• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

What was my type again?

wolfy

awsm
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
12,251
There isn't a period when STP truly just sits it out and gathers a lot of the "how and why". Not unless forced. They keep a basic blueprint how things work, and the individual "hows and whys" show themselves in emerging situations, when a problem poses new facts. Then they adapt. They tend to learn the "how and why" by problem solving in real time. Whether it's sports, music, fixing a sink, sex, a video game, whatever. Even when it comes to passive, theoretical things like this subject - typology. I didn't have a period of really bunkering down and educating myself. The pieces fall together more as I interact with the system. Maybe a little Ni pops in too and I get aha moments. Te has an eye on wanting to retain more facts, external nuances, each occurance of how things play out, predictability. So the educational process is different.

I tend to like to learn and apply. In typology,I spent some time sitting down and learning the theory behind it all. The system, or systems to be more exact. That to me seems more interesting. Learning, trying it out, adapting it, learning some more. You might be right about istp tending to just jump in though, on here at least, and that'd be why most of them burn out.

The easiest time I have had with type is istp in socionics. I can see that easy.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
The easiest time I have had with type is istp in socionics. I can see that easy.

It could be we're just different types there. I thought I was ISTp until I got more into it. Actually, I thought I was SLE further back, but I didn't want to really acknowledge it. The description for Beta STs are too primitive, but you have to read between the lines, and who you actually get along with. And I kept getting pissed off with Deltas.
 

wolfy

awsm
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
12,251
It could be we're just different types there. I thought I was ISTp until I got more into it. Actually, I thought I was SLE further back, but I didn't want to really acknowledge it. The description for Beta STs are too primitive, but you have to read between the lines, and who you actually get along with. And I kept getting pissed off with Deltas.

I didn't spend much time on the forums. Including hidden agendas and all that, istp fit best. But really. istp could be either isfp or istp in mbti.
 

wolfy

awsm
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
12,251
There is this part of socionics istp that describes them as really curious about how others see them. It is something they find hard to get a grip on themselves. I really relate to that, so thanks for the feedback here and other threads.
 

wolfy

awsm
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
12,251
I did the kisa test to see how I'd answer it. Everything is I am really inbetween. Except this one

I believe any feeling is valid, whether it makes sense or not.
I believe feelings are valid only if they are logical.

I am not inbetween on that one. I don't believe feelings are valid if they don't make sense. I see them as valid information to deal with, but not as valid. I was talking with my wife on the way home and she reckons I am chart the course. She is behind the scenes.

Maybe I am really inbetween.
 
Top