I know what my type is, but I'll pretend I don't and then argue against it.

[Mal12345]

You value chocolate and sex. Therefore it follows that you are ESFJ. I think Keirsey said that once.

The elder Keirsey? He said something about temperaments and many people confused that with personality. There just happens to be four traditional temperaments, and four Keirseyan temperaments. But throwing in a fifth temperament tosses a monkey wrench in the works.

 

[Epiphany]

Logically speaking, I can be all types or no type at all. But I'm leaning toward INFP because I personally value sex.

Hear, hear!

That's how I typed myself, as well. I propose a toast.

To sex and chocolate milk.

 

[Mal12345]

Hear, hear!

That's how I typed myself, as well. I propose a toast.

To sex and chocolate milk.

And camel toe!

 

[WALMART]

I've pondered this a bit further. First you make the distinction between focus of attention and behavioral aspects (the traditional intepretation). Then there are four different conflicting criteria. Then you brought up ambiversion. I'm not able to put this whole thing together.

And what is ambiversion anyway?

First I brought up ambiversion. It is a preference for equal devotion to the external and internal world, to embody traits of both types in approachingly equal quantities.

Then I brought up two classical methodologies to determining introversion or extroversion.

Then I added that I have personally conjured maybe four different ways one could be viewed as introverted in one light but extroverted in another, and et cetrera, tainting my perceptions of people's focus on the two dichotomies.

Then I posited you are probabilistically ambiverted.

 

[Mal12345]

First I brought up ambiversion. It is a preference for equal devotion to the external and internal world, to embody traits of both types in approachingly equal quantities.

Then I brought up two classical methodologies to determining introversion or extroversion.

Then I added that I have personally conjured maybe four different ways one could be viewed as introverted in one light but extroverted in another, and et cetrera, tainting my perceptions of people's focus on the two dichotomies.

Then I posited you are probabilistically ambiverted.

Well I don't see introversion and extroversion as dichotomies. If they are dichotomies, then there is no place for ambiversion whatsoever.

If however it is a continuum - meaning "more or less outgoing, either socially or otherwise," then you can have an ambivert, one who is in the comfortable middle: neither too introverted nor too extroverted.

I also believe that at the heart of typology is the need to eliminate the extremes from human existence. Too much of anything is unhealthy.

 

[Entropic]

How about filling out a questionnaire for starters to reveal how you actually think. If it's one thing I don't think you are based on the posts I've seen from you though, it's 5w4. I could see you more as a 6 assuming you are a head type at all which I am not entirely sure that you are, either.

 

[Mal12345]

How about filling out a questionnaire for starters to reveal how you actually think. If it's one thing I don't think you are based on the posts I've seen from you though, it's 5w4. I could see you more as a 6.

That's scary!

 

[RaptorWizard]

I don't care what your type is.

If you don't control your type, someone else will.

 

[Jaguar]

If you don't control your type, someone else will.

Only if you allow it.

 

[WALMART]

I also believe that at the heart of typology is the need to eliminate the extremes from human existence. Too much of anything is unhealthy.

Concurred. I enjoy Enneagram for this reason, there is a sense of growth inherent to the model.