Why I might be ISXJ

[Such Irony]

I've come to realize that when faced with new situations, I'm constantly comparing it to my past experience. For example, if I'm troubleshooting a problem, my instinct is to first think about solutions that have worked in the past and try those. If it's something I'm unfamiliar with, I might look for an aspect of it that sort of looks similar to something encountered in the past and apply the corresponding solution and hope that will work. If it doesn't closely relate to anything I have ever observed, chances are I'm not going to be able to solve the problem on my own and will have to rely on outside help.

My use of Ne seems to be to support my Si memory base. For example, if I'm troubleshooting a problem that's very unfamiliar to me, and I'm stuck, I'll seek external sources (e.g. other people, Google, etc.) to find a new possibility to consider. The new possibility gets added to the memory base and the list of possibilities to consider when troubleshooting that sort of problem expands. So through time, because I've got a larger memory bank of things to try, the less likely I am to get stuck.

I think if my Ne was stronger than Si, Si would support the Ne agenda but it seems like I work in reverse more.

My goal is to aim for being able to successfully solve the problem every time. It gradually approaches 100% as a few solutions work about 95% of the time but its always the rare exceptions and because there are so many ways a rare exception can happen, that it will never quite reach 100%

I think my intuition is weak because I don't really don't conjure up new solutions out of thin air. Maybe that sort of thing is more of an Ni thing though.

So is it possible I'm really Si dominant or do I just have good tertiary Si?

 

[Such Irony]

Another thing, is that I often need examples to make sure I'm understanding something properly.

For instance, there will be threads posted that illustrate the differences between Ni/Se users and Ne/Si users. It's interesting but because the language is rather abstract and theoretical, I'm not confident I'm interpreting it in the way the author of the post intended. If there was an everyday situation that everyone's been in and I was told how the Ni/Se user and the Ne/Si would approach it, then I could really grok the difference.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

I've come to realize that when faced with new situations, I'm constantly comparing it to my past experience. For example, if I'm troubleshooting a problem, my instinct is to first think about solutions that have worked in the past and try those. If it's something I'm unfamiliar with, I might look for an aspect of it that sort of looks similar to something encountered in the past and apply the corresponding solution and hope that will work. If it doesn't closely relate to anything I have ever observed, chances are I'm not going to be able to solve the problem on my own and will have to rely on outside help.

My use of Ne seems to be to support my Si memory base. For example, if I'm troubleshooting a problem that's very unfamiliar to me, and I'm stuck, I'll seek external sources (e.g. other people, Google, etc.) to find a new possibility to consider. The new possibility gets added to the memory base and the list of possibilities to consider when troubleshooting that sort of problem expands. So through time, because I've got a larger memory bank of things to try, the less likely I am to get stuck.

I think if my Ne was stronger than Si, Si would support the Ne agenda but it seems like I work in reverse more.

My goal is to aim for being able to successfully solve the problem every time. It gradually approaches 100% as a few solutions work about 95% of the time but its always the rare exceptions and because there are so many ways a rare exception can happen, that it will never quite reach 100%

I think my intuition is weak because I don't really don't conjure up new solutions out of thin air. Maybe that sort of thing is more of an Ni thing though.

So is it possible I'm really Si dominant or do I just have good tertiary Si?

I believe this is great evidence towards Si-dominance.

 

[WALMART]

I think of Si users as very much enjoying a catalog of empirically collected, objective data to implement in their daily lives. I think Ne users are much more concerned with their own methodology of going about things, as subjective as they may be at times.

I'm not confident I'm interpreting it in the way the author of the post intended.

I also view Si/Ni users as much more apprehensive about the data they do decide to collect. This statement is a large indicator of a judging function over a perceiving function. Si/Ni users are constantly seeking objectivity to their perceptions, Si users in particular. It could also, though, be indicative of Ni - a 'what if they meant this, what if they meant that' type thing...


From what you have provided, I would say ISXJ. To fill in the gap will be a true call on your part; I looked for a hint of subjectivity in these posts and the first page of your blog and couldn't really find anything indicative of preference for Fe or Te. It's kind of hard to tell, though, until relevant information comes traipsing across the spectrum. So whatever you wanna do there. It's way late, if I remember, or if you ask, I'll do some more investigating to see what I can turn up.



I wouldn't mind another ISXJ on the forum

 

[Eric B]

I still think it's the tertiary. I can identify a lot with comparing with past experience. (And AS figures in this as well). And then being lost if I have nothing remembered to ground something new I'm learning, upon.

It depends on these situations you're experiencing. Ne doesn't mean you always run headlong into things with all these "possibilities". It might be more that way when dominant, but as auxiliary, with Ti as dominant, you get a sense of the way things work, and build "models" so to speak, that you subjectively use to understand the world. That is part of what you describe, regarding "what works", and NT is the one that goes directly on "what works", where SJ is more "institutional" in its approach to what works.
Then, Si as tertiary will reinforce that.

What I find for myself, is that Ne tends to be used to look for ways to reshape the things you see in the world into the models you understand and prefer. When a situation doesn't fit this, you may run to the tertiary, which is the ego's first line of defense in the dominant attitude.
And that is the key, and why the tertiary is said to "inflate" to the point of possibly seeming like a preferred function.
You seem to be sure of your introversion, so whatever the functions, you are predominantly drawn to the inner world. If the auxiliary function is iNtuition, it will be extraverted, and only a support function for the dominant, since it pulls the other way from where the ego is truly focused. If that dominant then, is Thinking, then along with the iNtuition, your main perspective in life is that things should make sense. So if they don't (including when situations are "new"), then you will run to the next introverted function, which will be tertiary Sensing.

 

[Randomnity]

I said the last time you asked that you read as (far) more ISxJ than INTP to me. I still think this.

You are a better judge of your character than any of us, of course. Nothing you've said really rules out either INTP or ISxJ - I just see more of the latter in you. The easiest thing might be to see how much you identify with Ti vs. Si rather than comparing Si and Ne.

For a (probably crappy) example, Si-doms might look first to experience when solving a problem and then reason through why or why not that past experience is relevant and makes sense in that situation. Ti-doms might look first to "what makes sense" and then draw from the past experience to support that reasoning.

 

[Cellmold]

Another thing, is that I often need examples to make sure I'm understanding something properly.

For instance, there will be threads posted that illustrate the differences between Ni/Se users and Ne/Si users. It's interesting but because the language is rather abstract and theoretical, I'm not confident I'm interpreting it in the way the author of the post intended. If there was an everyday situation that everyone's been in and I was told how the Ni/Se user and the Ne/Si would approach it, then I could really grok the difference.

I heavily relate to this. There has to be something to tie it back to, something concrete. An example that can be repeated.

One thing about Si is it very often concerns esoteric knowledge which is garnered from those impressions which imprint themselves greatest on the Si dominant. Which is why stereotypes about tradition are actually quite inaccurate. Si depends heavily upon the environment it is brought up around. If that environment is not of the average or traditional, then the Si dominant themselves will not be that traditional.

The difference between old and young ISxJ's is fairly broad in my experience. Essentially we are all products of the current state of the world around us.

Something else about Si that goes along with this aquiring of esoteric knowledge about facts and information we individually find impressionable, is that, (as Lenore Thompson points out), Si doms might one day realise they know more than most other people in an area about some specific hobby or past time, although it does not have to be a hobby or past time; it can be anything.

 

[Such Irony]

Thanks to everyone who has replied so far.

I believe this is great evidence towards Si-dominance.

At first I wasn't sure if this was Si dominance or just me.

I think of Si users as very much enjoying a catalog of empirically collected, objective data to implement in their daily lives. I think Ne users are much more concerned with their own methodology of going about things, as subjective as they may be at times.

The bolded is very much like me.

I also view Si/Ni users as much more apprehensive about the data they do decide to collect. This statement is a large indicator of a judging function over a perceiving function. Si/Ni users are constantly seeking objectivity to their perceptions, Si users in particular. It could also, though, be indicative of Ni - a 'what if they meant this, what if they meant that' type thing...

I definitely need to seek objectivity towards my perceptions. The thing I'm confused about is that I've read that Si and Ni are perceiving functions and Ti and Fi are judging functions. Whether you have J or P in your type code depends on whether your strongest extraverted function is a judging or perceiving one. For extraverts, they are J types if their dominant function is Te or Fe. For introverts, you have to look at the auxilary function. Auxilary Te or Fe means MBTI J type. Auxilary Ne or Se means MBTI P.

I attributed the need to seek objectivity as a Ti thing. So how is seeking objectivity in perceptions in Ti dominants different than for Si dominants?

I don't think I'm Ni dominant, but I do alot of the what if they meant this? type of thing.

[
From what you have provided, I would say ISXJ. To fill in the gap will be a true call on your part; I looked for a hint of subjectivity in these posts and the first page of your blog and couldn't really find anything indicative of preference for Fe or Te. It's kind of hard to tell, though, until relevant information comes traipsing across the spectrum. So whatever you wanna do there. It's way late, if I remember, or if you ask, I'll do some more investigating to see what I can turn up.

I've reviewed both ISTJ and ISFJ profiles and the confusion is while I relate alot to dominant Si, I'm not sure about having strong auxilary Te or Fe. I think I lean towards ISFJ a little more if I had to pick one but I think that's because ISFJ has tertiary Ti and I identify with Ti and having previously typed as INTP. ISFJ and INTP have the same top four functions just in different order.

I still think it's the tertiary. I can identify a lot with comparing with past experience. (And AS figures in this as well). And then being lost if I have nothing remembered to ground something new I'm learning, upon.

I think having Aspergers definitely confuses things. When I was young, I was poor at all the Fe stuff and I'm better at it but it still feels awkward to me today. Most ISFJs are alot more socially savvy than I am. Also, Asperger people can take things overly literally at times, which was a problem for me in the past, so I could have identified more with S because of that in spite of actually being an INTP.

It depends on these situations you're experiencing. Ne doesn't mean you always run headlong into things with all these "possibilities". It might be more that way when dominant, but as auxiliary, with Ti as dominant, you get a sense of the way things work, and build "models" so to speak, that you subjectively use to understand the world. That is part of what you describe, regarding "what works", and NT is the one that goes directly on "what works", where SJ is more "institutional" in its approach to what works.

I am definitely about "what works" and building models in my head. I don't think I'm all that "institutional" in my approach but I could be wrong.

Then, Si as tertiary will reinforce that.

What I find for myself, is that Ne tends to be used to look for ways to reshape the things you see in the world into the models you understand and prefer. When a situation doesn't fit this, you may run to the tertiary, which is the ego's first line of defense in the dominant attitude.
And that is the key, and why the tertiary is said to "inflate" to the point of possibly seeming like a preferred function.
You seem to be sure of your introversion, so whatever the functions, you are predominantly drawn to the inner world. If the auxiliary function is iNtuition, it will be extraverted, and only a support function for the dominant, since it pulls the other way from where the ego is truly focused. If that dominant then, is Thinking, then along with the iNtuition, your main perspective in life is that things should make sense. So if they don't (including when situations are "new"), then you will run to the next introverted function, which will be tertiary Sensing.

Okay, this all makes sense.

I said the last time you asked that you read as (far) more ISxJ than INTP to me. I still think this.

You are a better judge of your character than any of us, of course. Nothing you've said really rules out either INTP or ISxJ - I just see more of the latter in you. The easiest thing might be to see how much you identify with Ti vs. Si rather than comparing Si and Ne.

What parts about me suggest ISxJ more than INTP?

I think the source of my confusion is that I read descriptions of Ti and Si and I identify with both equally. Either I'm not interpreting them right, not self-aware enough, or I'm just a paradox that doesn't fit the theory.

For a (probably crappy) example, Si-doms might look first to experience when solving a problem and then reason through why or why not that past experience is relevant and makes sense in that situation. Ti-doms might look first to "what makes sense" and then draw from the past experience to support that reasoning.

I do both but I think slightly more the latter than the former.

I heavily relate to this. There has to be something to tie it back to, something concrete. An example that can be repeated.

One thing about Si is it very often concerns esoteric knowledge which is garnered from those impressions which imprint themselves greatest on the Si dominant. Which is why stereotypes about tradition are actually quite inaccurate. Si depends heavily upon the environment it is brought up around. If that environment is not of the average or traditional, then the Si dominant themselves will not be that traditional.

I don't see myself as all that traditional. In fact many of the sense impressions and associations I've had are quite unique and individual. I remember reading somewhere that the Si dominant often doesn't realize how unique their own sense impressions are!

Something else about Si that goes along with this aquiring of esoteric knowledge about facts and information we individually find impressionable, is that, (as Lenore Thompson points out), Si doms might one day realise they know more than most other people in an area about some specific hobby or past time, although it does not have to be a hobby or past time; it can be anything.

Interesting, I kind of strive to be the most knowledgeable about my areas of interested. Before I attributed that to INTP and/or enneagram 5 but I could see how this could fit with Si.


Also want to add that being an enneagram 5 (if I typed correctly) and ISxJ isn't exactly the most common combination. Especially 5 with ISFJ. I read both INTP and ISFJ profiles and don't perfectly fit into either.

Compared to INTPs I'm more emotionally sensitive, more security oriented, seem to need more specifics and probably a bit more results oriented.

Compared to ISFJs I'm more emotionally detached, more independent, less tradition minded, more intellectually inclined, and more open to new ways of doing things.


So you've given me food for thought but I'm still not entirely sure.

 

[SilkRoad]

I don't have anything usefully function-based to add like many posts here, but: maybe you're actually a type 6 like me, and a bit ISxJ-like as a result, though it might not be your real type.

 

[Such Irony]

I've considered type 6 as well.

I think more have suggested type 9 though.

I still think 5 is my best fit type but I'm open to the possibility of something else.

 

[Eric B]

I think having Aspergers definitely confuses things. When I was young, I was poor at all the Fe stuff and I'm better at it but it still feels awkward to me today. Most ISFJs are alot more socially savvy than I am. Also, Asperger people can take things overly literally at times, which was a problem for me in the past, so I could have identified more with S because of that in spite of actually being an INTP.

If it feels "awkward", that right there is the language of a function being lower in consciousness. I guess an ISFJ can have Asperger's (and I hear INFJ's can have it), and I'm not sure how that would affect the type behavior. They probably wouldn't describe Fe as awkward, though they might be frustrated by whatever social problems the condition might give them. They would probably respond by constantly trying to merge with people, where INT's (the most common with the syndrome) would just reject people and retreat to themselves.

I am definitely about "what works" and building models in my head. I don't think I'm all that "institutional" in my approach but I could be wrong.

That was the NT's "pragmatism" being implied there, as opposed to the SJ's cooperativeness which is what tends to make them trust institutions more.

I think the source of my confusion is that I read descriptions of Ti and Si and I identify with both equally. Either I'm not interpreting them right, not self-aware enough, or I'm just a paradox that doesn't fit the theory.

I do both but I think slightly more the latter than the former.

Again the tertiary inflation, or what others call the "loop". And introverted functions can be hard to tell apart at times. S deals with "what it is", in terms of data being gathered, and T is "what it is", in the sense of a technical break-down of the object, so both functions seem similar. And when both are the same attitude, they will seem all the more similar (even when extraverted. Both Se and Te are often described in terms of "taking action"). So for both to be introverted, they may be confused even more. But if both are there, and you know you're an introvert, then one is dominant, and the other is tertiary.

The dominant is the ego's main world view, so you have to determine which perspective: things making rational sense, or things being familiar, is what really drives your ego. What is more frustrating when its need is not met.

I don't see myself as all that traditional. In fact many of the sense impressions and associations I've had are quite unique and individual. I remember reading somewhere that the Si dominant often doesn't realize how unique their own sense impressions are!

So that sounds like it's not dominant.

Interesting, I kind of strive to be the most knowledgeable about my areas of interested. Before I attributed that to INTP and/or enneagram 5 but I could see how this could fit with Si.

That may be true once an area of interest happens to be encountered or they are learning something, but I don't think Si preferrers would really focus on acquiring knowledge just for its own sake or putting that much focus into interests. "Knowledge and mastery" of everything dealt with is the NT's need.

Compared to INTPs I'm more emotionally sensitive, more security oriented, seem to need more specifics and probably a bit more results oriented.

That's explained by the Supine, and probably AS. "results" is something in general preferred by the "Behind the Scenes", as opposed to "process-oriented". So most INTP's should fit that, unless you're referring to something else.

Compared to ISFJs I'm more emotionally detached, more independent, less tradition minded, more intellectually inclined, and more open to new ways of doing things.

That sounds more like the genuine type preference. (N+T). Si is just a relief/defense function that you fall back on.