How Mistypes Have Warped The Descriptions Of Each iNtuitive MBTI Type

[Bush]

How Mistypes Have Warped The Descriptions Of Each iNtuitive MBTI Type

Pretty good insights on how descriptions get botched and confused because types get botched and confused. (I'm sure the problem's cyclical.) And it's not all "Lots of S's are mistyped as N's; they fuck up our descriptions just as S's are prone to fuck up everything" either, which is refreshing.

My biggest takeaway was that say, an ENxP may mistype as an INxP if they're not typically extroverted because of the influence of ES descriptions.

Because the ESFP is an extroverted sensing-dominant type, ESFPs who believe themselves to be ENFPs tend to portray the ENFP as a much more extroverted and engaged type than the ENFP actually is. Whereas the ESFP is tuned into his or her environment at all times and is incredibly extroverted in nature, the true ENFP is quite often mentally checked out of his or her environment and is significantly less social than the ESFP.

[...]

In fact, most true ENTPs strongly believe themselves to be introverts because they are more interested in the world of ideas and invention than they are in the world that physically surrounds them.

[...]

Almost every true ENTP out there has considered themselves to be an introvert at some point in time. ENTPs lead with extroverted intuition, a function that gains energy through the exploration of external ideas, but not necessarily through direct socialization.

Thoughts? Is it bullshit or spot-on? Have you ever mistyped yourself as per these lists and for the reasons given?

 

[527468]

I agree with the concept of the article, cognitive functions are the way to type, but all in all I don't agree with its premise that some of the functions are accurately defined, based on experience with JCF and its revolutions:

A couple examples:

(A) "The ENTP certainly does search for logical consistency – and they place a large emphasis on it – but the ENTP is more interested in supporting their latest scheme or entrepreneurial venture with the logic at hand than they are in seeking it logic out for the sake of purely knowing it."
- This is moreso describing the ENTJ by a hair, in my experience, in fact this is a decent simplified description of a mode of Te. On the flipside, the ENTP is the one more concerned with "seeking out logic for the sake of purely knowing," Ti, but is simply that this is not the ENTP's primary program (which is intuition of the object - Ne.)

(B) "Because INTPs and ENTPs are introverted thinking types, they are searching for indisputable and verifiable truths above all else. On the flip side, INTJs are introverted intuitives first and foremost, which means that they are much more concerned with determining how the future is likely to play out than they are with examining the reality of their present."
- This is simply a misunderstanding of Ni and Ti, an oversimplification of the difference between intuition and logic. I can expound here if need be, but to say a type often so passionate about philosophy and scientific theory as the INJ is not contingent on essential truth, comes down to a value in searching for truth vs determining future events being no difference of cognitive program, but a generic preferential focus. Every function individually is concerned with verifiable truth, and Ni and Ne are concerned with the underlying nature of things, Ti and Te with their workings and rationale, Xi and Xe cater mentally to very contrasting realms of applicable qualia. If there is confusion here, begin with reviewing Carl Jung on the nature of Object vs Subject (E vs I.) The very reason the simplified purpose of future events is put forth for Ni is due to the decisive nature of the J preference implying it must stand apart. Stereotypical Ni has not a definition which subjugates the J preference, which it should, as a heightened J preference is the basis of the very corresponding error of seclusion. Speak with many Ni doms in typological discussion and you'll hear the issue.

 

[Norrsken]

Oh my! Based on that article, I think I follow the INFP narrative than the INFJ one. I am definitely more intensely emotional than I am intellectual.
This is interesting. I kind of hate how they muddy the waters with certain things, though, like the planning aspect; whenever I think of the long-term, it's about how I can make my life as well the lives of others better in some way or form. This is why I'm such a fan of the self-help branch of psychology. I always want to develop into a much better person, whether it comes down to money, self-image, how to help others out better, mastering something in my spare time, and so on. I am not very ambitious in the traditional sense, though. Hmm!

Nice find, [MENTION=22264]Bush Did 9/11[/MENTION]

 

[violet_crown]

Thoughts? Is it bullshit or spot-on? Have you ever mistyped yourself as per these lists and for the reasons given?

Really great article. Thank you for sharing this.

When I first joined I was still trying to decide between ENTP and ENTJ. I had typed as ENTP when I was younger but in college began to consistently type as ENTJ. I was doing a lot more execution-oriented, leadership roles and it strengthen my preference for Te.

That said, any discussion of MBTI should always have the caveat that type is a matter of best fit rather than gospel truth. I know in my own functional stack, I prefer Ti just slightly less than I prefer Te, and behind that Ne slightly less than Ni. The two biggest determiners for me of ENTJ>ENTP have always been that Fe and Si are very foreign to me. Also, other ENTJ tend to resonate with me more than ENTPs I've encountered. I have a wide range of interests (probably due to the 7 wing and 7 fix), but my dance card is usually very short in terms of what I'm actually engaging with practically.

Last thought is that I've always felt the "political" aspect of type (i.e., certain types being seen as more prestigious or cool) is hellaciously counterproductive. I never entirely understood why anyone would want to be intuitive if they weren't. Especially when in the real world, we're not exactly the kind of people most people like or necessarily relate to. It's just a very strange inversion to me.

 

[erm]

Lots of S's are mistyped as N's; they fuck up our descriptions just as S's are prone to fuck up everything

 

[Jaguar]

Priebe fails to realize there are people who enjoy both the conceptualization and execution of an idea. MBTI types read as extremes to me.

 

[Star Atlas]

Very interesting read.

In my anecdotal experience with ENTPs, I have found that they more often than not identify as introverts simply because, "I just really hate most people."

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

 

[prplchknz]

I just sent that article to my friend who types himself ENFP because the part about why ESFPs mistyping as ENFP is him exactly. he's an ESFP 4w3 which i can see that combo can be mistaken for ENFP if looking at stereotypes

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

I can do about 140 a minute but if I go slower then I usually avoid mistypes.

 

[Seymour]

Priebe fails to realize there are people who enjoy both the conceptualization and execution of an idea. MBTI types read as extremes to me.

She also seems to think every INFP is (effectively) an enneagram 4. Her "Fi Repulsion Switch" post is a good example of this.

 

[á´…eparted]

It's a nice article but it doesn't fit me. I have never tested as a P, and never will. When I was younger I thought I was INFJ but that was largely influenced from mental illness. Even back then, I was always the poster child for a J, to the point of making my "type" not really fit. There was usually some ongoing debate into what J I was. Really what it comes down to is I am a very strong Je dominant. I clearly use Fe and prefer it over all else, but I also understand Te to a certain extent. At least, I can see it's methods goals and try and adapt in it's utility. Below that, I definitely use Ni but Si is also fairly well understood, like Te I see a big utility in it. Because of this all, I will always test as an ExxJ, and my N and F scores are usually very borderline. When I read type descriptions about ENFJ I am like "yeah, that's me but it miss so much". I often feel like I relate way more to ENTJ and ESTJ descriptions. I have to look to the functions to grasp at my type with my thinking and output styles. Enneagram pegs me far more than MBTI does.

Ne is actually the function I relate to the least. It's very confusing to me and I have a very difficult time seeing utility in it. I see it work for others in a very odd way, but only in the outcome. It's like "ok, you got to the end, so it works, but how. That shouldn't have worked." My brain is not organized like that at all, neither is my external world. I would never test as an ENFP and I largely don't grasp what they do.

 

[Amargith]

My biggest takeaway was that say, an ENxP may mistype as an INxP if they're not typically extroverted because of the influence of ES descriptions.

Thoughts? Is it bullshit or spot-on? Have you ever mistyped yourself as per these lists and for the reasons given?

I have. There was a period where I typed as INFP, due to not feeling that extraverted and going with 'ambivert' instead.

Ive also been typed - by others - ENFJ and INFJ. This article makes a good argument as to why that might be, though I also purposefully sought out to acquire the skill set of NFJ (despite knowing I'd never be as comfortable or good at using them as they are)

 

[HongDou]

I think regardless of what type I have identified with/others have related to me I don't identify with the level of extroversion described in it. With ESFx types I find that their descriptions portray them as too extroverted, when the people I know who identify as ESFJ or ESFP are more ambiverted - ESFJ because too much high energy can be polarizing and disharmonious, and ESFP because of their individualist nature and interests off the beaten path. With ENFP I don't actually get much of a big extroverted picture from how they're commonly talked about online. What I do get with ENFP descriptions is not being extroverted enough. So many people emphasize this myth about ENFP being "the most introverted extrovert" that I find that also hard to relate to because I do enjoy socializing and exchanging ideas with others rather than drawing back into my shell. So in that sense this article just kind of adds to this myth.

I'm all for Jungian analysis when determining one's MBTI type and I think it's a crucial step if you really want to discover the nature of your ego, but I think when it comes to measuring extroversion/introversion you should leave that to the Big 5 and whatever percentage your MBTI tests give you. I don't think any of the 16 types will be extroverted/introverted a certain way.

 

[BlueScreen]

Is it bullshit or spot-on? Have you ever mistyped yourself as per these lists and for the reasons given?

I'm not sure what equates to a correct MBTI typing. Does someone have to perfectly fit in a box drawn on an abstract space formed with false dichotomies? Or does someone have to fit more than a certain percentage in the box? Or does someone have to match a description which is based on observations of people who supposedly fit in the box?

 

[Verona]

I relate to the INFJ part except for not being emotional. I think saying Fe is more about helping people than being emotional is a bit of a stereotype. Fi and Fe are emotional in different ways in my opinion.

 

[Dreamer]

I know I'm most likely NOT Fi dom, but shoot, I'm so much in my head and keep to myself that I really do feel as though I'm INFP at times.

 

[Dyslexxie]

People who identify as ENTPs are very often: mistyped ESTPs.
How this warps our understanding of the ENTP type:

Because the ESTP is an extroverted sensing-dominant type, ESTPs who believe themselves to be ENTPs tend to portray the ENTP as a much more extroverted and engaged type than the ENTP actually is. Whereas the ESTP is tuned into his or her environment at all times and is incredibly reactive to his or her environment, the true ENTP is quite often mentally checked out of his or her environment and is significantly less outgoing than the ESTP. In fact, most true ENTPs strongly believe themselves to be introverts because they are more interested in the world of ideas and invention than they are in the world that physically surrounds them.

Though both types are intellectual in nature, the ESTP tends to be a hands-on learner who wants to see the physical consequences of how something is going to play out in their immediate environment. On the flip side, ENTPs enjoy speculating about the bigger picture, and are more interested in the theory behind why things happen the way they do than they are in seeing them play out practically.

The ENTP sees the knowledge they acquire as a means to an end of manipulating their environment to their advantage – often through a series of entrepreneurial schemes they cook up. On the flip side, the ESTP experiences their external environment as it comes, using their introverted thinking primarily as a means of understanding what’s going on around them. The ESTP wishes to understand what is based on what they’re experiencing. The ENTP wishes to understand what could be based on what hasn’t been explored yet. The ENTP lives in a highly theoretical world, whereas the ESTP lives in a very concrete one.

When ESTPs identify too readily as ENTPs, they give ENTPs the reputation for being significantly more engaged with their environment than the ENTP really is. In reality, most ENTPs are so caught up in the world of ideas and theories that they strongly believe themselves to be introverts.

As someone who often types as ENTP on quizzes, I agree with this 100%. A lot of ESTP descriptions make them sound like adrenaline junkies which might be the case for some, but I think Se is more about awareness in the moment than living life to the fullest right now/needing to practice extreme sports just because (although some might).

Types like ENTP and ESTP that both use Ti and Fe so I can see why many behave so similarly. Both are highly logical and quite open, but the way they approach issues and the reasoning behind it is what distinguished them so well (the Ne/Se difference). An ESTP is very likely to get bored discussing ideas and theories without implementation while an ENTP can do that until they're green in the face.

Functions have definitely helped me look at types differently, but it's harder to quiz properly for those without it being overly generic and leading. Overall cool find though.

 

[entropie]

Any person who really believes that those 16 types exist and describe mankind is pretty whacko in my eyes.
The 16 types is an instrument to tell who you are without many words, cause everyone is unique and will always be. the dynamic of life is ungraspable via 16 nor 1 Million types.

 

[Coriolis]

I'm not sure what equates to a correct MBTI typing. Does someone have to perfectly fit in a box drawn on an abstract space formed with false dichotomies? Or does someone have to fit more than a certain percentage in the box? Or does someone have to match a description which is based on observations of people who supposedly fit in the box?

IME it has to fit significantly better than all the other possibilities. I found that, for me, the best match stood out like the proverbial sore thumb.