold ones carry any value for determining my type correctly. 4 potential matches. It is thru these matches that i can assertain my type more correctly....the question is...is there another type which allows for a better fit?

[kensi]

Now lets take a look at my relations to the other types assuming that i am ENFP:

To ISTJ: really good fit
To ISFJ: good fit too, but not as much as above
To INTJ: almost like a teacher pupil relationship...good
To INFJ: ext...but can't proove it interpersonally.
To ISTJ: orig contact decent but long range weakened
To ISFJ: some conflict i've noticed
To INFP: good but can't give it enough weight
To INTP: avg outlook...rely on advice
To ESTJ: can lead to motivation to act...but not always....hmm. good for the most part
To ESFJ: they despise me much like a benefit relationship...this strongly fits
To ENFJ: I've always seen this type as more succesfull in its similarity in approach than I---as per type description...good
To ENTJ: I fwiw see them the same way ESFJ's see me
To ESTP: mixed views depending on the exact type....but Superego vibe to them....thus good
To ESFP: can't say much
To ENFP: can relate...avg to good to sometimes great
To ENTP: i iknow where they are coming from...good usually


9 matches (in bold) can be confirmed using the ENFP hypothesis. The last time i checked...9 is better than 4.


.....I've been really thinking about this ISFJ suggestion for my type...but can't quite make sense of all the necessary connections.

So I think that ENFP is much more likely for me despite the fact that i can go into an Si shell from time to time and appear like an Si dominant.

...besides i don't know how i would go about verifying ISFJ anyways, other than the method i used above.

[Evan]

Originally Posted by kensi

If i am ISFJ then there must be a lot of different subtypes to ISFJ cause i know that i am not like a lot of them. My brother, for example, is definitely an ISFJ...his Si dominance over my Si attempts are quite obvious....meaning that my Si has a rather smaller, modest position in my psyche....or so you'd think.

how are you defining Si?

also, there is a good amount of variation within a type. the "internal standard", which is the environment all introverted functions are based around, will differ from person to person and experience to experience. also, the "external standard" -- aka the visible environment, isn't the same for any two people.

in addition to that, keep in mind that the 16 types are just a result of arbitrarily defined thresholds. in other words, we just call a feeler a feeler because they have a higher feeling:thinking ratio than someone we would consider a thinker. they don't necessarily use their actual feeling function more than a thinking function. we define the norm...

[kensi]

Originally Posted by dissonance

in addition to that, keep in mind that the 16 types are just a result of arbitrarily defined thresholds. in other words, we just call a feeler a feeler because they have a higher feeling:thinking ratio than someone we would consider a thinker. they don't necessarily use their actual feeling function more than a thinking function. we define the norm...

So if that's the case then you are almost making it sound like type is changeable or at the very least one can go deep within oneself to use functions one would not think they'd be using.....if this predominates in this business...then it virtually is impossible to type someone. I think there has to be a better way. For example...an ENTP gone deep may look incredibly like an ISFJ and an ISFJ gone deep like an ENTP.

[kensi]

I have made my decision...... based on several years of research.....and this last recent inquest into my type...after thinking it all over again.....=I am ENFP for sure!

[Jack Flak]

Congrats. Since this is new to me, and I just watched the video, I'll tell you what I was going to say.

Not NT, since you talk about facts but not implications; Probably N, however, since you're contemplative. I was going to say "Likely NF."