sense of self

[miss fortune]

I've been kind of wondering lately how exactly people are able to say that they are XXXX type with any sort of absolute certainty... I mean, how can you know for sure that a certain type can cover who you are?

I mean, there are a lot of contributing factors to how a person sees themselves... what do we tell ourselves about ourselves? what do other people tell us? what do we tell other people? how do we relate to our bodies? what happens in our heads when nothing happens? how do we relate to others? what are we good at and what are we bad at? and so on and so forth... I mean, I could type out questions for hours there and still wouldn't be anywhere near coming to an end

what happens if these perceptions don't match one another? or if a person thinks and feels one way and yet acts another? is a person their actions or is a person their thoughts... or are they that split in between the two?

how do you know who you are?

 

[geedoenfj]

By doing a test and see if it fits me

 

[miss fortune]

By doing a test and see if it fits me

what happens if you take it again, get different results and they fit you as well?

 

[geedoenfj]

what happens if you take it again, get different results and they fit you as well?

I did it three times and they were all the same result, but if the result were different, I think there must be a type that suites me better and look generally more like me I guess..

 

[SearchingforPeace]

I thought I knew myself. I was wrong. It bugs the shit out of me.

I lived by the motto "To thine own self be true", or so I thought.

I realize now I coped by denying part of myself.

I am not my past. I own my future. I control my present.

I might really be a ENFJ 9w8 ...... maybe, haha

 

[prplchknz]

hmm i dunno i've never been 100% sure of my type but i think it fits me the best now if i get enough irrefutable evicidence that i'm actually cat that likes to chase and kill lizards i'll change my position but for now i am a human female that hates hot weather and prefer to live in places that are too cold for lizards.

 

[EcK]

what happens if you take it again, get different results and they fit you as well?

Then you are The Pretender and you'd better start wearing leather to fit in

 

[prplchknz]

 

[Qlip]

Oh, it doesn't actually matter. Whether you have a strong sense of yourself or not, you still are a self. Any typing should just be a tool, not an identity or a label. And really, not all tools are useful for everybody.

I think I maybe took a type test twice in my life and I found MBTI and cognitive functions to be a pretty useful way of looking at things for myself. Whether I am my type, whether my type exists, or whether MBTI is actually a real thing are still unsettled questions in my mind.

 

[cascadeco]

Good questions [MENTION=1180]whatever[/MENTION].

I think we know what we know, and think what we think, in a given moment. For us, that's our reality in that time -- what we think we are ends up being what we are. Or maybe what we are is what we think we are. I think it's often a chicken/egg scenario -- one thing plays into the other, it's hard to tell where it started. Anyway, also, I don't think I'm the ONLY one out there who plays mind games and is deluded about one or more aspects of myself -- or, simply completely unaware, in which case it's not really my 'fault', I just don't know / have any idea. All sorts of things can go on.

And maybe in 10 years you or I will have a totally different perception of ourselves, or we'll just change what we think about things, thus that changes how we act, and a bit of who we are.

We're still always someone, though, as [MENTION=10714]Qlip[/MENTION] says.

But typology is awfully rigid in many ways, even if it's enlightening sometimes too. So imo if one hangs too tightly to mbti they might lose out on all sorts of things -- they might box themselves in, when, if they never knew anything about mbti ever, they wouldn't have the constraints mbti can create -- or we think it can create.

 

[1487610420]

u gotta be able to separate the wanting to belong and fit into a something and assess information and correlate it with your preferred m.o. - not idealized, but natural gravitation towards - in a neutral way.

 

[Little_Sticks]

I used to think I had certain weaknesses and strengths, some natural inclination; but that changed when I stubbornly developed my weaknesses and got sick of my strengths and let them wither. I do have strong motivations though. For me at least, motivations are important to understanding who I am over playing a game of trying to define myself; it helps me know when I'm on the right track in what I'm doing by allowing me to realize what I truly value and pursuing that.

 

[miss fortune]

some good points... as [MENTION=1206]cascadeco[/MENTION] said a problem seems to be separating that which is right now from that which is always there in a way, because something can feel real and even, for that moment, be real and yet not be a good overall description because it's just one point in time.

Kind of like the difference between who someone is at work vs how they are with family or friends vs how they are when they are alone or with someone they feel very comfortable with... is there anyone who is consistently the same person across all of those different fronts? If so, how do they do it?

as [MENTION=7785]Little_Sticks[/MENTION] mentioned, I developed some weaknesses or things that aren't my first impulses as far as responses and such go pretty well... and use them whenever dealing with work or groups of people. Those were skills that were necessary for those environments so it only made sense to get good at them and adapting to things does come naturally to me. Me at work is a fairly different person than me at home... who is also a different person than me out with family or friends most of the time... and figuring out what has been learned over the years as far as behavior goes in comparison to what is actually there gets a bit tricky in a way because you add on enough layers and you get a bit lost... play a role long enough and it becomes another facet of who you are. Work on certain aspects enough that they become just as natural as if you were born acting that way.

So which of those things would be natural?

I guess, in a way, I kind of am slightly concerned that there is nothing there... if I actually did try to just slow down and go with my natural inclinations I'd end up just stuck, unable to decide which way to go or what to do. And this probably isn't a unique fear by any means... possibly one of the most common ones.

I guess I'll have to think some more on this... good responses (with an exception to my own, which kind of rambles and likely makes NO sense!)

 

[1487610420]

I guess, in a way, I kind of am slightly concerned that there is nothing there... if I actually did try to just slow down and go with my natural inclinations I'd end up just stuck, unable to decide which way to go or what to do. And this probably isn't a unique fear by any means... possibly one of the most common ones.

I guess I'll have to think some more on this... good responses (with an exception to my own, which kind of rambles and likely makes NO sense!)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terror_management_theory

On an individual level, self-esteem provides a buffer against death-related anxiety.

 

[Gawain]

My opinion is that you are either 1) Overthinking it because you are a very analytical type of person. OR 2) Have an underdeveloped sense of self and need help in figuring that out. (My own preferences color that interpretation as I'm not quite philosophical enough to enjoy the those sorts of intricacies, and I know exactly who I am.)

Qlip is right. These are just labels, not realities. Words do not make reality. They merely describe it. I know who I am because I just do. I know if I like things or hate them. I know how I feel. I know how I think. Some people have trouble with those things, but I do not. Self-assessment is easy for me because I have such strong feelings about nearly everything. Not everyone has that, so it can be harder for others. In reading and learning a new vocabulary for different personality types, it was very easy to see myself reflected in these likes and dislikes. It was slightly harder (but not too much) to figure out where my friends fit.

If you stump yourself, maybe try to learn the system by typing others and having them help you check your accuracy. When you are confident you understand the system, try again with yourself as the subject. Just a thought.

 

[cascadeco]

as [MENTION=7785]Little_Sticks[/MENTION] mentioned, I developed some weaknesses or things that aren't my first impulses as far as responses and such go pretty well... and use them whenever dealing with work or groups of people. Those were skills that were necessary for those environments so it only made sense to get good at them and adapting to things does come naturally to me. Me at work is a fairly different person than me at home... who is also a different person than me out with family or friends most of the time... and figuring out what has been learned over the years as far as behavior goes in comparison to what is actually there gets a bit tricky in a way because you add on enough layers and you get a bit lost... play a role long enough and it becomes another facet of who you are. Work on certain aspects enough that they become just as natural as if you were born acting that way.

So which of those things would be natural?

I can definitely relate, in terms of learning and adapting on the job. And yeah, those learned traits can become more natural. It can become hard to know what is the 'real' you -- ie what you naturally prefer -- if you are constantly becoming accustomed to doing what you maybe don't prefer and you've just sort of convinced yourself you prefer it as a survival thing. btw I am now totally projecting, this is what happened to me.

For me, recently, I've been able to reframe and easily figure out, yeah, but do I WANT to be doing this? Do I LIKE having do to this or be this way? For me that's a great indicator as to my actual preferences. For example, I've recently learned that, why yes, I CAN do customer service, but I in fact preferentially am lousy at it, and it's reflected back at me via the minority of customers I am unable or unwilling to enable and 'fake it'.

I guess, in a way, I kind of am slightly concerned that there is nothing there... if I actually did try to just slow down and go with my natural inclinations I'd end up just stuck, unable to decide which way to go or what to do. And this probably isn't a unique fear by any means... possibly one of the most common ones.

I guess I'll have to think some more on this... good responses (with an exception to my own, which kind of rambles and likely makes NO sense!)

Maybe if you did slow down you wouldn't know for a bit, but I'm willing to bet it wouldn't last forever and you'd figure it out. Also there is absolutely something there, you are writing this post, you have thoughts and feelings, and you exist and are YOU. Just because you are having trouble putting yourself in the framework of mbti doesn't mean you aren't 100% a Self.

 

[wolfnara]

I think this myself sometimes. I would never have concluded my type as an INFP if others did not say so. Of course I am never sure of what my type is and I don't think most people are certain either. It is important to have an objective view of yourself from others. I noticed some people don't see what others see in them. For example some don't realize their own talents, usually their intelligence - but that is not related to MBTI or JCF.

MBTI is just a simplified concept but I believe some of it rings true for me - I am better a discerning right from wrong than I am at seeing the logical correctness of something, regardless of whether I want to be or not. What I like about typology is that is shows that both feeling and thinking are important. For me it has really clarified my strengths and weaknesses, but I am less sure about the accuracy of the S/N spectrum however. So in terms of MBTI - thinking vs feeling and sensing vs intuition, I think it is easier to trust your own perception of yourself, because only you know how your mind works and can measure how well you relate to certain aspects of the functions of mbti.

 

[JocktheMotie]

MBTI type, in no way, encompasses "who you are."

I will repeat myself.

MBTI TYPE DOES NOT ENCOMPASS WHO YOU ARE.

Why is this such a prevalent attitude? I get this a lot from Fi users actually. There's this implicit rejection that to call oneself an INFP or something is a destruction of originality, uniqueness, and self. It isn't, and the fact that one thinks so means they don't understand what a categorization is, which is not that hard of a concept. MBTI does not aim to describe 100% of human existence. If you think it does, then you're dumb. How's that for a categorization.

 

[miss fortune]

MBTI type, in no way, encompasses "who you are."

I will repeat myself.

MBTI TYPE DOES NOT ENCOMPASS WHO YOU ARE.

Why is this such a prevalent attitude? I get this a lot from Fi users actually. There's this implicit rejection that to call oneself an INFP or something is a destruction of originality, uniqueness, and self. It isn't, and the fact that one thinks so means they don't understand what a categorization is, which is not that hard of a concept. MBTI does not aim to describe 100% of human existence. If you think it does, then you're dumb. How's that for a categorization.

I know that

which is why it was only pretty much the first line of the OP

was only mentioned because people who take those tests have to have some sort of idea as to how they will answer questions instead of thinking "well... this is true here, but not here..." and I was wondering how people can actually manage to assess themselves and come up with any sort of conclusive answers to questions that are supposed to describe everything

 

[JocktheMotie]

and I was wondering how people can actually manage to assess themselves and come up with any sort of conclusive answers to questions that are supposed to describe everything

Are they though? I can't think of a single other scenario where taking a test is supposed to "describe everything." I'm not sure why MBTI would be different. Tests are there to help you and give a good idea, but ultimately they just repeat back to you what you've told it. SAT? IQ Test? Autism Spectrum Test? MRIs? Diagnostic testing is always a starting point for deeper analysis. There's a reason we have job interviews and not job tests.

A good point you brought up though; are we our thoughts or are we our behaviour?

This is a good question. I'm in the camp where ultimately, if our thinking is sufficiently divorced from our behavior, what is the role or value of that thinking? A person can tell themselves they're a genius, intuitive, kind, empathetic, etc, but if that is not demonstrated at all then those are worthless labels. The proof is in the pudding, as they say.