Fe or Fi?

[Vendrah]

[MENTION=32874]Vendrah[/MENTION] - Thanks for your input again.

I don't really know what my 3rd or 4th position is for the stack. What I do know is again this, I was (finally came out enough of it) in a "grip" for a while where I was trying to look at my internals and eventually that would result in some emotion or insight or (most rarely but most useful) big picture of connecting dots of things with regard my internals and emotions and other people and my relationships and interactions with them.

Before this started, the only type of grip (or similar state, maybe not full-on grip) I would sometimes have was not emotional at all, was more about getting disoriented when things were not going as I wanted them to, and wasting time checking out some non-conventional "magic" solution. But I would integrate what I learnt from such approaches into my default approach and it would be helpful even, even if it was a lot of effort and wasted time. I say this is less of a grip than the above because it just simply was less of an upheaval for me cognitively or otherwise. Involving the emotions like above would be the biggest upheaval.

As for my typing, I really think that chasing any Feeling type option would be a waste of time here. I did ask in this thread (and in my other thread too) before whether whatever I am looking at in my grip-like experience is Fi or Fe, but it pretty much isn't my default approach, whether Fi or Fe.

I do want to say I'm not excluding that that "grip" is more shadow than grip, too. I would say it gets/used to get pretty horrible anyway... Then it could be Fe while I am a Fi type, or vice versa, or whatever, etc. And for the Intuition part too, Ni or Ne being shadow.

But I am INFx in that grip thingie. Sometimes it turns into an E-ish something too. But way more I than E. Still not sure on the "x" (J/P) or on the functions in relation to that grip thingy.



OK so, I tried the nardi test now, keys2cognition site, yeah?

Got this:

Cognitive Process Level of Development (Preference, Skill and Frequency of Use)

extraverted Sensing (Se) ****************************************** (42.1)
excellent use
introverted Sensing (Si) **************************************** (40.1)
excellent use
extraverted Intuiting (Ne) ************ (12.4)
unused
introverted Intuiting (Ni) ******************* (19.7)
limited use
extraverted Thinking (Te) ***************************************** (41.1)
excellent use
introverted Thinking (Ti) ************************************ (36.8)
excellent use
extraverted Feeling (Fe) ******************* (19.7)
limited use
introverted Feeling (Fi) *************************** (27.7)
average use

Summary Analysis of Profile
By focusing on the strongest configuration of cognitive processes, your pattern of responses most closely matches individuals of this type: ISTJ

Lead (Dominant) Process
Introverted Sensing (Si): Stabilizing with a predictable standard. Carefully comparing a situation to the customary ways you’ve come to rely on. Checking with past experiences. Stabilizing a situation and invest for future security.

Support (Auxilliary) Process
Extraverted Thinking (Te): Measuring and constructing for progress. Making decisions objectively based on evidence and measures. Checking if things function properly. Applying a procedure to control events and complete goals.

If these cognitive processes don't fit well then consider these types: ESTJ, or ISTP

If these results are different from what you know of yourself, you might consider why your developmental pattern does not align with your expectation. You might also consider exploring this result as a possible better fit.

The Four Temperaments
Corresponding best-fit temperaments based on your profile: Improviser; secondly Stabilizer; then Theorist; and lastly, Catalyst.



Then I did truity.com's basic Big 5 test:

Openness 52%
Conscientiousness 56%
Extraversion 42%
Agreeableness 35%
Neuroticism 17%

It said my Openness with the 52% was slightly lower than average, but it would not show the rest of the comparisons to the population without me paying for it. So no idea if the Conscientiousness is lower too or just plain average. Tbh if you ask me, I'd say average for myself on that. The other three scores here I'm pretty sure are lower scores than average. And that is about in line with how I see myself. For Neuroticism I would add I answered based on how I usually am, but in that grip-like experience it should be higher, because I do sometimes experience strong negative emotions then. Also I can be irritable outside any "grip" too, but other than that yeah no negative emotions by default.



What do you think of these results? If you have a preferred Big 5 test, feel free to let me know, I'm OK with filling it out, you can use my data as datapoint for your research.

Anyway about the results. You said the approx stack is Si-Te-Ti for ISTJ. I got Se-Te-Si, what would that be closest to?

Fi "level" is not enough to be considered a "fake" ISTJ or ESTJ in my record, and Neuroticism is quite low, so the risk of being in the shadow is very low, its quite unlikely that you are on "shadow mode".

These results were not that conclusive, I dont think that you doing another Big 5 test would be helpful because I dont have much idea how a result for Sensor should look like in Big 5 in terms of facets.

The aprox stack for Se-Te-Si doesnt exist in my book lol at least not yet. Se+Ti is almost equal Te+Si, which doesnt help much in J/P.

Big 5 STJ would be quite low Openness to Experience (lowest types should be ESTJ and ISTJ) and high Conscientiousness (how high I cant really tell), while STP average-low in Openness to Experience and low on Conscientiousness. You seem more close to STP type being "forced" by circumstances to decrease a P preference than a J type being "forced" to decrease J.

I still stick with ISTJ, and about E/I being ambivert is common, actually. Really.

 

[noname3788]

[MENTION=32874]Vendrah[/MENTION] - Thanks for your input again.

I don't really know what my 3rd or 4th position is for the stack. What I do know is again this, I was (finally came out enough of it) in a "grip" for a while where I was trying to look at my internals and eventually that would result in some emotion or insight or (most rarely but most useful) big picture of connecting dots of things with regard my internals and emotions and other people and my relationships and interactions with them.

Before this started, the only type of grip (or similar state, maybe not full-on grip) I would sometimes have was not emotional at all, was more about getting disoriented when things were not going as I wanted them to, and wasting time checking out some non-conventional "magic" solution. But I would integrate what I learnt from such approaches into my default approach and it would be helpful even, even if it was a lot of effort and wasted time. I say this is less of a grip than the above because it just simply was less of an upheaval for me cognitively or otherwise. Involving the emotions like above would be the biggest upheaval.

As for my typing, I really think that chasing any Feeling type option would be a waste of time here. I did ask in this thread (and in my other thread too) before whether whatever I am looking at in my grip-like experience is Fi or Fe, but it pretty much isn't my default approach, whether Fi or Fe.

I do want to say I'm not excluding that that "grip" is more shadow than grip, too. I would say it gets/used to get pretty horrible anyway... Then it could be Fe while I am a Fi type, or vice versa, or whatever, etc. And for the Intuition part too, Ni or Ne being shadow.

But I am INFx in that grip thingie. Sometimes it turns into an E-ish something too. But way more I than E. Still not sure on the "x" (J/P) or on the functions in relation to that grip thingy.



OK so, I tried the nardi test now, keys2cognition site, yeah?

Got this:

Cognitive Process Level of Development (Preference, Skill and Frequency of Use)

extraverted Sensing (Se) ****************************************** (42.1)
excellent use
introverted Sensing (Si) **************************************** (40.1)
excellent use
extraverted Intuiting (Ne) ************ (12.4)
unused
introverted Intuiting (Ni) ******************* (19.7)
limited use
extraverted Thinking (Te) ***************************************** (41.1)
excellent use
introverted Thinking (Ti) ************************************ (36.8)
excellent use
extraverted Feeling (Fe) ******************* (19.7)
limited use
introverted Feeling (Fi) *************************** (27.7)
average use

Summary Analysis of Profile
By focusing on the strongest configuration of cognitive processes, your pattern of responses most closely matches individuals of this type: ISTJ

Lead (Dominant) Process
Introverted Sensing (Si): Stabilizing with a predictable standard. Carefully comparing a situation to the customary ways you’ve come to rely on. Checking with past experiences. Stabilizing a situation and invest for future security.

Support (Auxilliary) Process
Extraverted Thinking (Te): Measuring and constructing for progress. Making decisions objectively based on evidence and measures. Checking if things function properly. Applying a procedure to control events and complete goals.

If these cognitive processes don't fit well then consider these types: ESTJ, or ISTP

If these results are different from what you know of yourself, you might consider why your developmental pattern does not align with your expectation. You might also consider exploring this result as a possible better fit.

The Four Temperaments
Corresponding best-fit temperaments based on your profile: Improviser; secondly Stabilizer; then Theorist; and lastly, Catalyst.



Then I did truity.com's basic Big 5 test:

Openness 52%
Conscientiousness 56%
Extraversion 42%
Agreeableness 35%
Neuroticism 17%

It said my Openness with the 52% was slightly lower than average, but it would not show the rest of the comparisons to the population without me paying for it. So no idea if the Conscientiousness is lower too or just plain average. Tbh if you ask me, I'd say average for myself on that. The other three scores here I'm pretty sure are lower scores than average. And that is about in line with how I see myself. For Neuroticism I would add I answered based on how I usually am, but in that grip-like experience it should be higher, because I do sometimes experience strong negative emotions then. Also I can be irritable outside any "grip" too, but other than that yeah no negative emotions by default.



What do you think of these results? If you have a preferred Big 5 test, feel free to let me know, I'm OK with filling it out, you can use my data as datapoint for your research.

Anyway about the results. You said the approx stack is Si-Te-Ti for ISTJ. I got Se-Te-Si, what would that be closest to?

I personally find it quite interesting that you seem to have a strong sensing preference (whereas I usually get strong intuition preference) while our Big5 results look quite similar, especially on the openness trait (main difference is me having higher agreeableness and neuroticism).

About your type, I guess xSTx is no surprise here, the question is just which one. Based on these results alone, I can't say anything, same as what [MENTION=32874]Vendrah[/MENTION] already mentioned. Based on my feeling and intuition, you seem more Ti+Fe to me than Fi+Te, they way you describe your inner thought process seems quite Ti to me. However, that's assuming that functions tandems are a thing, and that one is quite questionable. Both your feeling functions are not in higher positions, it just seems that you don't seem to give a single fuck about Fi. Regarding Fe, you seem to be well aware of what other people expect from you or how your own actions impact them, it's just getting overruled by your thinking functions. So I think about Fe or Fi, it is Fe, but can't say much about your type, beside the obvious xSTx.

 

[Vendrah]

[MENTION=39881]Meowcat[/MENTION] Dont think its going to help this much in this occasion but you could try my own MBTI test:
https://www.quotev.com/quiz/12501474/Sum-Typing-MBTI-Test-with-cognitive-functions

 

[Meowcat]

[MENTION=39881]Meowcat[/MENTION] Dont think its going to help this much in this occasion but you could try my own MBTI test:
https://www.quotev.com/quiz/12501474/Sum-Typing-MBTI-Test-with-cognitive-functions

I'll try this a bit later and I'll report back & respond to the posts above to both of you. Thanks!!

 

[Meowcat]

Fi "level" is not enough to be considered a "fake" ISTJ or ESTJ in my record, and Neuroticism is quite low, so the risk of being in the shadow is very low, its quite unlikely that you are on "shadow mode".

These results were not that conclusive, I dont think that you doing another Big 5 test would be helpful because I dont have much idea how a result for Sensor should look like in Big 5 in terms of facets.

The aprox stack for Se-Te-Si doesnt exist in my book lol at least not yet. Se+Ti is almost equal Te+Si, which doesnt help much in J/P.

Big 5 STJ would be quite low Openness to Experience (lowest types should be ESTJ and ISTJ) and high Conscientiousness (how high I cant really tell), while STP average-low in Openness to Experience and low on Conscientiousness. You seem more close to STP type being "forced" by circumstances to decrease a P preference than a J type being "forced" to decrease J.

I still stick with ISTJ, and about E/I being ambivert is common, actually. Really.

OK so your test gave me:

ENTJ 183
ESTJ 178
ENFJ 149
ESTP 149
ESFJ 142
INTJ 140
ESFP 130
INFJ 127
ISTP 122
ISTJ 117
ENTP 107
INTP 99
ISFJ 99
ENFP 81
INFP 77
ISFP 73

Thoughts?

***

To respond to your post here. Hmm as for circumstances affecting J/P. I don't know about that. My mother is xSFJ, my father didn't really take part in my upbringing. I can say I definitely was never low in Conscientiousness, never extremely high in it either, but I was higher in it when I was in a better state (less negative stuff). But I find when I'm at my best I'm not overly rigid either, or overly stuck on trying to be totally conscientious in every little detail ... When I said I'm getting more relaxed it was referring to this, too. Then, I'm not closed to experience but I've been accused of being dogmatic before by some. Because I stick to opinions in arguments and can be conventional in many things - not always but in many areas I absolutely don't get people who like to believe in alternative theories and stuff. E.g. with medicine. Or conspiracy theories etc. I have checked out some alternative approaches in my less intense version of the "grip" (which is not emotional like the more intense "grip" is) but by default I do not look for them. So as far as that I'm closed by default. But if we talk about experiences literally, and not ideas, then I'm not totally closed to experiences, less closed to them than to ideas.

Se-Te-Si: if it was Te-Si-Se it would be ESTJ? The scores were pretty close to each other anyway. And if it was Se-Ti-Te then ESTP?

Also. I do realise I have a more extraverted than introverted self-image i.e I accept the extraverted traits more about myself but not sure why.

***

About your test again, can I ask what this was asking about: "You have a very good sense of direction and instantly know your path around a place.2

I jumped at that and said "Completely Agree". It's part of the core for my self-image.

And can I ask about this part

"Reflective, Sensitive, Flexible, Idealist and Appreciative.
Sympathetic, Unassuming, Insightful, Easygoing, and Patient
Candid, Ingenious, Complicated, Analitical, Independent, and Rebellious
Discreet, Industrious, Deliberate, Strategical, Self-Confident, and Methodical
Critical, Detached, Guarded, Independent, and Resourceful
Easygoing, Spontaneous, Following, Secure, and Principled
Calm, Stable, Steady, Loyal, Cautious, and Conventional
Conservative, Hard-working, Supportive, Conventional, and Guarded
Enthusiastic, Sensitive, Spontaneous, Changeable, Impulsive, and Understanding
Active, Pleasant, Demanding, Impatient, Appreciative, Persuasive and Compromising
Friendly, Resourceful, Headstrong, Self-Centered and Independent
Ambitious, Forceful, Efficient, Optimistic, Self-Centered, and Adaptable
Dominant, Flexible, Demanding, Direct, Bold and Assertive
Changeable, Supportive, Forceful, Positive, Initiating, and Resourceful
Contented, Dedicated, Prejudiced, Self-Satisfied, and Practical
Structured, Secure, Practical, Sensitive, Loyal, and Rigid"

Were these the 16 types? I found it easier to pick for the 2nd part.

Picked "Conservative, Hard-working, Supportive, Conventional, and Guarded" and "Ambitious, Forceful, Efficient, Optimistic, Self-Centered, and Adaptable" because "Dominant, Flexible, Demanding, Direct, Bold and Assertive" was too extraverted and too flexible. This wasn't bad either: "Contented, Dedicated, Prejudiced, Self-Satisfied, and Practical" but I'm not that prejudiced as to put it in the first 5 traits for myself. And "Friendly, Resourceful, Headstrong, Self-Centered and Independent" was too friendly, lol. While "Critical, Detached, Guarded, Independent, and Resourceful" was too critical but that was my secondary option for the first part - if the 16 options are the 16 types then which types are these?

And the final question, I had an issue picking because it's like... instinctively it's A but more consciously it's B. (I picked A in the end btw) Let me explain. With A I saw it as me looking around to objects (for interaction or just plain looking around, navigating, whatever). This isn't really about thinking much and so it's instinctively easy, too. With B I saw it as my mental conscious thinking process, this is more laborious for me: patiently collecting data, details, facts and sorting them and having a highly convergent thinking. This is more analytical for me than option A. But also slightly more draining but then I can go on pretty long with it too... And physically it takes less energy so in that way easier but I do also get sorta almost bored with it eventually. Anyway yeah I picked A. I described all this bc it seems like cognition. What was this question getting at?

Also! To get even more specific. If this question was to do with ideas i.e. if I try to apply it to the sphere of ideas, I would die at having A. Like wanting to seek many many options or whatever. I will stop way faster than that. B would still be laborious but just more satisfying eventually. But if the question was to do with general extraversion or introversion then well A is easier in the above way. And if it was to do with what kind of sensory data I look at, I would say it's like I find A easier in the way described but B I can do for more data overall, better capacity in a sense for this, just gonna take longer. Well okay, I don't know if that made all that much sense. May be Si>Ne for the ideas, then may be overall E>I, and may be faster and more enjoyable access to Se but more eventual capacity for Si. Ha, I don't know. This is just what I thought of now, and I find this cognition stuff interesting regardless of what labels and boxes we try to force onto it.

***

One comment I got repeatedly from an INTJ guy btw. He has an ESTJ sister and an ISTJ friend (male friend). He knows them IRL ofc, he only knew me online tho' so this limits the value of his observations but he repeatedly said I'm like his sister in some things. He says I'm not as closed as the ISTJ... if he says whatever to the ISTJ the ISTJ just ignores it a lot. While his ESTJ sister will at least listen and try to comment on it. And I'm more like that, yeah. If for nothing else, I think it would be rude to just plain ignore what others say to me. Especially if it's a friend. I won't always be truly interested tho' lol even if I make that effort. I just try to not be rude really. And sometimes on top of the politeness I just don't mind paying attention to the stuff being said. The sister is also more temperamental or aggressive/wants to win more in stuff than the friend and yeah well that fits too. The INTJ actually found me really really temperamental/choleric umm... I think some people are more sensitive to it/notice it more than others.

 

[Meowcat]

I personally find it quite interesting that you seem to have a strong sensing preference (whereas I usually get strong intuition preference) while our Big5 results look quite similar, especially on the openness trait (main difference is me having higher agreeableness and neuroticism).

About your type, I guess xSTx is no surprise here, the question is just which one. Based on these results alone, I can't say anything, same as what [MENTION=32874]Vendrah[/MENTION] already mentioned. Based on my feeling and intuition, you seem more Ti+Fe to me than Fi+Te, they way you describe your inner thought process seems quite Ti to me. However, that's assuming that functions tandems are a thing, and that one is quite questionable. Both your feeling functions are not in higher positions, it just seems that you don't seem to give a single fuck about Fi. Regarding Fe, you seem to be well aware of what other people expect from you or how your own actions impact them, it's just getting overruled by your thinking functions. So I think about Fe or Fi, it is Fe, but can't say much about your type, beside the obvious xSTx.

Oh so you get around 50% for Openness too in that very same test?

Ha ha ha not giving a single fuck about Fi by default, that's about right. I really am so much better off not giving too much fucks about it.

As for Fe, I wouldn't say I'm well aware of how my actions impact others tho'. Well in some cases I'm aware quickly and like automatically but then totally not in other cases. I'm incredibly nonverbal overall about all that, too. I'm really bad at being verbal at it, i.e. real hard to pay attention to how to say stuff by taking it into account how it will affect others. It overall really seems like I have some basic awareness both about my actions and my words in terms of how they affect others that I developed a long time ago, and then beyond that I just have none bc I stopped focusing on any of it for a long time (re: awareness how I impact others).

Would you be able to put into words what you see about my inner thought process that you linked to Ti?

 

[Vendrah]

OK so your test gave me:

ENTJ 183
ESTJ 178
ENFJ 149
ESTP 149
ESFJ 142
INTJ 140
ESFP 130
INFJ 127
ISTP 122
ISTJ 117
ENTP 107
INTP 99
ISFJ 99
ENFP 81
INFP 77
ISFP 73

Thoughts?

***

To respond to your post here. Hmm as for circumstances affecting J/P. I don't know about that. My mother is xSFJ, my father didn't really take part in my upbringing. I can say I definitely was never low in Conscientiousness, never extremely high in it either, but I was higher in it when I was in a better state (less negative stuff). But I find when I'm at my best I'm not overly rigid either, or overly stuck on trying to be totally conscientious in every little detail ... When I said I'm getting more relaxed it was referring to this, too. Then, I'm not closed to experience but I've been accused of being dogmatic before by some. Because I stick to opinions in arguments and can be conventional in many things - not always but in many areas I absolutely don't get people who like to believe in alternative theories and stuff. E.g. with medicine. Or conspiracy theories etc. I have checked out some alternative approaches in my less intense version of the "grip" (which is not emotional like the more intense "grip" is) but by default I do not look for them. So as far as that I'm closed by default. But if we talk about experiences literally, and not ideas, then I'm not totally closed to experiences, less closed to them than to ideas.

Se-Te-Si: if it was Te-Si-Se it would be ESTJ? The scores were pretty close to each other anyway. And if it was Se-Ti-Te then ESTP?

Also. I do realise I have a more extraverted than introverted self-image i.e I accept the extraverted traits more about myself but not sure why.

***

About your test again, can I ask what this was asking about: "You have a very good sense of direction and instantly know your path around a place.2

I jumped at that and said "Completely Agree". It's part of the core for my self-image.

And can I ask about this part

"Reflective, Sensitive, Flexible, Idealist and Appreciative.
Sympathetic, Unassuming, Insightful, Easygoing, and Patient
Candid, Ingenious, Complicated, Analitical, Independent, and Rebellious
Discreet, Industrious, Deliberate, Strategical, Self-Confident, and Methodical
Critical, Detached, Guarded, Independent, and Resourceful
Easygoing, Spontaneous, Following, Secure, and Principled
Calm, Stable, Steady, Loyal, Cautious, and Conventional
Conservative, Hard-working, Supportive, Conventional, and Guarded
Enthusiastic, Sensitive, Spontaneous, Changeable, Impulsive, and Understanding
Active, Pleasant, Demanding, Impatient, Appreciative, Persuasive and Compromising
Friendly, Resourceful, Headstrong, Self-Centered and Independent
Ambitious, Forceful, Efficient, Optimistic, Self-Centered, and Adaptable
Dominant, Flexible, Demanding, Direct, Bold and Assertive
Changeable, Supportive, Forceful, Positive, Initiating, and Resourceful
Contented, Dedicated, Prejudiced, Self-Satisfied, and Practical
Structured, Secure, Practical, Sensitive, Loyal, and Rigid"

Were these the 16 types? I found it easier to pick for the 2nd part.

Picked "Conservative, Hard-working, Supportive, Conventional, and Guarded" and "Ambitious, Forceful, Efficient, Optimistic, Self-Centered, and Adaptable" because "Dominant, Flexible, Demanding, Direct, Bold and Assertive" was too extraverted and too flexible. This wasn't bad either: "Contented, Dedicated, Prejudiced, Self-Satisfied, and Practical" but I'm not that prejudiced as to put it in the first 5 traits for myself. And "Friendly, Resourceful, Headstrong, Self-Centered and Independent" was too friendly, lol. While "Critical, Detached, Guarded, Independent, and Resourceful" was too critical but that was my secondary option for the first part - if the 16 options are the 16 types then which types are these?

And the final question, I had an issue picking because it's like... instinctively it's A but more consciously it's B. (I picked A in the end btw) Let me explain. With A I saw it as me looking around to objects (for interaction or just plain looking around, navigating, whatever). This isn't really about thinking much and so it's instinctively easy, too. With B I saw it as my mental conscious thinking process, this is more laborious for me: patiently collecting data, details, facts and sorting them and having a highly convergent thinking. This is more analytical for me than option A. But also slightly more draining but then I can go on pretty long with it too... And physically it takes less energy so in that way easier but I do also get sorta almost bored with it eventually. Anyway yeah I picked A. I described all this bc it seems like cognition. What was this question getting at?

Also! To get even more specific. If this question was to do with ideas i.e. if I try to apply it to the sphere of ideas, I would die at having A. Like wanting to seek many many options or whatever. I will stop way faster than that. B would still be laborious but just more satisfying eventually. But if the question was to do with general extraversion or introversion then well A is easier in the above way. And if it was to do with what kind of sensory data I look at, I would say it's like I find A easier in the way described but B I can do for more data overall, better capacity in a sense for this, just gonna take longer. Well okay, I don't know if that made all that much sense. May be Si>Ne for the ideas, then may be overall E>I, and may be faster and more enjoyable access to Se but more eventual capacity for Si. Ha, I don't know. This is just what I thought of now, and I find this cognition stuff interesting regardless of what labels and boxes we try to force onto it.

***

One comment I got repeatedly from an INTJ guy btw. He has an ESTJ sister and an ISTJ friend (male friend). He knows them IRL ofc, he only knew me online tho' so this limits the value of his observations but he repeatedly said I'm like his sister in some things. He says I'm not as closed as the ISTJ... if he says whatever to the ISTJ the ISTJ just ignores it a lot. While his ESTJ sister will at least listen and try to comment on it. And I'm more like that, yeah. If for nothing else, I think it would be rude to just plain ignore what others say to me. Especially if it's a friend. I won't always be truly interested tho' lol even if I make that effort. I just try to not be rude really. And sometimes on top of the politeness I just don't mind paying attention to the stuff being said. The sister is also more temperamental or aggressive/wants to win more in stuff than the friend and yeah well that fits too. The INTJ actually found me really really temperamental/choleric umm... I think some people are more sensitive to it/notice it more than others.

Yep, first thing, it seems that my test (and I couldnt really track that) is slightly intuitive biased, meaning that the intuitive options are more attractive than sensing options, so, you getting intuitives is more like my mistake. And, actually, thats partially because most of the indirect stats I use come from intuitives, so some sensing options more comes fron intuitives non-preferences than for sensor preferences. And in part, actually, because ENTJ got some quite boost from your part lol.

That test went too much complicated in the end, but, yeah, originally, its Se-Ti-Te for ESTP and Te-Si-Se for ESTJ, Si-Te-Ti for ISTJ, Ti-Se-Si for ISTP. And that stack also fixes the "INTJ and INTP arent alike at all, they dont share any functions" (in Sensing that would be ISTJ and ISTP), all cousins shares either the two functions or the main one (they do have different weights, its 3-2-1). Im using stacks exactly this way. I avoided using the "achile heels" because I found it to be unreliable. I bet that people sometimes take that advice of "develop your achile heels" and people ends up giving too much attention to the supposed achile heels, ends up giving more attention to it in an attempt to develop it, and then the achile heels is no longer the achile heels. But there are lots of supplementary questions interfering, so, even with these results I cant even calculate the cognitive functions any longer. This test grew in complexity more than I wish for. But I had to do that.

"You have a very good sense of direction and instantly know your path around a place." - Thats a question from Sakinorva cognitive function test. Originally, I think the intention behind with it was evaluating and scoring Se. However, the statistics of Sakinorva test indicated that that question is a combo of Extraversion with Ni, with ENTJ and ENFJ scoring the highest scores for that question (and ISFP/ISTP one of the lowest). But, those who are already used with MBTI does ends up thinking that's a Se question while it is not. It is one of the indirect extroversion questions, thats one of the indirect E vs I questions.

The words list originally came from MBTI Manual (info given by Truity), but, I end up modificating it slightly. I firstly removed the obvious E vs I aspect, so I could put another indirect E vs I question, which was the "What was easier to pick, the first set of words or the 2nd?". The 1st set of words scores for introversion, and the 2nd set of words scores for extroversion. Originally, I already found it was intuitive biased (intuitive got more words than sensors, I reduced the difference). When diagnosed problems, I modified a good part of it again, removing some words that would pull unattraction or too much attraction (like "submissive" for INFJ, that made an incentive to INFJ to migrate to the INFP option). You can search truity type descriptions, at the end of it there will be a list of words, thats the original version.

"Reflective, Sensitive, Flexible, Idealist and Appreciative. - INFP
Sympathetic, Unassuming, Insightful, Easygoing, and Patient - INFJ
Candid, Ingenious, Complicated, Analitical, Independent, and Rebellious - INTP
Discreet, Industrious, Deliberate, Strategical, Self-Confident, and Methodical - INTJ
Critical, Detached, Guarded, Independent, and Resourceful - ISTP
Easygoing, Spontaneous, Following, Secure, and Principled - ISFP
Calm, Stable, Steady, Loyal, Cautious, and Conventional - ISTJ
Conservative, Hard-working, Supportive, Conventional, and Guarded - ISFJ
Enthusiastic, Sensitive, Spontaneous, Changeable, Impulsive, and Understanding - ENFP
Active, Pleasant, Demanding, Impatient, Appreciative, Persuasive and Compromising - ENFJ
Friendly, Resourceful, Headstrong, Self-Centered and Independent - ENTP
Ambitious, Forceful, Efficient, Optimistic, Self-Centered, and Adaptable - ENTJ
Dominant, Flexible, Demanding, Direct, Bold and Assertive - ESTP
Changeable, Supportive, Forceful, Positive, Initiating, and Resourceful - ESFP
Contented, Dedicated, Prejudiced, Self-Satisfied, and Practical - ESTJ
Structured, Secure, Practical, Sensitive, Loyal, and Rigid - ESFJ"

The A vs B question really provoke some interesting thoughts on you, it is really a picture that can be interpretated in many many ways. But it is a Ne vs Ni question. There is a image on the internet where a person explains "Ne is divergent, Ni is convergent" and the person uses that image to explain. I had trouble into differentiating Ne vs Ni at the first version of the question so I "appealed" to that image question as a desperation to fix the trouble (it supported the fix that had good post-results).

This test uses a lot of indirect stuff (Enneagram, Big 5, and some other stuff, as far as I remember uses a part of DISC as well), that what it makes it unique (and the correlations I did it make it functional). So far, just looking at the results, it looks like that the indirect stuff really indicates extraversion for you. Just to give you a hand, Im separating the I/E questions (not in sequence):

=> "You have a very good sense of direction and instantly know your path around a place." - Extroversion plus Ni, Ni is in the form of navigation (the navigation aspect of Ni). Instant know your path relates to original Jung concept of E/I, where E is towards the object (around a place) and I is towards the subject.

=> The words ones, where the first set of words is I and the second set is E.

=> The very first question of the test. I took a search on the internet about E vs I curious statistics, and found that:
"I enjoy receveing rewards!" - E, Extraverted people enjoy receveing rewards more than Introverted people (that is in line with Jung)
"I enjoy learning through interactions" - E, Extraverted learning style
"I enjoy removing mental barriers" - Introversion, through Enneagram 5, the odds of someone being extroverted and enneagram 5 is really low, there are even discussions if Enneagram 5 or any extraverted type is possible.
"I enjoy avoiding situations that involves punishment" - Introversion, curiously introverted people avoid situations that involves punishment more than extraverted people, although this option seems quite SJ.

=> The third question is an enneagram test question that doesnt limit to E/I but focus on it. I modifided it to make the test more precise using the enneagram to mbti table but in the begining it was made just for E/I, accessing E/I using enneagram.
"I have to show affection for people" = Enneagram 2, extroversion
"I like activities that has potential to be recognized by others" = I think its Ennea 3, extroversion
"I like activities that put me in charge" = Ennea 8, extroversion
"I like to keep my life exciting" = Ennea 7, extroversion
"I like to investigate stuff few people are interested in" = Ennea 5, introversion
"I usually approach my life with caution" = Ennea 6, introversion
"I have an important internal peace and I avoid confrotations" = Ennea 9, introversion

=> "Lets talk about your communication style! You like to talk about…"
"I prefer to talk in a more impersonal way, about accepted facts and current/possible experiences." => Extroversion, uses the objective VS subjective concepts.
"I prefer to talk about my feelings and/or my thoughts and/or my dreams and/or my past experiences." => Introversion, uses the same set of concepts.

Te vs Ti and Se vs Si questions

=> What motivates you to collect facts?
"To support" - Ti
"For the sake of it" - Te

=> In the middle of the action, I tend to be…
"Easygoing, calmly dealing with one problem at time." - Se
"I keep myself high alert, vigilant and avoid excessive dangerous situations" - Si

=> Pick up a virtue:
Modesty - Si
Courage - Se

=> When speaking:
I have a confident, friendly and factual way of speaking - Te
I have a more uncertain and probabilistic way of speaking, commonly using words such as “maybe” and “likely” - Ti

=> What of these weakness or trouble happens more to you?
"Sometimes I have difficult dealing with fields and subjects with no clear accepted facts. And the fact that I need these guidances pass an impression of me being overly materialistic (and/or I already been accused of being overly materialistic)." - Te
"I openly play with ideas, but sometimes I can lose myself in an immense truth no one can truly understand but me, making me appear rigid and unbending." - Ti
The other two were Fi and Fe. This and the next one comes directly from Jung chapter X, into a more clear and shorter version.

=>
"Sometimes I have trouble dealing with changes and unpredictable/unusual situations. Surprises can catch me!" - Si
"Sometimes I can accept everything that happens, without discrimination, making things around me go into lawlessness and chaotic due to my lack of judgement and excessive accceptance. In these days, things just happen!" - Se
The other two were Ne and Ni. The Si here is non-Jung Si

--

Per results, you seem ESTJ, but you should be a quite different ESTJ. I dont know, it feels wrong to answer ESTJ here, at least I think it does because, if you are ESTJ, then you are quite different then the regular ESTJs. Did you already tried to figure out the Enneagram type? Perhaps you got a different Enneagram combo. Weird because:
- This whole topic. ESTJ are less busy with themselves and more busy in the outer world, very unlikely to keep into a deep self-analysis. This topic is one of the biggest type me threads on TypoC, it has more pages than 95% of the threads at least.
- Fi. There is way too much Fi, not only on Dario Nardi test but on the writting as well. But I already knew that the back is unreliable, but still, per my measures its very unlikely that.
- Your way of writting, I dont know why but it doesnt sound ESTJ at all, all these wonderings...
- Conscientiousness, Openness and Extraversion on Big 5 doesnt matches quite what I would expect for ESTJ type.

 

[noname3788]

Oh so you get around 50% for Openness too in that very same test?

Ha ha ha not giving a single fuck about Fi by default, that's about right. I really am so much better off not giving too much fucks about it.

As for Fe, I wouldn't say I'm well aware of how my actions impact others tho'. Well in some cases I'm aware quickly and like automatically but then totally not in other cases. I'm incredibly nonverbal overall about all that, too. I'm really bad at being verbal at it, i.e. real hard to pay attention to how to say stuff by taking it into account how it will affect others. It overall really seems like I have some basic awareness both about my actions and my words in terms of how they affect others that I developed a long time ago, and then beyond that I just have none bc I stopped focusing on any of it for a long time (re: awareness how I impact others).

Would you be able to put into words what you see about my inner thought process that you linked to Ti?

My big5 resuls don't change that much (compared to MBTI), it mostly looks like this:

O: 50-60%
C: 40-50%
E: 35-55%
A: 50-60%
N: 30-60% (heavily depends on the assessment)

I mentioned it because I found it interesting that you have a strong sensing preference, while I get huge intuition preference when taking MBTI tests (usually 80/20 N/S), and Openness an intuition are supposed to be correlated. Based on this, the only logical explanation would be, since N/S and J/P are also somewhat correlated, that I would be an NJ and you an SP. It would explain a lot, but unlike [MENTION=32874]Vendrah[/MENTION] I don't collect data to back up claims like this one so... damn

Back to topic: As I said, I don't really see much Fi use, so I would put it into inferior or PolR spot. Fe seems to be somewhat present, but not too influential, one of the lower functions, even though I think it is better developed than you might think. Your opening post is full of Fe. Since you asked for concrete examples for Ti: Why not take this whole thread? You knew from the beginning that you aren't an F type, yet to determine which kind of xSTx you are, you instead look at an entirely theoretical construct of determining your inferior side. I think Te would take the more straightforward way and look for Te vs Ti. I guess you need your type to match the framework you use in it's entirety, and you point of every bit of inconsistency. So for me you come across as a strong Ti user, and I disagree with [MENTION=32874]Vendrah[/MENTION] at this point. I suggest looking into ISTP and ESTP, probably more the latter than the former.

 

[Meowcat]

Yep, first thing, it seems that my test (and I couldnt really track that) is slightly intuitive biased, meaning that the intuitive options are more attractive than sensing options, so, you getting intuitives is more like my mistake. And, actually, thats partially because most of the indirect stats I use come from intuitives, so some sensing options more comes fron intuitives non-preferences than for sensor preferences. And in part, actually, because ENTJ got some quite boost from your part lol.

Ah I see lol. I'm really not an ENTJ heh, it would be nice but no...I'm not strategic enough or have enough of a long-term vision for it.

"You have a very good sense of direction and instantly know your path around a place." - Thats a question from Sakinorva cognitive function test. Originally, I think the intention behind with it was evaluating and scoring Se. However, the statistics of Sakinorva test indicated that that question is a combo of Extraversion with Ni, with ENTJ and ENFJ scoring the highest scores for that question (and ISFP/ISTP one of the lowest). But, those who are already used with MBTI does ends up thinking that's a Se question while it is not. It is one of the indirect extroversion questions, thats one of the indirect E vs I questions. (...) "You have a very good sense of direction and instantly know your path around a place." - Extroversion plus Ni, Ni is in the form of navigation (the navigation aspect of Ni). Instant know your path relates to original Jung concept of E/I, where E is towards the object (around a place) and I is towards the subject.

Ah I see. I thought it was either Se or Ti. Btw where you mention Ni and instant knowing. I never thought of it that way but hey it makes sense. I have some favourite stories about how I found the way in different, totally foreign countries completely relying on my gut instinct or something. And there was also time pressure in all these cases. Like having to find the right way quickly. While I would only have a very rudimentary crappy map with me. Sometimes I also looked at a map briefly before leaving but did not have it with me while on the move, only some crappy one. And then sometimes no map at all, just me going around and then finding my way around and back, and helping others who were with me, too (they would feel completely lost). Sure call me crazy, lol. So yeah, so these moments seem very Ni actually and hmm that's cool. But the thing is I did not see people who I know have high Ni (NTJ, NFJ) pull this off.

Anyway usually I just have the good sense of direction and like to explore places and never feel lost. That's where I said it's part of myself very much. Whether Ni or not. And then these special moments under extra pressure of having to find the way, these feel Ni for sure.

"Reflective, Sensitive, Flexible, Idealist and Appreciative. - INFP
Sympathetic, Unassuming, Insightful, Easygoing, and Patient - INFJ
Candid, Ingenious, Complicated, Analitical, Independent, and Rebellious - INTP
Discreet, Industrious, Deliberate, Strategical, Self-Confident, and Methodical - INTJ
Critical, Detached, Guarded, Independent, and Resourceful - ISTP
Easygoing, Spontaneous, Following, Secure, and Principled - ISFP
Calm, Stable, Steady, Loyal, Cautious, and Conventional - ISTJ
Conservative, Hard-working, Supportive, Conventional, and Guarded - ISFJ
Enthusiastic, Sensitive, Spontaneous, Changeable, Impulsive, and Understanding - ENFP
Active, Pleasant, Demanding, Impatient, Appreciative, Persuasive and Compromising - ENFJ
Friendly, Resourceful, Headstrong, Self-Centered and Independent - ENTP
Ambitious, Forceful, Efficient, Optimistic, Self-Centered, and Adaptable - ENTJ
Dominant, Flexible, Demanding, Direct, Bold and Assertive - ESTP
Changeable, Supportive, Forceful, Positive, Initiating, and Resourceful - ESFP
Contented, Dedicated, Prejudiced, Self-Satisfied, and Practical - ESTJ
Structured, Secure, Practical, Sensitive, Loyal, and Rigid - ESFJ"

Ah so I picked ISFJ and ENTJ, lol. ISTJ was 3rd place for the first 8 btw (after ISTP). I didn't pick it bc I don't see myself as very "Cautious". And ESTP/ESTJ in second place after ENTJ for the next 8.

This test uses a lot of indirect stuff (Enneagram, Big 5, and some other stuff, as far as I remember uses a part of DISC as well), that what it makes it unique (and the correlations I did it make it functional). So far, just looking at the results, it looks like that the indirect stuff really indicates extraversion for you. Just to give you a hand, Im separating the I/E questions (not in sequence):

Ahh lol yeah it indicated extraversion. But like I said, I have a high capacity for doing that introverted analysis, too. It just feels more effort mentally or something and I don't want that all day even if I tolerate it very well and able to do it all day. Like on here too ha ha.

=> The very first question of the test. I took a search on the internet about E vs I curious statistics, and found that:
"I enjoy receveing rewards!" - E, Extraverted people enjoy receveing rewards more than Introverted people (that is in line with Jung)
"I enjoy learning through interactions" - E, Extraverted learning style
"I enjoy removing mental barriers" - Introversion, through Enneagram 5, the odds of someone being extroverted and enneagram 5 is really low, there are even discussions if Enneagram 5 or any extraverted type is possible.
"I enjoy avoiding situations that involves punishment" - Introversion, curiously introverted people avoid situations that involves punishment more than extraverted people, although this option seems quite SJ.

Oh yah there I picked that I enjoy receiving rewards. I liked the stuff about removing mental barriers but it's the same issue as with too much introverted analysis, lol.

=> The third question is an enneagram test question that doesnt limit to E/I but focus on it. I modifided it to make the test more precise using the enneagram to mbti table but in the begining it was made just for E/I, accessing E/I using enneagram.
"I have to show affection for people" = Enneagram 2, extroversion
"I like activities that has potential to be recognized by others" = I think its Ennea 3, extroversion
"I like activities that put me in charge" = Ennea 8, extroversion
"I like to keep my life exciting" = Ennea 7, extroversion
"I like to investigate stuff few people are interested in" = Ennea 5, introversion
"I usually approach my life with caution" = Ennea 6, introversion
"I have an important internal peace and I avoid confrotations" = Ennea 9, introversion

I picked the enneagram 3 one apparently. I also liked the enneagram 8 one and the enneagram 7 too, but I picked the 3 one eventually. Enneagram 5 a little with the investigating but it's too eccentric overall.

=> "Lets talk about your communication style! You like to talk about…"
"I prefer to talk in a more impersonal way, about accepted facts and current/possible experiences." => Extroversion, uses the objective VS subjective concepts.
"I prefer to talk about my feelings and/or my thoughts and/or my dreams and/or my past experiences." => Introversion, uses the same set of concepts.

Err I picked the extroverted one there.

Te vs Ti and Se vs Si questions

=> What motivates you to collect facts?
"To support" - Ti
"For the sake of it" - Te

Picked Ti there

=> In the middle of the action, I tend to be…
"Easygoing, calmly dealing with one problem at time." - Se
"I keep myself high alert, vigilant and avoid excessive dangerous situations" - Si

Picked Se there

=> Pick up a virtue:
Modesty - Si
Courage - Se

Again Se

=> When speaking:
I have a confident, friendly and factual way of speaking - Te
I have a more uncertain and probabilistic way of speaking, commonly using words such as “maybe” and “likely” - Ti

Te here

=> What of these weakness or trouble happens more to you?
"Sometimes I have difficult dealing with fields and subjects with no clear accepted facts. And the fact that I need these guidances pass an impression of me being overly materialistic (and/or I already been accused of being overly materialistic)." - Te
"I openly play with ideas, but sometimes I can lose myself in an immense truth no one can truly understand but me, making me appear rigid and unbending." - Ti
The other two were Fi and Fe. This and the next one comes directly from Jung chapter X, into a more clear and shorter version.

Again Te. But when I get crazy enough then I "lose myself in an immense truth no one can truly understand but me, making me appear rigid and unbending". But it's really not normal for me.

"Sometimes I have trouble dealing with changes and unpredictable/unusual situations. Surprises can catch me!" - Si
"Sometimes I can accept everything that happens, without discrimination, making things around me go into lawlessness and chaotic due to my lack of judgement and excessive accceptance. In these days, things just happen!" - Se
The other two were Ne and Ni. The Si here is non-Jung Si

Se here

Per results, you seem ESTJ, but you should be a quite different ESTJ. I dont know, it feels wrong to answer ESTJ here, at least I think it does because, if you are ESTJ, then you are quite different then the regular ESTJs. Did you already tried to figure out the Enneagram type? Perhaps you got a different Enneagram combo. Weird because:
- This whole topic. ESTJ are less busy with themselves and more busy in the outer world, very unlikely to keep into a deep self-analysis. This topic is one of the biggest type me threads on TypoC, it has more pages than 95% of the threads at least.
- Fi. There is way too much Fi, not only on Dario Nardi test but on the writting as well. But I already knew that the back is unreliable, but still, per my measures its very unlikely that.
- Your way of writting, I dont know why but it doesnt sound ESTJ at all, all these wonderings...
- Conscientiousness, Openness and Extraversion on Big 5 doesnt matches quite what I would expect for ESTJ type.

Ahh hm. Thanks for the input. Yeah at one point in my life I started all this self-analysis, I still suck at it though LOL. And I wasn't doing it at all before I started.

 

[Meowcat]

My big5 resuls don't change that much (compared to MBTI), it mostly looks like this:

O: 50-60%
C: 40-50%
E: 35-55%
A: 50-60%
N: 30-60% (heavily depends on the assessment)

I mentioned it because I found it interesting that you have a strong sensing preference, while I get huge intuition preference when taking MBTI tests (usually 80/20 N/S), and Openness an intuition are supposed to be correlated. Based on this, the only logical explanation would be, since N/S and J/P are also somewhat correlated, that I would be an NJ and you an SP. It would explain a lot, but unlike [MENTION=32874]Vendrah[/MENTION] I don't collect data to back up claims like this one so... damn

Back to topic: As I said, I don't really see much Fi use, so I would put it into inferior or PolR spot. Fe seems to be somewhat present, but not too influential, one of the lower functions, even though I think it is better developed than you might think. Your opening post is full of Fe. Since you asked for concrete examples for Ti: Why not take this whole thread? You knew from the beginning that you aren't an F type, yet to determine which kind of xSTx you are, you instead look at an entirely theoretical construct of determining your inferior side. I think Te would take the more straightforward way and look for Te vs Ti. I guess you need your type to match the framework you use in it's entirety, and you point of every bit of inconsistency. So for me you come across as a strong Ti user, and I disagree with [MENTION=32874]Vendrah[/MENTION] at this point. I suggest looking into ISTP and ESTP, probably more the latter than the former.

Ah, you sound a bit more E/O than I am. : p And a bit less C. But yeah it's not far from my numbers. Thanks for all the input and I'm considering this too. One last question if you can say, how do you see my OP as Fe?

The inferior function stuff btw, I was so interested in it because it sounded a lot like what I've been/was going through with the "grip-like" experiences stuff. And I didn't see that anywhere else so it really got me thinking.

 

[Vendrah]

Ah I see lol. I'm really not an ENTJ heh, it would be nice but no...I'm not strategic enough or have enough of a long-term vision for it.




Ah I see. I thought it was either Se or Ti. Btw where you mention Ni and instant knowing. I never thought of it that way but hey it makes sense. I have some favourite stories about how I found the way in different, totally foreign countries completely relying on my gut instinct or something. And there was also time pressure in all these cases. Like having to find the right way quickly. While I would only have a very rudimentary crappy map with me. Sometimes I also looked at a map briefly before leaving but did not have it with me while on the move, only some crappy one. And then sometimes no map at all, just me going around and then finding my way around and back, and helping others who were with me, too (they would feel completely lost). Sure call me crazy, lol. So yeah, so these moments seem very Ni actually and hmm that's cool. But the thing is I did not see people who I know have high Ni (NTJ, NFJ) pull this off.

Anyway usually I just have the good sense of direction and like to explore places and never feel lost. That's where I said it's part of myself very much. Whether Ni or not. And then these special moments under extra pressure of having to find the way, these feel Ni for sure.




Ah so I picked ISFJ and ENTJ, lol. ISTJ was 3rd place for the first 8 btw (after ISTP). I didn't pick it bc I don't see myself as very "Cautious". And ESTP/ESTJ in second place after ENTJ for the next 8.




Ahh lol yeah it indicated extraversion. But like I said, I have a high capacity for doing that introverted analysis, too. It just feels more effort mentally or something and I don't want that all day even if I tolerate it very well and able to do it all day. Like on here too ha ha.




Oh yah there I picked that I enjoy receiving rewards. I liked the stuff about removing mental barriers but it's the same issue as with too much introverted analysis, lol.




I picked the enneagram 3 one apparently. I also liked the enneagram 8 one and the enneagram 7 too, but I picked the 3 one eventually. Enneagram 5 a little with the investigating but it's too eccentric overall.




Err I picked the extroverted one there.




Picked Ti there




Picked Se there




Again Se




Te here




Again Te. But when I get crazy enough then I "lose myself in an immense truth no one can truly understand but me, making me appear rigid and unbending". But it's really not normal for me.




Se here




Ahh hm. Thanks for the input. Yeah at one point in my life I started all this self-analysis, I still suck at it though LOL. And I wasn't doing it at all before I started.

I had checked the intuitive-sensing proportion of the test, versus what is normal in these tests, and its fine. My test got 78% of intuitives, Sakinorva has 74%. But I also noticed that I used Openness to Experience to measure Ne in some passages, and that could boost your N up, that is the most likely reason for it (plus the sense of direction and you picking the ENTJ words).

I also mark completely agree on the sense of direction one without being ENTJ/ENFJ, but thats because of playing open map racing games in the maps, Im also great with locating myself.

I do change E for I, although. Since you answered E in all 5 different E/I questions. I would say ESTJ but, as I said, a quite different one. Im against you denying your Fi to the end just to fit, dont do it, the back is unreliable anyway.

 

[typologyenthusiast]

Have the OP read ENFP?

Btw, This thread discuss similar topic Fi vs Fe with this one
https://www.typologycentral.com/forums/myers-briggs-and-jungian-cognitive-functions/101783-fe-vs-fi-discussion.html?101783=#post3137203

 

[Meowcat]

I had checked the intuitive-sensing proportion of the test, versus what is normal in these tests, and its fine. My test got 78% of intuitives, Sakinorva has 74%. But I also noticed that I used Openness to Experience to measure Ne in some passages, and that could boost your N up, that is the most likely reason for it (plus the sense of direction and you picking the ENTJ words).

I also mark completely agree on the sense of direction one without being ENTJ/ENFJ, but thats because of playing open map racing games in the maps, Im also great with locating myself.

I do change E for I, although. Since you answered E in all 5 different E/I questions. I would say ESTJ but, as I said, a quite different one. Im against you denying your Fi to the end just to fit, dont do it, the back is unreliable anyway.

Ah, see I had no idea even that they were testing for E/I. Thanks for all your time and effort with this.

- - - Updated - - -

Have the OP read ENFP?

Btw, This thread discuss similar topic Fi vs Fe with this one
https://www.typologycentral.com/forums/myers-briggs-and-jungian-cognitive-functions/101783-fe-vs-fi-discussion.html?101783=#post3137203

Thanks for the input and the link. Considering Feeling types for me would be a dead-end.

 

[Vendrah]

Ah, see I had no idea even that they were testing for E/I. Thanks for all your time and effort with this.

- - - Updated - - -



Thanks for the input and the link. Considering Feeling types for me would be a dead-end.

Just forgot to tell that, considering the proportions and people posted results, E/I on that questionnaire works quite well, except for some people who already were quite ambivert. Also, I had no problems in T/F department, only you on N/S. The most problematic (and inaccurate) dimension in this test is J/P. These questions of E/I showed themselves to be quite efficient into determinate E/I and doing that without asking your energy orientation or anything at all about your sociability.

 

[noname3788]

Ah, you sound a bit more E/O than I am. : p And a bit less C. But yeah it's not far from my numbers. Thanks for all the input and I'm considering this too. One last question if you can say, how do you see my OP as Fe?

The inferior function stuff btw, I was so interested in it because it sounded a lot like what I've been/was going through with the "grip-like" experiences stuff. And I didn't see that anywhere else so it really got me thinking.

To be more concrete about my perception, it's mostly your answers to #1 and #2, and to be honest, it wasn't full of Fe - Feeler types tend to use exaggerations too frequently, my bad.

And I guess some problem that I keep coming back is how different systems produce different results, and it heavily depends on the PoV (personal self-typing rant incoming). For myself, it's somewhat conflicted, behavior-wise I seem to be an introvert, but I don't relate to typical introvert "qualities" like being "drained" by social contact or to enjoy solitude. I want some more company but struggle to get it. A similar thing happens to T/F in my case: I'm outwardly a thinker, and for basically all of my time in school I was supposed to be good at using logic, and I used to get effortless A's in math and science classes. That led me to believe at first that I was an NT type, and indeed my first test result was INTJ. I later noticed that it isn't that much the case, to the point where I tend to see myself as an F type rather than T. For J/P, it's a matter of typology system, using dichotomies I usually get P, functions however point towards xNFJ. So, nothing is really conclusive in here. Enneagram is the same btw, I got results for type 5, 4 , 7 and 2.

Why I wrote this in your thread? First of all, to feel better myself, but also because it might apply to you as well in some aspects. I can't really see whether you're E or I, and people here also have different opinions about J/P. I shared my opinion about the functions (which is the most accepted model in MBTI communities), and I sometimes grow tired of explaining why I don't prefer to use the functions. In most cases, you come to similar results anyway, since the first two functions clearly determine someone's preferences. The top 2 are enough to describe a type, and there is weak evidence for tertiary and inferior to appear in the exact way that the function stack predicts. However, leaving things open also sucks

 

[whateverr]

Thanks for your input. I'm amused about being typed as a Feeler. I think that's a dead-end, to be constructive here. But your input has been interesting otherwise. This actually made a lot of sense to me: "here are all the reasons (...) about what makes me feel the way i probably do, but i'm not really sure about those, so please help me to understand all of these things that go on inside me that i don't really pay much attention to". Story of my life in the last year. I'm luckily past this phase for the most part by now and I stopped getting so much input from external sources (articles, books, people etc).

But either way, can you give me some specific examples where I was coming off as people centric, and "here are my feelings, get them"? I'm curious. As I am still curious about all the feely stuff lately, though I'm slowly returning to my normal pov, but I don't want to forget the lessons learned.

EDIT: I realise now that you were talking about my OP where I filled out that short questionnaire. (Tho' I don't know if you were talking just about my OP questionnaire. As I did not focus on people there, I mentioned what I prefer or like as I was asked about that, but I did not talk about people.) Yeah, I did not explain anything there at length and gave short answers only. Because the "why" questions were way too general and abstract to me, being asked about why I prefer x thing. I cannot tell you, no, I can only tell you if I prefer something or not. I can tell you in detail how I prefer it compared to something else, but I cannot give a very good general answer beyond the details or beyond some trivial answer. Such as, liking fashion because of the good looks. Why I like good aesthetics though, well I just do have that preference. I always did. I noticed I highly care about the looks of things I own or about my own looks. I can tell you in detail what things I prefer based on their looks, but I cannot go deeper or more far reaching general with the reason than that. The best I can attempt is tell you how I started dressing fashionably as a teenager. I can tell you that in detail but cannot give you the why beyond describing the experience I actually had. I don't make abstract meaning out of such things is how I can best sum this up. All in all: I respond way better to questions asking "what" rather than "why". I'm fine with explaining about the "what" but the "why" eh not so much. The "why" would lead to never-ending turtles anyhow, I'd expect.

Okay, this made me think a tiny bit further. So yeah, I think it would be alien from me if I was to *only* go by rational utilitarian reasoning as in, I must do x thing only and not y thing, because it's rationally beneficial. I use this reasoning too, but not just that. I'm more like... I have certain set preferences and arrange and organise things neatly around that. All this does include reasoning for what's rationally beneficial and this simplifies the organising process for sure, but, it's not the starting point alone. This may be a point for ISTJ over ESTJ, ...? Thinking out loud.




As for ratio of my behaviour, that's still the same answer. Achievements incl. materialistic stuff.

That made me think however - the stuff that I care about but I apparently do not express in behaviour is meaningful special relationships. Also somewhat more emotional connection with people. Especially that part is hard to express. The more I try to focus on this, the harder, apparently.

And I have actually considered it lately and it frankly was a very unpleasant idea, that I may not actually need these things all that much. I am not sure what is making me think that I do, or I should care, or whatever, but because I believe that I care is why I have spent so much time trying to see all the feelz, emotionz, relationships, people stuff. Which my thread is full of, but I expect it's boring to most people where I go into detail about it.




I had a problem with being called *overly* forceful. Not a problem with being called forceful, just if called *overly* so. I accepted that after a long time, though. That it's sometimes true. I am fine with that now ... Everyone has their negative traits.

Another thing I have had a problem with and I do not see it and I never will, because it's complete bullshit; when certain people want to see me as sensitive. Then they make these assumptions that I have the emotional needs that - in the way I see it, I'm not trying to offend anyone - such sensitive people have, which to me would indicate weakness in myself if I had them. I mean... I'm not trying to call people weak who have those needs. It just would be me being weak if I had them. I feel more myself being tough against emotions/feelz. I have been returning to my old self with that.

But I have been also called insensitive or cold, so .... it depends. And I'll add more below.




I'm not clear on this now. You mean a trait that's not necessarily negative or a big problem but I just don't see in myself while others do is to do with the dominant function? And if it's an actual problem while I still don't see it in myself then it's to do with the inferior function?

I think I consciously see my forcefulness; I just previously disagreed with the idea that it's "too much pushiness" etc etc. Now I can see how it can be too much for some.

Also, I very recently have been really pissed off at someone who kept calling me cold and analytical. I can't even explain why. I just don't like to be too analytical beyond a point, I like my real life goals and achievements and materialism. Again, those are most conscious for me along with the forcefulness. Then sometimes I notice being detail oriented and anally analytical, too, but that's less often. This is the part however that I have felt really uncomfortable about. I CAN see it sometimes but I just don't like to .... again, I don't know why. The best way I can try to describe it, it makes me feel being put on the spot. If that makes sense. I don't think I fully accept this part in myself. I accept and welcome the forcefulness more readily (as long as it doesn't get to be too much of a negative trait, it's been harder for that part of it). I have tried to work on accepting the analytical detail-oriented stuff as part of myself consciously but eh. Better off if I don't think about this too much. I just avoid staying in it all day either way, because then I would be missing my more dynamic half that's less detail oriented (and yes more forceful etc etc).

As for a list of common criticism by people - I would respectfully disagree about the idea that these things make me look like a fool - about my negative traits, that I can recall now: overly forceful/aggressive/pushy, impatient, overly logical/analytical, stuck in details, distant/cold, socially aloof, dogmatic (!??!), rigid, insensitive, looking down on others. These have come up the most often. But mostly the aggressiveness stuff. Runner-up is the being distant and the impatience and the details-orientation; and then the rest less often than that. Note on the social aloofness: that's just in some cases but then it's very much so. And then I can look like I look down on others .... That one is still mystifying to me but eh.

The one thing that could make me look like a fool I don't want to think of. My being too enthusiastic (emotionally and then sometimes just being too pushy) sometimes when I care about someone. This is hard to explain. I just don't even want to think about it. It's too hard to face. As someone once used it to try and hurt me, as well.

Ah also trying to pull bullshit ideas out of nowhere, but I don't even try. I know THAT would make me look like a fool, heh. It easily makes others look like fools, too.



So anyway, I don't know if all this makes up a type neatly according to your framework. I could see Te (impatience and the like) being auxiliary based on this being pretty conscious, but not sure where I'd put the rest, because some of it sounds like inferior Feeling at the same time. Tho could reason for inferior Intuition considering that I didn't even mention that one (except with the being dogmatic thing that I really reject seeing in myself). And Si, if we want to call the detail-oriented stuff Si, well I could call it dominant. I'm however still okay with the idea of typing at ESTJ instead of ISTJ.

Let me know what you think if you have any further ideas. Thanks.

You do sound very ESTJ from this post. It's hard to get a 100% pristine clear picture because i don't actually know you, so it's hard to actually get it right, but still, i stand by the fact of having a top judger. ESTJ has dom Te, which makes sense. If you have a more "agressive/inflexible" expression of your Te, it might come across as pushy to other people. And when you say that spitting ideas and looking overly emotions, really seem NF inferior. You make a strong case for Te-Sx. Could be Te-Se ENTJ jumper, but then again, you'd still have to do further self-assessing. I do think you might be Te-Si form this post. It really "sounds" like that (note: "sounds", it's very subjective and uncertain). But, from this last post, you do seem more "in control" or more comfortable by being pushy with others so that you don't have to pay attention to your own emotions (Te/Fi) and you do seem more of a controller rather then a gatherer/seeker which would be Se. Think of Se as Clinton having an affair with Monica Lewinsky. He saw a possible sensory experience and he went for it, without even thinking about the Ni aspect that would signal to him the most likely outcome and the best course of action for him to follow to avoid any future upsets. To me, an Ni dom, looking at an dom Se f*cking up like that just seems completely stupid. And Clinton would probably think i'm stupid because while i was discussing the possible future that might not even happen, i stepped on dog sh*t and/or that i completely missed the hot girl checking me out that just walked by a minute ago. Si follows a similar behavior to Ni in the sense that you're more comfortable with the "narrowing down to what is best for me" with the "let's try everything without thinking about what would be best". Utilizing your own internal parameters to determine the best use of the information acquired. And it won't be so extreme like this because it's your middle function. So you'd be more prone to do repetitive actions, worrying about the classifications and the organization of the data rather then trying to connect the dots. You can be comfortable with both, but you seem to lean more on the "controlled" side than the "explorer/chaotic" side.
So it makes sense for you to see Te-Si.

Oh. One more thing. [MENTION=40424]whateverr[/MENTION]



What I think I should be..... that's where the more feely stuff comes up. I thought I should focus on feelings more, basically. (Returning to my old self, thinking the "I should" less about this now. Thank god...) But, what I have actively cared about rather than just thinking "I should be", that's emotional connection (or I thought I care?) and then sometimes finding some really great idea (by insight) that's so great that it's like a paradigm shift, meanwhile it makes total sense to everyone and can be put to use, but the real point here is the idea being big... I don't like to talk about that part at all .... I frankly cannot take that seriously for long when this comes up. So I usually do not believe in this. Just sometimes for a short time. Could be inferior Intuition tho'. I take the emotional connection part more seriously and tried to work on that actively, tho' yah the results could be better but not totally wasted time and effort....just considering HOW much time and effort I've put in, it's not as big results so far. Still, don't want to forget what I've learned there.

Yeah, from this, it seems pretty clear that you have inferior Fi. It could be Fe, but taking into account the "forceful,pushy" thing, it doesn't seem inf Fe. It looks more like Dom Te with inf Fi.
Good luck man. I have a similar issue. I thought i was an ENTJ because of this, but i noticed that my main issue lied in Ni/Se and not in Te/Fi. I am more prone to be harsher to other people or more pushy to the outside without a more transparent "empathy" with a more moveable and internal emotional core that i, either don't want people to see, or that i actively ignore. Get the job done first, feel later. Or, "go whine to your therapist. Vent your feelings with your friends. It's ok. Just don't show up crying and screw up because you are feeling bad feelings or whatever. Deal with it". "What you should do, what you are doing wrong" vs "what i feel about this, what i value, what i care about". I truly get this. Good luck, man. You will experience a whole other level of happiness once you figure this out lol

 

[Meowcat]

You do sound very ESTJ from this post. It's hard to get a 100% pristine clear picture because i don't actually know you, so it's hard to actually get it right, but still, i stand by the fact of having a top judger. ESTJ has dom Te, which makes sense. If you have a more "agressive/inflexible" expression of your Te, it might come across as pushy to other people.

Thanks again.

"might", haha ...

I'm not always inflexible but when it gets like that yeah...

And when you say that spitting ideas and looking overly emotions, really seem NF inferior. You make a strong case for Te-Sx. Could be Te-Se ENTJ jumper, but then again, you'd still have to do further self-assessing. I do think you might be Te-Si form this post. It really "sounds" like that (note: "sounds", it's very subjective and uncertain). But, from this last post, you do seem more "in control" or more comfortable by being pushy with others so that you don't have to pay attention to your own emotions (Te/Fi) and you do seem more of a controller rather then a gatherer/seeker which would be Se.

Yeahh thats pretty much decided that I have the NF inferior thing.

Definitely not an ENTJ here, tho they are very cool imo.

The bolded yes especially true in recent years

Think of Se as Clinton having an affair with Monica Lewinsky. He saw a possible sensory experience and he went for it, without even thinking about the Ni aspect that would signal to him the most likely outcome and the best course of action for him to follow to avoid any future upsets. To me, an Ni dom, looking at an dom Se f*cking up like that just seems completely stupid. And Clinton would probably think i'm stupid because while i was discussing the possible future that might not even happen, i stepped on dog sh*t and/or that i completely missed the hot girl checking me out that just walked by a minute ago. Si follows a similar behavior to Ni in the sense that you're more comfortable with the "narrowing down to what is best for me" with the "let's try everything without thinking about what would be best". Utilizing your own internal parameters to determine the best use of the information acquired. And it won't be so extreme like this because it's your middle function. So you'd be more prone to do repetitive actions, worrying about the classifications and the organization of the data rather then trying to connect the dots. You can be comfortable with both, but you seem to lean more on the "controlled" side than the "explorer/chaotic" side.
So it makes sense for you to see Te-Si.

Ha lol yeah ok the example is def more impulsive than I am

Bolded again makes neat sense yeah

Yeah, from this, it seems pretty clear that you have inferior Fi. It could be Fe, but taking into account the "forceful,pushy" thing, it doesn't seem inf Fe. It looks more like Dom Te with inf Fi.
Good luck man. I have a similar issue. I thought i was an ENTJ because of this, but i noticed that my main issue lied in Ni/Se and not in Te/Fi. I am more prone to be harsher to other people or more pushy to the outside without a more transparent "empathy" with a more moveable and internal emotional core that i, either don't want people to see, or that i actively ignore. Get the job done first, feel later. Or, "go whine to your therapist. Vent your feelings with your friends. It's ok. Just don't show up crying and screw up because you are feeling bad feelings or whatever. Deal with it". "What you should do, what you are doing wrong" vs "what i feel about this, what i value, what i care about". I truly get this. Good luck, man. You will experience a whole other level of happiness once you figure this out lol

Lol thanks I hope you are right with the last part lol

I liked bolded stuff again

I think "get the job done first, feel later" looks more like to me "get the job done". End. Uh. lol I'm trying to at least add "feel later"

With the therapist stuff I don't really see it the same way, to me therapy isn't about aimless whining. But yeah feelings can't get in the way of things.

Edit. One more thing, you mention being pushy to the outside without the transparent empathy thing. Part of my NF thing is trying to do that outwards empathy stuff more actually because it can be beneficial in some situations. I get you were contrasting Fe and Fi there but I think both have some value to me but with both I'd definitely been like just "get the job done", no feelz, inside or outside. .....