who I am

[wildcat]

The Cognitive Processes Test and the MBTI test show a discord.
It is interesting to know what is the discrepancy in an individual basis.

Individuality is informality.

Neither the empiric or the abstract study is about individuality.
It is all about charts and numbers.
And there they go wrong. Psychology is not about charts and numbers.

Who are you?

What is the indifference in an individual basis?

Why and when did you discover you were different?

 

[Athenian200]

Well, my pattern actually doesn't correspond to type at all. Look, according to this test, my functional preferences don't make any sense at all. The order was:

Ti -- 41.1 (excellent use)
Si -- 40.4 (excellent use)
Fi -- 39.2 (excellent use)
Ne -- 37.5 (excellent use)
Fe -- 36.6 (excellent use)
Ni -- 32.1 (good use)
Te -- 9.9 (unused)
Se -- 2.8 (unused)

I retook the test today, and got these results. I'm off the wall, aren't I?

Fi -- 42.5 (excellent use)
Fe -- 41 (excellent use)
Si -- 36.6 (excellent use)
Ti -- 34.2 (good use)
Ni -- 31.6 (good use)
Ne -- 21.5 (limited use)
Te -- 20.2 (limited use)
Se -- 12.2 (unused)

According to this, no type fits. For instance, the first type you would think of after looking at this would be ISTP, but where's the Se? Then maybe ISTJ, but then there's not enough Te. My theoretical dominant and auxiliaries are my weakest functions except for Te and Se. The closest type patterns that make sense are INFP, INTP, and ISFJ. I rarely use Ne, as far as I can tell.

Ti as my strongest function? I'm sure there are several ISTP's and INTP's who would be quick to scoff at such an idea. Just read a few of my past posts. I suppose this test (or my understanding of the questions) must be flawed, because the functional development they're proposing is impossible from the standpoint of pure Jungian theory, Socionic theory, and the MBTI. That would be three against one, right? And it would seem absurd for someone to have five functions with excellent development, wouldn't it?

Well, according to something I read somewhere, the last functions to develop should be the opposite of your dominant and auxiliary. If Se is weakest, then Ni would be dominant (normal). If Te is second-weakest, Fi should be auxiliary (this is an abberation, but Fi is counted as strong). Si and Ti actually test as my strongest functions, but that doesn't seem to make much sense.

Of course, if that is the case, that five of my functions are that strong, then I suppose that could undermine Jungian theory, and invalidate the purpose of all the existing material and theories that have been founded upon it. If that's really a possible outcome, perhaps we should just ignore this test.

 

[The Ü™]

Ne -- 46.9 (excellent use)

Ni -- 46.9 (excellent use)

Te -- 46.1 (excellent use)

Ti -- 43.8 (excellent use)

Si -- 28.5 (average use)

Fi -- 23.5 (limited use)

Se -- 1.4 (unused)

Fe -- 0.3 (unused)

This is one of the best assessments out there, because it's based on your own behavior and not preferences.

I take it now and then. This outlines my probable source for the struggle between a P and J preference.

 

[Sahara]

extraverted Sensing (Se) - (14.9) unused

introverted Sensing (Si) - (33.4) good use

extraverted Intuiting (Ne) - (39.7) excellent use

introverted Intuiting (Ni) - (32.1) good use

extraverted Thinking (Te) - (13.9) unused

introverted Thinking (Ti) - (22.9) limited use

extraverted Feeling (Fe) - (37.6) excellent use

introverted Feeling (Fi) - (45.7) excellent use

I found that quite interesting, thanks for the link, I hadn't done this one before.

 

[Totenkindly]

Past results (posted elsewhere)

introverted Thinking (Ti) (49.2)
extraverted Intuiting (Ne) (42.2)
introverted Intuiting (Ni) (38)
extraverted Feeling (Fe) (29.8)
introverted Feeling (Fi) (28.5)
extraverted Thinking (Te) (21.7)
introverted Sensing (Si) (19.5)
extraverted Sensing (Se) (11.5)

Interestingly, I just retook it and my Ni score was a point above my Ne. So I guess they are very comparable.

 

[heart]

I know, these results always confuse me. My Ti is higher than Te, which according to the INFP profile should be the opposite. My Ni is also higher than it should be as a shadow function.


extraverted Intuiting (Ne) (52.7)
introverted Feeling (Fi) (46.3)
introverted Intuiting (Ni) (39.2)
introverted Thinking (Ti) (32.2)
introverted Sensing (Si) (22.8)
extraverted Thinking (Te) (22)
extraverted Feeling (Fe) (14)
extraverted Sensing (Se) (10.8)

 

[ptgatsby]

If that's really a possible outcome, perhaps we should just ignore this test.

That is surprisingly Ti of you

Regardless, the test seems to have a problem measuring Ti vs Te. Most test results push the trait itself (F/T/S/N) together, meaning that the P/J divide is actually being testing based on the difference between Xi/Xe. In your case, there is no consistent groupings of traits, which is quite unusual.

It is not impossible, by design of the test, to have multiple well developped functions... it is also theoretically possible unless you are convinced that the J/P trait determines attitude in absolutes. I believe that is demonstratably fallous - it seems like shadow functions are, at best, randomly distributed.

If you want to see how the test normally reports, check out the other responses in this thread - only Jennifer, the IN?P has a strong split on any of the dominant traits. Everyone else has closely matching Ti/Te, Ni/Ne, Si/Se, Fi/Fe. The only people that I know of that don't have extremes of J/P without extremes on traits... but even that isn't consistent.

Also, a lot of INTPs are Ne-Ti dominant. For example, I am *vastly* more Ne than Ti when I test. If I take other tests (even as far as FFM or something robust), my T is quite weak relative to my N, which is extremely high (If to put it perspective 94-97% of the population - I am only more disagreeable than 60% of the population... with 50% being norm). And I measure strongly Te as well.

The short of it being - I agree and either the test or the theory is flawed. I believe it is both.

 

[Totenkindly]

If you want to see how the test normally reports, check out the other responses in this thread - only Jennifer, the IN?P has a strong split on any of the dominant traits.

Huh...wha...?

Do you mean the Ne/Ni being comparable? Or what exactly?

Also, a lot of INTPs are Ne-Ti dominant. For example, I am *vastly* more Ne than Ti when I test.

Which is so funny. Because when you write, you sound much more T and I sound much more N.

And I measure strongly Te as well.

Yes, you do seem to have that odd quirk about you. ("Data! Show me data!")

The short of it being - I agree and either the test or the theory is flawed. I believe it is both.

What about the third option of you being flawed?
(Sorry. have to be thorough!)

You've thought about it more than I have. I found the J/P determination process you hinted at intriguing.

 

[ptgatsby]

Do you mean the Ne/Ni being comparable? Or what exactly?

This is you Jen;

introverted Thinking (Ti) (49.2)
extraverted Intuiting (Ne) (42.2)
introverted Intuiting (Ni) (38)
extraverted Feeling (Fe) (29.8)
introverted Feeling (Fi) (28.5)
extraverted Thinking (Te) (21.7)
introverted Sensing (Si) (19.5)
extraverted Sensing (Se) (11.5)

Note that everything else is in pairs. In most cases the ordering is extremely close together - you have 4 traits between Ti and Te! That's unusual on the test.

There are a couple others that have one trait that is gapped, but athenian200 is at the extremes.

Which is so funny. Because when you write, you sound much more T and I sound much more N.

Hmm, have you ever seen me refuse to change my mind, challenge an idea - including my own - or adopt an ethnocentric view? But you probably have seen me empathise with a situation, or adapt my style to who I'm talking to... MBTI suggests that T is about being logical, which irritates me... it has to do with my empathy and such, which is why I'm not a strong T. I have personal traits in me, rather than just being a bastard.

You can really see my F leak when it gets onto philosophy. Coherence? Objectivity? HAH!

Yes, you do seem to have that odd quirk about you. ("Data! Show me data!")

Despite being a joke, it's still more about feeding my Ne. I know the weakness in being an extreme N - I need to control the way I determine things. (Have you ever actually seen an NTJ ask for data to form an opinion on a theory!?)

What about the third option of you being flawed?
(Sorry. have to be thorough!)

That's a given But I already know that I'm an errant tester because I push the extremes (the real extremes, not the MBTI 100% extremes) on 3 traits.

You've thought about it more than I have. I found the J/P determination process you hinted at intriguing.

How do you determine Ti or Te. It isn't based on the strength of T - therefore, in theory, the strength of the J/P would determine the strength of Ti over Te. Therefore, in theory, Fi and Fe and so on should be equally divergent.

They are not, therefore there is an issue with the J/P functional view, either with the theory or this particular test.

 

[The Ü™]

Which is so funny. Because when you write, you sound much more T and I sound much more N.

Since you seem so good at determining types based on the way people write, how do you think I sound?

 

[Totenkindly]

This is you Jen... Note that everything else is in pairs. In most cases the ordering is extremely close together - you have 4 traits between Ti and Te! That's unusual on the test.

Ah, I see what you mean now.

There are a couple others that have one trait that is gapped, but athenian200 is at the extremes.

This could have been just a bad testing, but Ath is definitely also another "atypical" MBTI'er (from the conversations we have had via PM), as far as I can tell. So I don't know for sure how the results have been flupped.

have to rush home, so I will have to skip the rest of the fun, except this:

How do you determine Ti or Te. It isn't based on the strength of T - therefore, in theory, the strength of the J/P would determine the strength of Ti over Te. Therefore, in theory, Fi and Fe and so on should be equally divergent.

I have a very big struggle with using Te. It's like I can look at something and intellectually understand it (I understand all the principles of task management), but actually breaking it down into components and then DOING it? It's not even a choice to not follow my checklist, I actually have a lot of trouble getting things into compartments and sticking to task (!)

Everything is so... internalized... with me...

Just like I can follow your posts easily enough, but thinking in terms of the equations and details just... slips out of my mind like water out of a leaky bucket. I have trouble thinking in those sorts of concrete specifics, I do much better with the internalized (non-concrete) concepts and nuances.

 

[Athenian200]

Well, whatever type I am, I really don't like Se and Te very much. That might be more important than the types that tested strong. So, to recap:

Ti, Si, and Fi were all near equal in strength.

Fe and Ne were near equal in strength as well.

Ni was almost as good as Fe and Ne. (But it's supposed to be my dominant!?!)

Te and Se were at the rock bottom.

The biggest problems I see with this are the following:

I don't really see myself as using very much Ti. In fact, I think most INTP's and ISTP's would see quite a few holes in my logic, and probably find me insipid. And, I only use logic as a way of showing the value of what I consider important, not as it's own end.

Also, I don't see myself as using much Ne. In fact, Ne-dominants irritate me with their obsessive search for novelty and their random behavior.

So if I go with Si and Fe, that would make me an ISFJ. But I seem to have good intuitive perception, and both my N-functions are reasonably strong. I'm just a mess. According to that test, I could reasonably be one of three types:

INFP (Auxiliary Ne, Dominant Fi)
ISFJ (Auxiliary Fe, Dominant Si)
INTP (Auxiliary Ne, Dominant Ti)

And I was sure I was an INFJ... Weird.

 

[ptgatsby]

In fact, I think most INTP's and ISTP's would see quite a few holes in my logic, and probably find me insipid.

I should mention that type does not denote talent - I personally find that xNTPs, in particular, generally lack critical thinking skills (such as logic) when compared to the IxTJs or ISTPs.

But I have no idea what you are According to that type, you have three dominant internal processes. That's crazy talk

 

[Totenkindly]

But I have no idea what you are According to that type, you have three dominant internal processes. That's crazy talk

Three down, 197 to go!

 

[runvardh]

Fi, Ne, Ni always my top three. After that is always a thinking function then the rest.

extraverted Sensing (Se) ******************** (20)
limited use
introverted Sensing (Si) ******************** (20.8)
limited use
extraverted Intuiting (Ne) ************************************** (38.3)
excellent use
introverted Intuiting (Ni) *************************************** (39.1)
excellent use
extraverted Thinking (Te) ********************** (23)
limited use
introverted Thinking (Ti) ***************************** (29.2)
average use
extraverted Feeling (Fe) **************************** (28.9)
average use
introverted Feeling (Fi) **************************************** (40.1)
excellent use

 

[wildcat]

I thank everyone for participation.
You have added to the confusion.
Good.

We have to add to the confusion and not avoid it. Then we know what is wrong.

Imagine you are looking at a screen. It is empty.
Is the picture the screen? No.

What is a screen?

Before there is a picture in it, it is void.
Is it completely void?
As far as it does not have the picture in it.

Is it completely void?

No.
It is an object in space.

Hence the screen is bound by loci.

Is the picture on the screen bound by loci?
No.

What we have to do to understand spatial logic?
We have to separate the picture from the screen.

Why this is so hard to understand?
Because our environment stifles our understanding.

Edit
How did von Braun have the man in the moon?
He separated the screen from the picture.

We have to stop a clock to see the other clock.

 

[wildcat]

Ever directed a play?

Is the play the set of the play?
Does the play take room outside of the set?
Do you remove the set in the middle of the act?

 

[wildcat]

I have a great admiration for ptgatsby. His posts are a delight to read.
He has a sharp mind and he presents an interesting outlook on things.

I had an ESTJ history professor. Te was his primary function.
His logic was extraordinary. He could have made a good staff officer in the army.

His dictum was fair play. He was polite, cultured, extremely proficient and well read.
I wished I could have had him as my history tutor.
Unfortunately my history tutor was an ESFJ.

At school I had two history teachers. One was an ENTJ and the other was an ISFJ.
The ENTJ gave me A+ and the ISFJ gave me B- .. invariably.

The grades are about the object seen by the subject.

Evaluation is inescapably field dependent.

The study of psychology is hindered by the psychology of the student.

 

[Shimpei]

extraverted Sensing (Se) ***************** (17.6)
limited use
introverted Sensing (Si) **************************************************** (52.1)
excellent use
extraverted Intuiting (Ne) **************** (16.3)
limited use
introverted Intuiting (Ni) ***************** (17.3)
limited use
extraverted Thinking (Te) ****************************** (30.6)
good use
introverted Thinking (Ti) ***************** (17.9)
limited use
extraverted Feeling (Fe) **************************************** (40.8)
excellent use
introverted Feeling (Fi) ********************************************** (47)
excellent use


Si Fi Fe Te Ti Se Ni Ne

(Last year the order of the first three was Si Fe Fi )

 

[htb]

(Se) -- 38
(Si) .-- 23.6
(Ne) -- 17.7
(Ni) .-- 40.9
(Te) -- 42.1
(Ti) .-- 28.8
(Fe) -- 13.4
(Fi) .-- 35.9

Te Ni Se Fi (Ti Si Ne Fe)

Interesting.