You really sound Fi dom tbh.
What kinda sold it to me was the way you write. Te is about being reasonable to the outside. 90% of your writing was very much dependent on what you feel about it and not in "making us understand it". And your deal seems to be more "people centric" rather than "info centric". So there is most likely an introverted judger on top and i'd guess Fi. You don't seem really worried in making us understand anything and, most of the questions that required explanation you were like "i dunno, i just like it". You're more like "here are my feelings, get them" rather then "here are all the reasons that anyone reading could understand 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" which would be Te over Fi.
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.
You should try to pay attention to the ratio of your behavior. Not the things you care about, those can be VERY misleading. Because then you'd be focus on who you'd want to be, or who you think you should be, and not in who you really are. Which is usually a weird kinda opposite type. INTJ's become ISFP's, ENTP's become INFJ's, it's all kinda weird.
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.
One thing that really helped me was to find out where you were really unbalanced. You know that person that has an obvious trait that everyone can see except for themselves? And if you ask them about it they'd swear TO GOD that they don't have those traits that you see all the god damn time?
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.
Those are the traits you should look for. That trait is probably your dom. And the problem that everyone sees about you, except yourself, is probably your inferior function. What we consciously see, are often our middle functions, we tend to be more balanced towards those. But our dom and inf, ooooh boy those are the ones that we, respectively, really overwork and ignore, define 90% of our personality and we don't even notice. Jung said in some book (Se inf right here not giving a sh*t about accurate sensory info "some book") that no one sees the most important traits about themselves. You should triangulate and ask your close relatives, family and friends about the things that you probably don't even see and that constantly make you look like a fool. Those are your dom and inf.
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.
