Fudjack/Dinkelaker Functional Preferences Instrument

[Trystorp]

Intuiting 12
Sensing 6
Feeling 6
Thinking 13

 

["?"]

thinking =14
sensing =9
intuiting =9
feeling =5

N-F-T-S = iNfj, iNfp, eNfp, eNfj
F-N-S-T = inFp, inFj, enFj, enFp
N-T-F-S = iNtj, iNtp, eNtp, eNtj
T-N-S-F = inTp, enTj, inTj, enTp
S-F-T-N = iSfj, eSfp, iSfp, eSfj
T-S-N-F = isTp, esTj, isTj, esTp
S-T-F-N = iStj, eStp, iStp, eStj
F-S-N-T = isFp, esFj, isFj, esFp

 

[PuddleRiver]

Intuiting - 10
Sensing - 6
Feeling - 12
Thinking - 9

FNTS ?

 

[wildcat]

Score Summary

mbti type= INTP
ennea type= 5w4

intuiting =18
sensing =3
feeling =3
thinking =13

N-T-F-S = iNtj, iNtp, eNtp, eNtj

This is something I did already figure out a year or two ago -- I'm an INTP in terms of personality, but I express and rely on my N more often.

N is also a gateway into F, in some ways.

Exactly.
It is the gateway.

 

[wildcat]

Fudjack/Dinkelaker Functional Preferences Instrument -
Short Form 1.1(experimental)

My result: N-F-T-S

I am still reading this and trying to fully understand it. Very interesting.

ETA. Sorry if there is already a thread on this!

x1 > N = NFTS

what is x1?

N > x2 = NTFS

what is x2?

x2 > T = TNSF

T > y1 = TSNF

what is y1?

y1 > S = STFN

S > y2 = SFTN

what is y2?

y2 > F = FSNT

F > x1 = FNST

 

[niffer]

n = 12
f = 11
s = 7, t = 7

eh.

 

[wildcat]

E/I not included?

The dichotomy of E is J and P.

You do not have the one without the other.

Should x1 be P
y1 is J.

Hence x2 is I and y2 is E.

Is y the only boundary of S?

No; we have a second boundary.

Is x the only boundary of N?

No; we have a second boundary.

What is the relationship of the second boundary of S to the first boundary of N?

What is the relationship of the first boundary of S to the second boundary of N?

What is the relationship of the first boundary of S to the first boundary of N?

What is the relationship of the second boundary of S to the second boundary of N?

What is the relationship of the first boundary of F to the second boundary of T?

What is the relationship of the second boundary of F to the first boundary of T?

What is the relationship of the first boundary of F to the first boundary of T?

What is the relationship of the second boundary of F to the second boundary of T?

What is the relationship of the first boundary of x1 to the second boundary of y1?

What is the relationship of the second boundary of x1 to the first boundary of y1?

What is the relationship of the first boundary of x1 to the first boundary of y1?

What is the relationship of the second boundary of x1 to the second boundary of y1?

 

[wildcat]

Do you find a match?
No. It is only one look of the table.

Do you find a match if you switch the table around?
No. Then it is again only one look of the table.

When do you find the match?

 

[wildcat]

OK. Let us find the match.

x1>N = NFTS. It reads Ne Fi Te Si hence ENFP. The zero does not count. The number is 01278.

N>x1 = NFTS. It is not ENFP. Look at the coordinate. Hence the position of zero = the moment of initiation is always ahead of the primary function.
The number is 21087 = Fi Ne Si Te = INFP. Paradoxically, zero is not in the middle = it is never a middle point. Therefore nothing is changed. Ne Fi Te Si reads 01278 and 21087. ENFP and INFP respectively.

 

[wildcat]

Now we know E/I is reflected in the sequence of the function in the unit. Zero never changes position hence x1>N = ENFP and N>x1 = INFP.
Is x1 then E?
No. It is a dichotomy of E.

x1>F = FNST = Fe Ni Se Ti = ENFJ = 01278.

F>x1 = FNST = 21087 = Ni Fe Ti Se = INFJ.

 

[wildcat]

y2>F = FSNT = Fe Si Ne Ti = ESFJ = 01278.

F>y2 = FSNT = Si Fe Ti Ne = ISFJ = 21087.

y2>S = SFTN = Se Fi Te Ni = ESFP = 01278.

S>y2 = SFTN = 21087 = Fi Se Ni Te = ISFP.

y1>S = STFN = 01278 = Se Ti Fe Ni = ESTP

 

[wildcat]

S>y1 = STFN = 21087 = Ti Se Ni Fe = ISTP.

y1>T = TSNF = 01278 = Te Si Ne Fi = ESTJ.

T>y1 = TSNF = 21087 = Si Te Fi Ne = ISTJ.

x2>T = TNSF = 01278 = Te Ni Se Fi = ENTJ.

T>x2 = TNSF = 21087 = Ni Te Fi Se = INTJ.

x2>N = NTFS = 01278 = Ne Ti Fe Si = ENTP.

N>x2 = NTFS = 21087 = Ti Ne Si Fe = INTP.


N>S

N1. INTP and INFP.

N2. ENTP and ENFP.

N3. ENFJ and ENTJ.

N4. INFJ and INTJ.

N5. ISFJ and ISTJ.

N6. ESFJ and ESTJ.

N7. ESFP and ESTP.

N8. ISFP and ISTP.

 

[Varelse]

T 14, N 11, S 8, F 4.

 

[Kaveri]

I'm N-F-T-S iNfp.

N=16
F=8
T=7
S=6

I could predict the result because in the function order test my results were
Ne, Fi
Ni, Ti
Si
Te, Fe, Se

 

[lastrailway]

That would make: TNFS??? Oh, well, it is not included in the categories. and, if I assume I am INTP, this would be Ti, Ne, Fe, Si? then my inferior function would be introverted S and not extroverted F, unlike the typical INTP?

intuiting =9
sensing =6
feeling =7
thinking =15
N-F-T-S = iNfj, iNfp, eNfp, eNfj
F-N-S-T = inFp, inFj, enFj, enFp
N-T-F-S = iNtj, iNtp, eNtp, eNtj
T-N-S-F = inTp, enTj, inTj, enTp
S-F-T-N = iSfj, eSfp, iSfp, eSfj
T-S-N-F = isTp, esTj, isTj, esTp
S-T-F-N = iStj, eStp, iStp, eStj
F-S-N-T = isFp, esFj, isFj, esFp

 

[Lateralus]

I'm ENFP, but according to this, I'm ENTP or ENTJ (I'm not an introvert). I'm not really surprised.

intuiting =12
sensing =6
feeling =8
thinking =11
N-F-T-S = iNfj, iNfp, eNfp, eNfj
N-T-F-S = iNtj, iNtp, eNtp, eNtj

 

[Kaveri]

This test's point of view is refreshing. I wonder what the differences between iNfps and inFps in general are-- maybe the more philosophical NFs are generally Nfs and the more people-oriented NFs are generally nFs.

What about the other types? What sets an St apart from an sT? How does one recognize an Nt as opposed to an nT? Not to forget Sfs and sFs, of course.

 

[lastrailway]

But the S/N and T/F mark the dominant/inferior function? So, supposedly, if T is one's dominant then F could not be the tertiary , should obligatory be the inferior? and the other axis would mark the auxiliary/tertiary? Then a result TNFS would contradict the functions hierarchy?

 

[Kaveri]

But the S/N and T/F mark the dominant/inferior function? So, supposedly, if T is one's dominant then F could not be the tertiary , should obligatory be the inferior? and the other axis would mark the auxiliary/tertiary? Then a result TNFS would contradict the functions hierarchy?

I suppose.

I wondered why there were no F-T-x-x, T-F-x-x, N-S-x-x or S-N-x-x types. But I guess that, according to the theory upon which these types are based, one must use the judging function (T/F) approximately as much as one uses the perceiving function (N/T). It seems to be assumed that one can't judge more than one perceives, or perceive more than one judges. This forces the order to T-x-x-F, F-x-x-T, S-x-x-N or N-x-x-S.

Fi+Ti+Fe+Te = Ni+Si+Ne+Se

If you are an Nt, then

Ne+Ni > Te+Ti > Fe+Fi > Se+Si

I suppose it makes sense.

 

[lastrailway]

...

I guess it makes sense.

Yes, that's how I see it too, so I should assume that this test, being in experimental stage, can give some not coherent results, like the ones I got. Though I am trying to understand a bit better the functions dynamics (hadn't bothered enough before), before dismissing it, given that I have serious doubts about my type, in first place