Is it possible to be "untypable"?

[Candlelight]

The title says it all, but... is it really possible?

I good at typing people in general, reading them, observing human behavior etc. But I have a hard time typing MYSELF, and it's strange.

(I don't want to turn this thread a "type me" thread, it's not my purpose!) I seem to have a fair balance between my axis and functions, and when I take some personality test, the result may change only for a slight % difference... this is so much that between 2006 from 2012 I've tested as ALL the types, seriously!

I don't/ didn't have any mental illness, neurosis, never been on psychiatric treatment or anything. I'm really mentally healthy.

Given those facts anyone experienced it or know anybody like this? I'm curious.

 

[PimpinMcBoltage]

Considering that it's difficult to objectively see yourself and put yourself into a system, because you know the real you, and because you'd notice characteristics of type descriptions that don't fit into the stereotypical mold of whatever type you wanna know.

I had a bit of difficulty typing myself, and I'm still not 100% on this, but it works in it's own way. *Shrug* Though I'm more SPish in temperament then SJ (but Kersey is a cunt anyways).

 

[miss fortune]

considering how many tests give up on me, or I get pissed off at them because my behavior may appear one way while the motivations that drive it go another, I have decided that I transcend the MBTI

of course, I believe that the manner in which the test is constructed is faulty and that the concept of a dichotomy is as well, so you can take my response with a grain of salt if you wish

 

[Fluffywolf]

It's entirely possible that you will not be able to type yourself with any available test. However, MBTI is a circular theory that encompasses all personalities through preference and scales them as such. It is impossible to be anything other than the 16 types and it is impossible to be more than 1 type.

However, one of the hardest things when you look at your own behaviour is to do so objectively. For example, as a Si user, I find myself looking at MBTI test questions and think of experiences I've had that I can relate to the question. Of course that is only natural, however it is also flawed, what if the experience I recall is of such nature that is skews my own perspective? After all, it is easier to remember the good parts about myself and unknowingly ignore the bad parts. When I take a test, I will subconsciously try to present myself in the best possible way after all.

Next to that, every question in an MBTI test is out to test a certain dichotomy or scale. However, it is very possible you will reach answers based on reasons that lie outside the scale that is being measured.

Basicly, MBTI tests are not reliable. They may work for a lot of people, but will undoubtfully fail for some.

Another possibility is simple blindness: I thought I was enneagram 5 for the longest time, because I most related to what the description said. However, turned out I'm such an obvious 9, but was apparantly blind to it. Whilest this will happen more regularly with enneagram, since enneagram deals much more with the subconscious. The same blindness can occur for people taking MBTI tests. It is easy to miss key information about yourself when you take yourself for granted after all.


------------


Apart from learning about MBTI and your own tendencies from an objective point of view in great detail, which will take time (and more often than not a third party), a good alternative is to take an MBTI test but answer all the questions as they were open by adding your thoughts with the answer. The reasons you accompany with each answer don't need to be of any set length or form. For some questions your reasons will be simple, for other questions you might have a very detailed opinion about. The trick is to write down the answers that leave you most satisfied. For some questions you might even have more than one answer, depending on different situations, so write down what answers you would give for which situations.
While doing so however, you must let go of what you think the world wants you to be and focus solely on who you truely are.

Then, for the next step is posting your results here or to people you trust that know cognative functions well and have them take a gander at it. Knowing what the question intends to weigh and knowing your thoughts and reasons for your answer, should sketch a much clearer picture of what your type is.

 

[mintleaf]

I don't really think so. Unless, for example, you fail to even remotely relate to a single Myer-Briggs type...but it's my guess that at least 97% of people are probably going to lean towards one of the 16.

 

[Jaguar]

From the MBTI manual by Isabel Briggs Myers, Mary H. McCauley, Naomi L. Quenk and Allen L. Hammer:

In dealing with people, when we keep their type in mind, we are respecting not only their abstract right to develop along lines of their own choosing but also the importance of qualities they have developed by making that choice. For example, if, for whatever reason, they have not exercised one or more of their preferences, they may not have developed a type, or at least a type that they can report clearly. Not everyone is a type.

Katharine D. Myers' comments on type development:

Developmental models imply there is one particular pattern to be followed for 'healthy' development. According to type theory, however, each person develops variations of the pattern whether through choice or adaptation. It is important not to apply any model, including this one, too rigidly to oneself and certainly not to others. A particular adaptation may be serving one well; another may have been useful in the past but is no longer productive.

There's a bit of irony when flexibility is being called for by those who promote the MBTI for a living, but its application by many people in type forums resembles rigor mortis.

 

[The Great One]

The only person that I have come across that seems impossible to type is Dr. Gregory House. Everyone pretty much unanimously agrees that he's an NT, but no one knows which of the 4 NT types that he is. He seems to use Ne, Ti, Te, and Ni all very well.

 

[RaptorWizard]

The only person that I have come across that seems impossible to type is Dr. Gregory House. Everyone pretty much unanimously agrees that he's an NT, but no one knows which of the 4 NT types that he is. He seems to use Ne, Ti, Te, and Ni all very well.

Due to the inconsistency in the presentation of any fictional character, I would think they are all theoretically untypable, at least beyond vague approximations.

Also, I have found it recently to be of greater use to type people via their brain processes (explained in Dario Nardi's Neuroscience of Personality), which is what their functions seem to be used in concert for (and if you are ENTP, examples of brain processes you would likely be good at are Process Manager and Precise Speaker, among others).

 

[Fluffywolf]

The only person that I have come across that seems impossible to type is Dr. Gregory House. Everyone pretty much unanimously agrees that he's an NT, but no one knows which of the 4 NT types that he is. He seems to use Ne, Ti, Te, and Ni all very well.

You can't seriously mean the fictional character, right? I mean, you actually mean the actor himself, right?

Typing fictional characters can be fun, but is a joke in itself for obvious reasons.

 

[Standuble]

I wouldn't say so. You surely would have one function more developed than the others even if they were all more-or-less equal (absurd to begin with) and would be able to majorly narrow it down to two types by this single determination.

 

[Rasofy]

That should be the ultimate goal.

 

[The Great One]

Due to the inconsistency in the presentation of any fictional character, I would think they are all theoretically untypable, at least beyond vague approximations.

Also, I have found it recently to be of greater use to type people via their brain processes (explained in Dario Nardi's Neuroscience of Personality), which is what their functions seem to be used in concert for (and if you are ENTP, examples of brain processes you would likely be good at are Process Manager and Precise Speaker, among others).

Well, I can pretty much type most fictional characters, it's just that some are kind of inconsistent which makes them hard to type, unlike a normal person.

You can't seriously mean the fictional character, right? I mean, you actually mean the actor himself, right?

Typing fictional characters can be fun, but is a joke in itself for obvious reasons.

I meant the fictional character, not Hugh Lorey.

 

[Xann]

u r esfp 9w8 OP

 

[Fluffywolf]

I meant the fictional character, not Hugh Lorey.

Ah yeah, well, fictional characters are often untypable, because they're fictional. So typing them is mostly just a gamble.

 

[The Great One]

Due to the inconsistency in the presentation of any fictional character, I would think they are all theoretically untypable, at least beyond vague approximations.

Also, I have found it recently to be of greater use to type people via their brain processes (explained in Dario Nardi's Neuroscience of Personality), which is what their functions seem to be used in concert for (and if you are ENTP, examples of brain processes you would likely be good at are Process Manager and Precise Speaker, among others).

You can't seriously mean the fictional character, right? I mean, you actually mean the actor himself, right?

Typing fictional characters can be fun, but is a joke in itself for obvious reasons.

Ah yeah, well, fictional characters are often untypable, because they're fictional. So typing them is mostly just a gamble.

I can throw a pretty good dice roll with most characters though. It's just that some characters change so much over a series of books that I literally can not type them. Let's take Anakin Skywalker for example. In the first 3 Star Wars movies, he seemed ESFP with strong Te, and in the last 3 movies he seemed ENTJ with strong Se. WTF?

 

[The Great One]

u r esfp 9w8 OP

Who were you referring to with that comment?

 

[Xann]

Who were you referring to with that comment?

the OP

 

[The Great One]

the OP

Oh ok. I have had people tell me that they thought I was an ESFP 9w8 before too.

 

[Xann]

Oh ok. I have had people tell me that they thought I was an ESFP 9w8 before too.

Yeah, not you You don't vibe me that way, personally.

 

[The Great One]

Yeah, not you You don't vibe me that way, personally.

Yeah, the common consensus is that I am an ENTP 7w6. Do you get that vibe from me?