Please help me type myself...

[Ellyn]

[MENTION=18736]reckful[/MENTION] , & between INs, which IN do YOU think I most likely might be?
(Based on my posts, & based on your experience)


Also, one thing I've heard about INXJ (Se inf) is that they use their Se inf mostly in grips!

But I actually use it in normal situations & use it alot less in grip or huge stress!!!

Is what I've heard true?!

 

[reckful]

[MENTION=18736]reckful[/MENTION] , & between INs, which IN do YOU think I most likely might be?
(Based on my posts, & based on your experience)


Also, one thing I've heard about INXJ (Se inf) is that they use their Se inf mostly in grips!

But I actually use it in normal situations & use it alot less in grip or huge stress!!!

Is what I've heard true?!

I've still got a mild F lean for you — but again, subject to all those possible "T/F's a mess" complications, which could mean you're partly T and partly F, or etc. — and an even milder J lean, so I'd still pick INFJ as your "most likely" type and INFP as the runner-up (if forced to choose), but I'm not inclined to rule out any of the four IN types at this point.

If you end up reading much of my T/F or J/P stuff, I'd be curious to hear any reactions you have that would indicate that, if you assume that whatever I'm describing about T/F or J/P is true, you feel like you're considerably more one side than the other.

Similarly, if you read any of the IN type profiles in those roundups and come across anything that gives you a particularly strong "that sounds just like me" or "that's not me" reaction, I'd be interested in hearing about those.

As far as "inferior Se" goes, and as previously noted, I'm not really a believer in typing yourself using the functions — or a believer in the functions at all, really. As explained in that TC Wiki page that I already linked you to, I basically agree with James Reynierse, who concluded — in a series of articles in the journal published by the official MBTI folks (including "The Case Against Type Dynamics") — that the so-called "cognitive functions" are basically nothing more than a "category mistake." When it comes to the kind of validity that makes a personality typology worth an intelligent person's attention, I think "type dynamics" belongs in the same category as the zodiac.

It's not uncommon to read that their "inferior Se" supposedly leads INJs to do things like overindulge in sensory activities when they're under stress — buuut it really only makes sense to view sensory-indulgence stuff as a sign of "inferior Se" if whatever behavior you're focusing on is something that INTJs and INFJs are actually significantly more likely to engage in (or engage in under stress) than the other types — including the other N types.

Otherwise, pointing to that stuff and saying, "that's my Se in action" is better viewed as Forerism.

Talking about an MBTI type's "inferior" side certainly makes sense if what you're talking about is the tendency for the preferred sides of anyone's type to be associated with their strengths, and what comes naturally to them, and etc., and conversely, for the non-preferred sides of their type to be associated with their difficulties and weaknesses. But contrary to typical function-stack analyses, that strength/weakness dynamic is best viewed as true for all four dichotomies and all the possible dichotomy combinations. So an INTP, for example, will tend to demonstrate weaknesses associated with the aspects of personality associated with E and S and F and J, and associated with combinations like EF and SF and SJ and FJ and so on.

So from that standpoint, if you're looking at an "Se" description, and it consists of aspects of personality that tend to be most characteristic of SPs, and where SPs tend to be the most accomplished/natural types, then it makes sense to expect that NJs will be the types (as among the SPs, SJs, NPs and NJs) who are most likely to experience those aspects of personality as sources of weakness/difficulty/inferiority.

 

[reckful]

Just in case it's helpful, I've put a recycle of a more recent dichotomies-vs.-functions post (from another forum) in the spoiler, and it probably qualifies as a more streamlined version of that previously-linked TC Wiki page and the collection of posts that it links to.

I suspect you've been exposed to more than a handful of forum posts (not to mention other sources) claiming that Jungian/MBTI type is largely about the so-called "cognitive functions," and/or that the dichotomies mostly deal with more superficial stuff, and/or that you should think of the dichotomies as "letter codes" that need to be decoded to lead you to the deeper stuff.

But I'm here to tell you that those posters have been taken for a ride. Not even Jung himself prioritized the eight functions in the way that a lot of forumites do. In fact, Jung spent more of Psychological Types talking about the things he thought extraverts had in common and introverts had in common than he spent talking about all eight of the functions put together; and in the Foreword to a 1934 edition of the book, he bemoaned the fact that too many people were inclined to view Chapter 10 (his function descriptions) as the essence of the book, while noting that he'd stuck those at the back of the book for a reason.

And in any event, and regardless of what Jung's perspective was, it's been close to 100 years since Psychological Types was published, and the modern MBTI reflects countless adjustments and improvements to Jung's original concepts.

Contrary to what you sometimes hear, and notwithstanding that there are important distinctions to be made between "hard sciences" and "soft sciences," the four MBTI dichotomies now have decades of data in support of their validity and reliability — and a combination of meta-review and large supplemental study in 2003 concluded that the MBTI was more or less in the same category (if not on a par) with the Big Five in terms of its psychometric respectability. And if you're interested, you can read more about that — and about several other issues often raised by people claiming to "debunk" the MBTI — in this post and the post that follows it.

Carl Jung — mystical streak notwithstanding — was a believer in the scientific approach, and Isabel Myers took Psychological Types and devoted a substantial chunk of her life to putting its typological concepts to the test in a way that Jung never had, and in accordance with the psychometric standards applicable to the science of personality. Myers adjusted Jung's categories and concepts so that they better fit the data she gathered from thousands of subjects, and by the start of the 1960s (as the leading Big Five psychologists have acknowledged), she had a typology that was respectably tapping into four of the Big Five personality dimensions — long before there really was a Big Five. And twin studies have since shown that identical twins raised in separate households are substantially more likely to match on those dimensions than genetically unrelated pairs, which is further (strong) confirmation that the MBTI dichotomies correspond to real, relatively hard-wired underlying dimensions of personality. They're a long way from being simply theoretical — or pseudoscientific — categories with no respectable evidence behind them.

Buuut contrary to what some of the function aficionados would have you believe, the scientifically respectable side of the MBTI is the dichotomy-centric side — and the dichotomies differ greatly from the so-called "cognitive functions" in that regard. The functions — which James Reynierse (in "The Case Against Type Dynamics") rightly characterizes as a "category mistake" — have barely even been studied, and the reason they've barely been studied is that, unlike the dichotomies, they've never been taken seriously by any significant number of academic psychologists. Going all the way back to 1985, the MBTI Manual described or referred to somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,500 MBTI studies, and as I understand it, not one of the many study-based correlations reported in the manual were framed in terms of the functions. The third edition of the MBTI Manual was published in 1998 and, as Reynierse notes in that same article, it cited a grand total of eight studies involving "type dynamics" (i.e., the functions model) — which Reynierse summarizes as "six studies that failed, one with a questionable interpretation, and one where contradictory evidence was offered as support." He then notes: "Type theory's claim that type dynamics is superior to the static model and the straightforward contribution of the individual preferences rests on this ephemeral empirical foundation."

As I'm always pointing out, the modern function descriptions you'll find in Thomson, Berens, Nardi, etc. differ in many ways (large and small) from Jung's original concepts, and appear to be a set of descriptions more or less jerry-rigged to match up reasonably well with the MBTI types they purportedly correspond with. (As one dramatic example, and as described at length in this post, the description of "Si" you'll find Thomson, Berens, Nardi and Quenk using bears little resemblance to Jung's "introverted sensation" and is instead a description made to match MBTI SJs. And you can read about the changes Myers made to Te in this PerC post.)

So... since "Ne" descriptions are set up to match NPs (extraverts and introverts both) reasonably well (since the IN_Ps are "Ne-aux" types) and "Ti" descriptions are set up to match TPs (extraverts and introverts both) reasonably well (since the E_TPs are "Ti-aux" types), it's not surprising that INTPs and ENTPs both read those modern Ne and Ti descriptions and feel like they relate reasonably well. (Although I can't help noting that, as discussed in the spoiler in this post, INTJs often relate pretty well to Ne and Ti descriptions as well....)

As a general matter, in other words... if you're looking at those modern cognitive function descriptions, and you're applying them to the types who purportedly have them as their dominant or auxiliary functions, you're likely to get quite a bit of piggybacked validity, because if an "Ne" description is largely made up of things that NPs tend to have in common, it's obviously going to be reasonably valid for NPs.

But none of that has anything to do with whether the functions — as components of a four-function "type dynamics" model — beat Reynierse's "category mistake" rap.

As Reynierse notes, virtually all the respectable data/studies point to the conclusion that the actual, at-least-semi-genetic, underlying components of MBTI personality are the four dichotomies, and that personality characteristics that result from (or are influenced by) a combination of two or more of the dichotomies are affected in a simple, additive way. So what I call the "Real MBTI Model" — partly because, if you ignore the Jungian lip service, it was essentially Isabel Myers's model — looks like this:

INTP = I + N + T + P + IN + IT + IP + NT + NP + TP + INT + INP + ITP + NTP + INTP.

INTJ = I + N + T + J + IN + IT + IJ + NT + NJ + TJ + INT + INJ + ITJ + NTJ + INTJ.

ESFJ = E + S + F + J + ES + EF + EJ + SF + SJ + FJ + ESF + ESJ + EFJ + SFJ + ESFJ.

And as already explained, type analysis that's supposedly based on the cognitive functions often "works" — in the sense of matching up reasonably well with the corresponding types — to the extent that it simply overlaps with the Real MBTI Model. But on the other hand, and as Reynierse emphasizes, if what you're talking about is assertions about the types that are based on "cognitive functions" analysis and that are inconsistent with what the Real MBTI Model would lead you to expect, those kinds of assertions have never had any respectable body of data support behind them, and in fact have tended to be contradicted by the results of relevant MBTI studies.

As one example, those inconsistent assertions include the idea that an INTP's personality tends to exhibit both "Ne" characteristics (so far, OK) and "Si" characteristics — with the Ne and the Si working together "in tandem."

The Real MBTI Model for INTPs and ESFJs (see above) says that INTPs and ESFJs have no MBTI-related personality characteristics in common, because they're opposites on all four dimensions — and therefore also opposites with respect to all the relevant preference combinations that make contributions to their personality. According to the Real MBTI Model, the INTP is indeed an "Ne" type (to the extent that your "Ne" description is made up of characteristics that NPs tend to have in common) but is not an "Si" type (to the extent that your "Si" description is made up of characteristics that SJs tend to have in common).

By contrast, the cognitive functions model — in its tandem-based incarnation (the Harold Grant function stack) — says that INTPs and ESFJs share quite a bit in the way of MBTI-related personality characteristics because they're both "Si" types (not to mention "Ne" and "Ti" and "Fe" types), and that the types who tend to not share those "Si" personality characteristics are the "Se" types (e.g., ENTJs with "tertiary Se").

Assuming that Ne, Ni, Se and Si correspond to significant aspects of personality — and if they're used to refer to stuff that NPs, NJs, SPs and SJs, respectively, have in common, they certainly do — and given that we now have data pools (thousands of them, over 50 years) correlating the MBTI types with a huge variety of things (including countless personality dimensions as measured by other personality typologies), if it was true that NJs and SPs are both "Ni/Se types," and that NPs and SJs are both "Ne/Si types," you'd expect there would be some significant body of data pools where Ne, Ni, Se and/or Si were the most significant MBTI-related influences on whatever the study was looking at — and where, accordingly, the NJs and SPs showed up on one side of the correlational spectrum and the NPs and SJs showed up on the other.

But that correlational pattern — like all patterns that are inconsistent with the Real MBTI Model — virtually never shows up. Instead, regardless of what aspect of personality it is that somebody's study may be focusing on, if the SJs show up at one end of the spectrum, look for the NPs to show up at the other end — just as the Real MBTI Model would lead you to expect.

And there's quite a bit more on that in the "bogosity of the tandems" post linked to below.

As another example of type dynamics leading to expectations that go beyond the Real MBTI Model, the function-centric perspective says that, comparing an INTJ and an INTP, the INTJs' N will generally play a greater role in their personality than their T and the INTPs' T will generally play a greater role than their N — because dom/aux! — and that notion, too, has no respectable validity. INTJs and INTPs both have N and T preferences, with all that those entail, and whether the N or the T plays a greater role in any NT's personality will basically depend on whether one of those two preferences is substantially stronger than the other — and the data suggests that the N preference is no more likely to be the stronger one for an INTJ than for an INTP.

And meanwhile, the fact that function-centric analyses of personality tend to shortchange (if not completely miss) many significant MBTI-related aspects of personality is at least as substantial a shortcoming as those data-challenged assertions that the popular function models make. I previously noted that type analysis that's supposedly based on the cognitive functions often "works" — in the sense of matching up reasonably well with the corresponding types — to the extent that it simply overlaps with the Real MBTI Model. Buuut when I say it "works," it's important to note how grotesquely incomplete an INTP profile is going to be if it stops at (or is overly dominated by) "Ti" (TP) + "Ne" (NP) — since it means that the profile is likely to be missing (or to shortchange) quite a lot of the stuff that's common to all introverts, and all N's, and all T's, and all P's, and all IN's, and all NTs, and so on.

If you're interested in reading more about the INTP=Ti-Ne-Si-Fe model — a function stack that's inconsistent with both Jung and Myers and has never been endorsed by the official MBTI folks — and about the relationship between the dichotomies and the functions and the place of the functions (or lack thereof) in the MBTI's history, you can find quite a bit of further discussion in these two posts:

The bogosity of the "tandems"
Why I'm a "dichotomies guy"

 

[reckful]

In the probably highly unlikely event that you haven't had enough of me yet...

Back in 2013, I did quite a bit of post stalking as part of typing two forum women who I ended up concluding were pretty good examples of their respective types.

RisaMoccasin, in particular, is a "textbook INFJ" in many ways (IMHO) — and neurotic, to boot — and my five-post type analysis of her (starting here) includes lots of exemplary quotes from her posts, and commentary by me on various ways I think NJs differ from NPs, INFJs differ from INFPs, ISFPs differ from INFPs, and so on.

And I think Inis Mona (then known as Polly) is a pretty good example of an above-average-neurotic INFP — although closer than you to the E/I borderline — and here's a post where I talk about various of the reasons why I think so.

As I've said, I think your J/P preference, whatever it may be, is on the mild side, so I'm guessing you'd find — if you look at those analyses (which you shouldn't feel any pressure to do) — that RisaMoccasin is considerably more J than you are, and probably that Inis Mona is significantly more P than you are. And I'd say RisaMoccasin is also significantly more F than you are. But especially if you end up concluding that you're a neurotic INF, you might find that reading those posts helps you decide whether you're an INFJ or an INFP.

 

[sardonic delight]

In the probably highly unlikely event that you haven't had enough of me yet...

Back in 2013, I did quite a bit of post stalking as part of typing two forum women who I ended up concluding were pretty good examples of their respective types.

RisaMoccasin, in particular, is a "textbook INFJ" in many ways (IMHO) — and neurotic, to boot — and my five-post type analysis of her (starting here) includes lots of exemplary quotes from her posts, and commentary by me on various ways I think NJs differ from NPs, INFJs differ from INFPs, ISFPs differ from INFPs, and so on.

And I think Inis Mona (then known as Polly) is a pretty good example of an above-average-neurotic INFP — although closer than you to the E/I borderline — and here's a post where I talk about various of the reasons why I think so.

As I've said, I think your J/P preference, whatever it may be, is on the mild side, so I'm guessing you'd find — if you look at those analyses (which you shouldn't feel any pressure to do) — that RisaMoccasin is considerably more J than you are, and probably that Inis Mona is significantly more P than you are. And I'd say RisaMoccasin is also significantly more F than you are. But especially if you end up concluding that you're a neurotic INF, you might find that reading those posts helps you decide whether you're an INFJ or an INFP.

[MENTION=18736]reckful[/MENTION] I can't leave private messages to you so I'm kinda highjacking this thread a little. I've been following your conversations in this thread and would like to know if I could get your opinion on my type?

 

[reckful]

[MENTION=18736]reckful[/MENTION] I can't leave private messages to you so I'm kinda highjacking this thread a little. I've been following your conversations in this thread and would like to know if I could get your opinion on my type?

I don't browse the What's My Type? subforum and very rarely get significantly involved in individual type-me exercises here at TC. I ended up in this thread because it was originally in the MBTI/JCF subforum, and also because I was looking for an excuse to copy a bunch of long type-related posts that I'd made at other forums over here. And on top of that, I'm mostly going to be away from forumland for much of the rest of August.

Buuut my posts in this thread are a set that basically add up to a reckful type-you kit — on all four MBTI dimensions, plus Neuroticism. So if you follow my links to the official MBTI and Big Five tests, and read my takes on E/I, S/N, T/F and J/P — not to mention the dichotomies-over-functions stuff — then you're likely to be able to figure out what your type is according to my MBTI perspective, and quite possibly better than I could, given that you'll have my take on the four dimensions (and neuroticism) and you know yourself a lot better than I'll ever know you.

That said, I'm more than happy to address any specific type-related issues you might have that arise from your trying to apply the stuff in my posts to yourself, and the best way to do that would probably be to tag me in one of your type-me threads, just like you've tagged me here. You shouldn't expect much in the way of responses before September, though.

 

[Ellyn]

[MENTION=18736]reckful[/MENTION] , when I read about those two TC ppl, I think I relate to Polly a lot more than Risa!

Polly was too E to be me!

I can relate to what Risa (INFJ) said, but honestly,...not really. She was too J. Alot more than me!
& she was alot more F & caring than I am!

__________________________________________________

I also read your T/F & P/J spoilers.
You're right I'm so in the middle for both of them.

For example, for T/F (& P/J), some of the examples made me think I'm T (most of them) & some made me think I'm the other one.

Also, in real life, I really can't deal with extremely P ppl, they're just too carefree & relaxed.
But I also can't deal with extremely J ppl either.

Though I might not always act on it, I do get stress & a sense that I have to complete a mission, or fo something in a perfectionist way!

Two examples ;

1)I might procrastinate. I might not always be somewhere on time. But I do get alot of stress from it. I cannot relax. (Btw, my procrastination usually happens in response to extreme stress/disappointment or lack of interest/hope.)


2)On day, my P friend, needed my class notes. So I took my notebook to uni to give it to her.

Guess what! She didn't even show up at uni that day (she skipped the class that day).

I waited a bit cuz I assumed she might really need them asap, & also because I wanted to complete this mission asap & feel relaxed.
But she didn't show up! & she didn't even bother to let me know!!!

Idk if I called her or not, but I guess I did, but she didn't answer or call back I guess.

I was both angry with her & also worried. How could she not feel anxious for not having the notes the wanted?!?

Anyways, after waiting for her for a proper time & not even getting a text/call from her, I went home & thought that "it's HER problem not mine"!!!

At midnight (or maybe the next morning), she finally texted me telling me to relax & that she's not in a rush for it !!!

As I knew that she's probably going to do the same thing when giving my notes back, I photocopied the parts she needed & gave it to her!!! I kept the original notes!!!

Though I didn't really complain about it & didn't express my anger in a direct way!

But I'm not really J either!!!

_______________________________________________


Now an F/T example.

One of my F family members had a dog(puppy). She spoiled the dog very much. Even if she didn't want to, she changed her mind after seeing those sad puppy eyes. She gave him "too much food" & everything in their house had sorta become the pup's toy! If the pup begged for it, she would give it to him.

& she didn't even want to train or limit her pup. The puppy could do everything & go everywhere. He could pee everywhere without being punished or trained. She thought it was too cruel to train a puppy!

Sometimes, she asked me to look after her pup. I often resisted but sometimes I did not.

In general, the sad pup eyes had NO effect on me! & I deffo thought the puppy had to have training & limitations.
& I deffo only gave him food when needed!
I told her this, but she still thought it was cruel!!!

So, I just ended up not accepting babysitting his dog!!!

__________________________________



Now on the S/N part. Eventhough you say I seem IN, I'm still very confused on this part.

I sort of see a Idealism/realism balance (50/50)
& I sometimes see the flaws & want to make things better, more perfect, etc. (N)

But I also have S. In real life I like "doing". I'm a bit lazy at first, but I need to have things to do, fun activities, adventures, etc.

& I'm deffo the person who loves big supermarkets full of surprises, new/exotic things to try(eat). It really stimulates my curiousity & my S.

Seeing all those different tastes, fragrances, smells, brands, colors, etc. It's just so S-stimulating for me!!! & So exciting!!!


**also, I learn better by "doing a thing" or at least "seeing it" than by reading it.

______________________________


Wow! I seem in the middle in most functions. Plz plz ask me some tricky real life questions in order to make sure which side I am in each of them.

& sorry I ask too many questions.

 

[Ellyn]

[MENTION=18736]reckful[/MENTION] ,
Another reason why I probably doubt being INFP so much, us my INFP cousine.

She's INFP, but we're so different. Actually it was first "her" who introduced me to mbti world. & in my first mbti test, I got ISTP & at that time I read the discription & it matched.
(But a few months after that, I took another test & got INTP & it sorta didn't match.).
Then I started searching for my true type!!!



It's mostly our differences that makes me think I'm probably not INFP.
For example ;

â– 1)She's more judgemental & two faced than I am.
If two ppl (relatives) are fighting, she's alot more likely to take sides & involve herself, judge them & try to be two faced/gossipy etc.

I might care, but I don't get involved (unless it's inside my own family), & I try to watch it & not get sides.& I usually keep my judgements to myself.




â– 2)she's into the meanings, literature, opera, theater, books, novels, theories, philosophy, poems reading, ppl, etc. She loves reading.

I'm mostly into adventures, nature, fashion, trying new things, new food, or at least looking at food pictures, cooking new dishes, painting, handicraft, movies, gym, gardening, etc.

While I can be creative in some of these areas (specially for the sakes of competition, being perfect, etc), I don't really actively seek to have hobbies/interests in those areas!

(example; I might write poems/novels(short stories)..for the sakes of knowing that I CAN if I want to, or for competition, being known as tallentef, or just for similar reasons like testing my creativity, but I'm not "generally" into poems/novels/books/reading.

Actually, asides from school, I have NEVER read poems/poetic books, & I have only read 7 short story type novels in my whole life (apart from childhood bedtime stories ppl read for me.) ;

Jane Eyre (after watching the series)
The Christmas Carol
Ghost Stories (only half of it)
Sherlock Holmes (only half of it I guess)
Frankenstein
Voodoo Island

& I've got my 4th SS novel (The Pic of Dorian Grey) & That's because I've watched "Penny Dreadful" series, & Dorian was my favorite character with his sensuality.
But I still haven't started reading.)

I get ADD/ADHD every time I try to read a book!!!

I used to read scientific books (specially about astronomy & planets) in childhood. They were the sorts of books that were full of pictures & illustrations & explained everything only in one short paragraph or two. (Kid's encyclopedia)



â– 3)I'm into fashion & "creating/making".

She's not. While she can really enjoy clothes shopping (which I kinda hate), she doesn't really care about making/creating or wearing something different or looking original.
---
& when It comes to food, I care about variety, appearance, taste, exoticness, being new/different, adventurous, cultures, etc. I actually research about food alot!

She doesn't really like trying new food.
She just eats for the sakes of eating & mot getting hungry.
& she doesn't care about variety or appearance of food.




â– 4)she's really bossy. When we're in a group, she thinks she has the right to boss ppl down. & if you don't listen to her she gets angry & even more controlling (while she might seem relaxed at first). & she can be very rude.

I neither like to be a boss, nor a follower. I'm a delta type. If the boss is useful or reasonable (if he deserves being a boss), I'm loyal & I try to impress.
Otherwise, I'm not gonna be in that group.




â– 5)She's more traditional than me. She believes in patriarchy & family hierarchy & accepts them without questioning them.
She thinks we should respect our older relatives (specially males) without any reason. & then she respects her old relatives more than "outsiders".

We should deal with abusive parents, & obbey them, without defending ourselves or questioning it.

We should have our parents religion & believe in it (without questioning it or changing it)

Well, I deffo DON'T!!!!!!!!




â– 6) but she's very relaxed about changes of plans (in the last moment), or ppl not being responsible.
& I plan more than she does.



â– 7)aesthetics are less important to her.
You can take her to a dessert with no beauty & nothing to do, but she can still be happy about being with relatives, talking/debating or grabbing a book & relaxing.
She's more talkative than I am!


I get bored in these situations. For me, the place needs to be beautiful, modern & full of adventures & thrills, & new things.
I love my family (esp very few of them), but I also care very much about aesthetics & being active.



â– 8) she believes in traditional roles (like of men & women) alot more than me. (Women should be this/that way, men should be this/that way, etc.) Or this is only for men/women, etc.

While I think there should be no "traditional view"! There should be balance.
& in relationship men & women should help eachother & be like friends.

______________________________________


What do you think?
Can two INFPs be thaaaat different?

 

[Ellyn]

Again, Sorry I ask too many questions!

Today I took D.Nardy test again &...


Cognitive Process Level of Development (Preference, Skill and Frequency of Use)
extraverted Sensing (Se) ******************************* (31.6)
good use
introverted Sensing (Si) **************************** (28.8)
average use
extraverted Intuiting (Ne) **************************** (28.9)
average use
introverted Intuiting (Ni) *********************************** (35.9)
good use
extraverted Thinking (Te) ****************************** (30)
average use
introverted Thinking (Ti) ***************************** (29.6)
average use
extraverted Feeling (Fe) ********************** (22.7)
limited use
introverted Feeling (Fi) ******************************** (32.9)
good 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: INTJ

Lead (Dominant) Process
Introverted Intuiting (Ni): Transforming with a meta-perspective. Withdrawing from the world and focusing your mind to receive an insight or realization. Checking if synergy results. Trying out a realization to transform things.

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: ENTJ, or ISFP



Idk about ISFP. Even INTJ would "kinda" suit me, but ENTJ?!?!

The last type I would see myself as would be ENTJ/ESTJ.

Nothing against them, I just don't think I'm EXTJ!!!

 

[reckful]

[1 of 2]

Here's a roundup of stuff from some of your posts (here and at PerC), with my type-related annotations.

One day, I'm like a classic old fashioned (like 20s-70s) lady, & I enjoy old fashioned hobbies & style. I become serious, polite & lady-like.

One day I'm like a sensual, sensitive, creative & original artist.

I pay attention to my artistic hobbies like dancing, singing, painting, classical music, loving architecture, art, dancing, designing, fashion & being in a dramatic/sad mood. I sometimes become goth-like.

Again, placing a high value on creativity — and especially artistic creativity — really is a pretty good N indicator, and it applies to creation/design/aesthetics involving physical stuff (painting, dancing, fashion, architecture) as well as intangible stuff (fiction or music). "Aesthetics" is one of the six facets of Openness to Experience (the Big Five equivalent of an N preference)

And it seems to be a pretty consistent theme in the posts you've made (both here and at PerC) that if there's one area of life that really deserves to be called your biggest passion, it's artistic/aesthetic creativity, and that the reason you haven't pursued something more creative as a career has more to do with trying to be realistic (and maybe some parental pressure) than the fact that a more creative career wouldn't be your fondest desire.

Quite a few of your posts talk about ways that you're a mix of MBTI-related characteristics, but especially for someone who's probably got one or more mild preferences, the question to ask is which side feels more like the core, gut-level you, and which side is more like the sometimesy, change-of-pace you.

You say "one day" you're like that "classic old fashioned lady," and "one day" you're that "sensual, sensitive, creative & original artist" — but if you assume for the sake of argument that one of those is more the core you and one is more the change-of-pace you, wouldn't you say you ultimately identify more with the sensual/creative artist?

Similarly...

One day I'm like a serious hardworking/determined & ambitious business man who is very envious and competetive. & I just want to improve myself & my position & I make plans for that.

& some days (very rarely) I try to be happy, adventurous, carefree & friendly (rare). I watch funny videos, feel strong, do athletic activities alot, whatch happy things on TV, etc.

You note that the adventurous/carefree you is the "rare" you, and that's why it makes sense to assume that the other you (the "serious hardworking/determined & ambitious business man") is more the core you that corresponds to whatever inborn MBTI "preference" you may have (mild though it may be).

I feel close to ISXP because...

I'm very sensual, & into variety. different things, tastes, colors, etc excite me. Old things & routines bore me.

I'm adventurous & love trying new things. This adrenaline rush really works for me.
...
Also, I'm a hand on learner. I learn best through "doing" than like studying or listening to lectures or records. I judt can't sit still or listen to lectures & I start daydreaming in most classes.

Also, I'm very imaginetive & sometimes spend my time in my head daydreaming about someone or something or future.
...
And INXJ (Ni) because....

I have goals & ambitions for my future, & feel guilty when I see some ppl are just too carefree & don't have them.

I'm competetive & envious. I wanna be better than others, & If I can't (for whatever reasons) I lose interest & feel anxious.

I make plans alot. I can not always be spontaneous & carefree or positive & comfy.

If I wanna go to a new situation/place, I have to ask or research & gain enough info about that place, the ppl, what I should do, what they expect me to do, What I should wear, how I should act, etc.

In one word, I have to be prepared or I'm going to feel anxious/self conscious.

I even make plans for what I'm going to say,...

& If I really take responsibility or promise something, I have to do it asap or I'm going to feel guilty. Like If I borrow something, I take good care of it & give it back asap & if others are not like that, I secretly get angry.

At places like work(summer job), I do work with others & help them. I like feeling needed and important, & don't like conflicts,

but my priority is to be creative & do things to stand out & be admired/appreciated by useful ppl & higher powers. That's why I'm a bit secretive & loner in these places.

& you know, I'm not a charity lover type of person when It comes to act of service ;

Most of the times, I help ppl I really care about (very few ppl) or useful ppl. & I find it hard to say "No" to them.

For example at work/uni, when I do something very well, or do something original & then bosses/higher powers thank me, admire me or that I look into their eyes & see that they're happy/pleased & they like me, it gives me an ecstatic feeling & motivation.

It makes me want to work harder & please them ever harder.

On the other hand, if they don't see things I do, or don't treat me well, or don't include me, I get depressed, self consious & lose interest/hope.

& yes, I kinda care about what ppl think/say about me. Especially the useful ones, or the ones I see everyday.

Maybe that's why I'm not witty. I watch my words alot & try not to even joke to offend/hurt ppl in order not to see a bad reaction or revenge that can hurt me. Misunderstandings can happen.

So specially at work (summer job) & uni, I'm quiet/shy, polite, reserved & business like. I hardly even open up or find friends.

I'd say there are quite a few more J-indicators than P-indicators in those descriptions, and more N-indicators than S-indicators.

You associated ISXP with "variety. different things, tastes, colors, etc excite me. Old things & routines bore me. I'm adventurous & love trying new things" — but I'd say that aspect of personality falls along a spectrum with the NPs at one end (the most adventurous and variety/change-loving ones) and the SJs at the other.

Here's some recycled reckful on NPs and SJs (and NJs and SPs) and change:

I think it's fair to say that any time you're talking about an aspect of personality that two (or more) of the dichotomies make a substantial contribution to, the people on opposite sides of all the relevant dichotomies will also be on opposite sides with respect to the affected aspect of personality. As one example, I'd say attitude toward change is one of those cases where two of the dichotomies can be viewed as contributing, each in its own way, to an aspect of personality. If you want to contrast change-oriented vs. tradition-oriented, I'd say N/S and J/P each tend to make a contribution, with SJs being the ultimate traditionalists (temperamentally over-pessimistic about change, and tending to over-value the way things are and/or "always have been"), NPs being the ultimate change agents (temperamentally over-optimistic about change, and prone to err on the side of having too little respect for established ways), and SPs and NJs being somewhere in between and arguably more realistic (about change). Maybe you could say NJs are change agents, but more cautious and realistic about possible changes than the NPs; and that SPs are not that driven to be changers/innovators, but are more open to change (and less tradition-worshipping) than the SJs.​

One of the Big Five Openness to Experience facets is Openness to Actions, and here's how McCrae & Costa describe it:

Openness is seen behaviorally in the willingness to try different activities, go new places, or eat unusual foods. High scorers on this scale prefer novelty and variety to familiarity and routine. Over time, they may engage in a series of different hobbies. Low scorers find change difficult and prefer to stick with the tried and true.​

So it really doesn't make to be giving yourself S points for your love of variety and trying new things — including when those things are physical things (like foods). If anything, that's more of an N indicator.

"Hands on learner" is a concept that's often associated with S in MBTI sources, but I'd say it partly depends what kind of subject you're talking about. And having trouble sitting through lectures can sometimes be more of an indication that there are ADHD-ish factors in play than an S/N thing. Also, speaking as a strong N, I can assure you that just about anybody can find themselves having trouble sitting through classes if they're not particularly interested in the subject, or the teacher's style is on the snoozy side.

And on the other side, I'd say that set of "INXJ" characteristics you listed got you significantly more J points than the "ISXP" set got you P points. And more specifically, I'd say your "INXJ" portrait is better framed as an INFJ portrait (if I assume you're an IN).

NTs are the most independent types, and the types who care the least about what others think of them.

You care a lot what people think of you. And as among introverts, that's IF > IT first and foremost.

But also: you don't care about approval/validation from just anybody. You're looking for serious approval/validation, from the people who matter (the "useful" people). It's not a popularity thing for you, first and foremost. And that's significantly more characteristic of FJ than FP, and it sounds to me like that streak is pretty strong in you.

You want the kinds of approvals that show that you're "better than others"; not just well-liked. You want to be recognized as "important," not just popular. You say, "my priority is to be creative & do things to stand out & be admired/appreciated by useful ppl & higher powers. That's why I'm a bit secretive & loner in these places."

You're "secretive" and a "loner" partly because you don't care that much about being accepted/liked/popular with the masses of your co-workers. You're looking for "admiration" from the "useful ppl & higher powers."

And I'd say that's kind of quintessential FJ — although, as you know, I also think T/F and male/female is kind of a tangle, and I'd say that kind of streak would be somewhat less uncharacteristic of a female INT than a male INT. But that said, and assuming you're an introvert (and especially if I assume you're an N), that streak gets you both significant F points and significant J points at Casa Reckful.

I can't resist reprising a bit more of your description:

For example at work/uni, when I do something very well, or do something original & then bosses/higher powers thank me, admire me or that I look into their eyes & see that they're happy/pleased & they like me, it gives me an ecstatic feeling & motivation.

It makes me want to work harder & please them ever harder.

On the other hand, if they don't see things I do, or don't treat me well, or don't include me, I get depressed, self consious & lose interest/hope.
...
So specially at work (summer job) & uni, I'm quiet/shy, polite, reserved & business like. I hardly even open up or find friends.

And to focus on one point in particular: the fact that you're "ambitious" and "competitive" could lead to the result that you want your "bosses/higher powers" to admire and appreciate you as a means to an end — namely, to help you achieve success. And in that case seeking that admiration and appreciation could just as well be a T thing. But you confess that the fact that "they're happy/pleased & they like me" gives you an "ecstatic feeling," and motivates you to "work harder & please them ever harder" — and that's got significantly more of an INF flavor than an INT flavor (although again, I'll grant that typical male/female differences may also come into play there).

And meanwhile, I'd say these parts of your description are worth some significant J points:

I have goals & ambitions for my future, & feel guilty when I see some ppl are just too carefree & don't have them. ...

I make plans alot. I can not always be spontaneous & carefree or positive & comfy.

If I wanna go to a new situation/place, I have to ask or research & gain enough info about that place, the ppl, what I should do, what they expect me to do, What I should wear, how I should act, etc.

In one word, I have to be prepared or I'm going to feel anxious/self conscious.

I even make plans for what I'm going to say,...

& If I really take responsibility or promise something, I have to do it asap or I'm going to feel guilty. Like If I borrow something, I take good care of it & give it back asap & if others are not like that, I secretly get angry.

And here's a PerC post with the same strong J flavor:

Why INTJ/INFJ?

mostly because of Ni-dom.

Like I said before, I think about future alot. I sometimes make to-do lists, or lists before going shopping, traveling, etc.

Usually, When I come home from uni/summer job, instead of fully staying in the present moment and enjoying it, I mostly think about the next day and get stressed out. I don't like doing it, but I do it.

& usually, before going to a new places with new ppl, I have to do a lot of research and Q&As in order to feel less anxious. I might even be excited for it, but I ask tons of "what ifs" & Ineed to be prepared.

I need to know what they expect, what I should do/wear etc...

I might not necessarily keep up with it, but I sorta love planning.

Moving to T/F...

& about being F or T,

Sometimes I overthink about some ppl/ situations & read between the lines, misinterpret, or get dramatic & depressed in my head. & I'm sensitive & hate conflict. I take lotsa things personally & I truly wish I could have thick skin.

But in some situations, I don't let emotions stop me from making a logical decision and it amazes me.
...
I rarely open up unless I'm very anxious (& even then I open up ONLY a bit & regret it later).
...
I express my personal emotions through art, painting or music if I ever do it.

As for being indipendent or social...

I hate social media/chatting/texting/having on-line or long distance friends. I have very few friends & we rarely text. I prefer family to friends.

Overthinking interpersonal situations and "reading between the lines" and taking "lotsa things personally" and hating conflict are all somewhat more characteristic of F's than T's — and maybe especially more characteristic of INFs (the most psychologically-prone types) than INTs (the most interpersonally-aloof types).

And on the other hand, most INFs would say that "in some situations" (at least), they "don't let emotions stop [them] from making a logical decision." (And you add that "it amazes me" — and I don't think it would be all that likely for an INT or IST to be "amazed" that they didn't let emotions get in the way of a logical decision.)

And being much more inclined to "express your personal emotions through art, painting or music" is significantly more N-characteristic than S-characteristic, and really quintesstentially INF.

On the other hand...

3. When you think about having kids, which of these five statements best applies to you?

A. I feel like not having kids would mean missing out on an aspect of life nobody should miss.

B. I'm pretty sure I want to have kids.

C. I have mixed feelings on kids, and could see my life going either way.

D. I acknowledge I may feel differently in a few years, but at this point I'm somewhat leaning against ever having kids.

E. I feel sure, or pretty sure, I don't ever want to have kids.​

Deffo (100%) "E"!!!

The thought of having kids some day really scares me!!! The thought of marriage scares me too, but having kids scares me alot more!

I'm 22! & I had this opinion from early ages & I still have it even though many ppl told me I'm going to change my mind when I grow up!

Many ppl say "aww cute" when they see kids/babies, but I actually hate babies.

It's not just that! I hate pregnancy, child birth, body changes, resposibility that comes with it, taking care of them, sacrifices, etc.

I think I'm going to end up being single forever, as I know "NO ONE" who thinks like me!

I'm not gonna lie. Although plenty of 22-year-old single INF women have mixed feelings (at best, and for various reasons) about whether they want to have kids someday, the one-sidedness of your perspective in this area earned you some T points.

 

[reckful]

[2 of 2]

4. Imagine that a couple of your friends are trying to tell somebody who's never met you what kind of person you are. If there are particular things you can imagine them saying where they'd be rolling their eyes or chuckling (albeit maybe good-naturedly) as they described them — because they're aspects of your personality where you're eccentric or notably toward one end of the spectrum — what would they be?

My family/relatives know me alot more than friends.

But ppl a bit close to me, would probably say that I'm Imaginative/creative, impatient, artistic, adventurous & in love with trying new things, envious, competetive, someone who wants to be original, passive agressive, that I bottle up my feelings(when having problems) until they explode, etc.

But anyone other than my close family & friends would say that I'm quiet, abit shy, introverted, mysterious, loner & serious!!!

[bolding by reckful]

Probably needless to say at this point, from an S/N standpoint, the heart of your answer — to the question of what aspects of your personality people who know you well would be inclined to say put you "notably toward one end of the spectrum" — is more than a little N-dominated.

And that "serious!!!" thang is consistent with a number of your posts, and in the next spoiler is the part of my RisaMoccasin type analysis (which it sounds like you probably already read) that addresses that issue:

In one of those "alienated-IN" things I already quoted, you noted how baffled you were that so many people didn't take life seriously, and that's a refrain that runs through a number of your posts and, as among the N types, I think of that as very characteristically INFJ.
...
And I'm certainly not meaning to suggest that INFJs don't often joke around, or that you don't often joke around. But I think it's fair to say that an INFJ doing something (or talking about something) that they view as a serious matter is substantially more likely to do it with a matching serious/earnest tone than an INFP with a significantly stronger gut tug in the playful direction.

Here's some more of you:

I don't think I'm better than [all those people my age who I can't understand] -- not at all, I have a very very very very very far way to go as a person. But I take life very seriously. I take commitments very seriously, deadlines very seriously, my hobbies very seriously. I am a perfectionist to the extreme. And I can't choose that. I wish I wasn't.

I often appear lighthearted on the outside, or like a mature, lighthearted person, but I'm very serious (and often dramatic) when people get to know me well, and even more so on the inside.

I always take other people seriously unless it's really, really obvious that they're joking about something. People often laugh at me and say "You thought I was serious?", then I feel really embarrassed and creep back into my turtle shell.

^ That's a more characteristic kind of error for an earnest INFJ to make than a more playful INFP.

And again, it's not that J's aren't playful on plenty of occasions where playfulness is appropriate, or that a P isn't likely to take quite a few of the more serious aspects of her life seriously. But somebody with a significant gut tug in the earnestness direction that causes them to sometimes take things too seriously — or at least more seriously than most of their friends seem to — is somebody who's more likely to be a J than a P.

And all other things being equal, I think FJs are significantly more likely to be earnest to a fault (in at least some ways) than TJs. I'm a strong J, but I'm also an irreverent wiseass, and that's somewhat typical of my type. When it comes to things I take seriously, I'm unquestionably prone to take them more seriously than the average person, but at the same time, as long as my intent isn't malicious and I expect that to be understood, I'm also prone to joke (including in a jokingly irreverent/disrespectful way) about many things, including many things that have a serious side.

By contrast, here's you:

& yes, I kinda care about what ppl think/say about me. Especially the useful ones, or the ones I see everyday.

Maybe that's why I'm not witty. I watch my words alot & try not to even joke to offend/hurt ppl in order not to see a bad reaction or revenge that can hurt me. Misunderstandings can happen.

So specially at work (summer job) & uni, I'm quiet/shy, polite, reserved & business like. I hardly even open up or find friends.

And I'll grant that that's a messy example, because part of your hesitancy to joke stems from the fear that someone will misunderstand you, leading to "a bad reaction or revenge." But I get the sense that biting your tongue comes considerably easier to you than it would to me, in part because it seems to me that you have a significantly stronger earnest streak ("serious!!!") than I do that may well stem in part from your being more F-ish than I am — although that could theoretically mean a milder T preference rather than an F preference.

In comparing yourself to typical INTJ portraits, you noted that INTJs tend to be "sarcastic," and that you lacked that characteristic.

I also read your T/F & P/J spoilers.

You're right I'm so in the middle for both of them. ...

Two examples ;

1)I might procrastinate. I might not always be somewhere on time. But I do get alot of stress from it. I cannot relax. (Btw, my procrastination usually happens in response to extreme stress/disappointment or lack of interest/hope.)

2)On day, my P friend, needed my class notes. So I took my notebook to uni to give it to her.

Guess what! She didn't even show up at uni that day (she skipped the class that day).

I waited a bit cuz I assumed she might really need them asap, & also because I wanted to complete this mission asap & feel relaxed.

But she didn't show up! & she didn't even bother to let me know!!!

Idk if I called her or not, but I guess I did, but she didn't answer or call back I guess.

I was both angry with her & also worried. How could she not feel anxious for not having the notes the wanted?!?

Anyways, after waiting for her for a proper time & not even getting a text/call from her, I went home & thought that "it's HER problem not mine"!!!

At midnight (or maybe the next morning), she finally texted me telling me to relax & that she's not in a rush for it !!!

As I knew that she's probably going to do the same thing when giving my notes back, I photocopied the parts she needed & gave it to her!!! I kept the original notes!!!

Though I didn't really complain about it & didn't express my anger in a direct way!

But I'm not really J either!!! ...

Now on the S/N part. Eventhough you say I seem IN, I'm still very confused on this part.

I sort of see a Idealism/realism balance (50/50)

& I sometimes see the flaws & want to make things better, more perfect, etc. (N)

But I also have S. In real life I like "doing". I'm a bit lazy at first, but I need to have things to do, fun activities, adventures, etc.

& I'm deffo the person who loves big supermarkets full of surprises, new/exotic things to try(eat). It really stimulates my curiousity & my S.

Seeing all those different tastes, fragrances, smells, brands, colors, etc. It's just so S-stimulating for me!!! & So exciting!!!

On your J/P examples, I'd previously mentioned that you seemed to be going through a more P-ish phase of your life right now, and it seems likely to me that that's at least somewhat influenced by the fact that your motivation is way down because you're very disillusioned with your current program, and feel like it wasn't really the right choice for you. And in your first example, you note that "procrastination usually happens in response to extreme stress/disappointment or lack of interest/hope."

And by contrast, your second example sounds like a typical lament of someone who's fairly dutiful/conscientious at the gut level (a J), in the face of a friend who's more naturally inclined to treat her obligations/responsibilities more casually (a P). My guess is that it would be all but impossible for you to treat a friend the way your friend treated you that day (you'd feel really guilty!), and that the difference really comes down to classic Conscientiousness (the Big Five term for a J preference). I know you've seen this, but for the benefit of other readers of this post, here's how the leading Big Five psychologists describe Dutifulness (one of the six facets of Conscientiousness):

In one sense, conscientiousness means "governed by conscience," and that aspect of C is assessed as Dutifulness. High scorers on this scale adhere strictly to their ethical principles and scrupulously fulfill their moral obligations. Low scorers are more casual about such matters and may be somewhat undependable or unreliable.​

And on your S/N comments, and as I noted earlier in this post, it really doesn't make to be giving yourself S points for your love of variety and trying new things — including when those things are physical things (like foods). If anything, that's more of an N indicator.

Another reason why I probably doubt being INFP so much, us my INFP cousine.

She's INFP, but we're so different. Actually it was first "her" who introduced me to mbti world. & in my first mbti test, I got ISTP & at that time I read the discription & it matched.

(But a few months after that, I took another test & got INTP & it sorta didn't match.).

Then I started searching for my true type!!!

It's mostly our differences that makes me think I'm probably not INFP.

For example ;

â– 1)She's more judgemental & two faced than I am.

If two ppl (relatives) are fighting, she's alot more likely to take sides & involve herself, judge them & try to be two faced/gossipy etc.

I might care, but I don't get involved (unless it's inside my own family), & I try to watch it & not get sides.& I usually keep my judgements to myself.

â– 2)she's into the meanings, literature, opera, theater, books, novels, theories, philosophy, poems reading, ppl, etc. She loves reading.

I'm mostly into adventures, nature, fashion, trying new things, new food, or at least looking at food pictures, cooking new dishes, painting, handicraft, movies, gym, gardening, etc.

While I can be creative in some of these areas (specially for the sakes of competition, being perfect, etc), I don't really actively seek to have hobbies/interests in those areas!

(example; I might write poems/novels(short stories)..for the sakes of knowing that I CAN if I want to, or for competition, being known as tallentef, or just for similar reasons like testing my creativity, but I'm not "generally" into poems/novels/books/reading. ...

I get ADD/ADHD every time I try to read a book!!!

I used to read scientific books (specially about astronomy & planets) in childhood. They were the sorts of books that were full of pictures & illustrations & explained everything only in one short paragraph or two. (Kid's encyclopedia)

â– 3)I'm into fashion & "creating/making".

She's not. While she can really enjoy clothes shopping (which I kinda hate), she doesn't really care about making/creating or wearing something different or looking original.

---

& when It comes to food, I care about variety, appearance, taste, exoticness, being new/different, adventurous, cultures, etc. I actually research about food alot!

She doesn't really like trying new food.

She just eats for the sakes of eating & mot getting hungry.

& she doesn't care about variety or appearance of food.

â– 4)she's really bossy. When we're in a group, she thinks she has the right to boss ppl down. & if you don't listen to her she gets angry & even more controlling (while she might seem relaxed at first). & she can be very rude.

I neither like to be a boss, nor a follower. I'm a delta type. If the boss is useful or reasonable (if he deserves being a boss), I'm loyal & I try to impress.

Otherwise, I'm not gonna be in that group.

â– 5)She's more traditional than me. She believes in patriarchy & family hierarchy & accepts them without questioning them.

She thinks we should respect our older relatives (specially males) without any reason. & then she respects her old relatives more than "outsiders".

We should deal with abusive parents, & obbey them, without defending ourselves or questioning it.

We should have our parents religion & believe in it (without questioning it or changing it)

Well, I deffo DON'T!!!!!!!!

â– 6) but she's very relaxed about changes of plans (in the last moment), or ppl not being responsible.

& I plan more than she does.

â– 7)aesthetics are less important to her.

You can take her to a dessert with no beauty & nothing to do, but she can still be happy about being with relatives, talking/debating or grabbing a book & relaxing.
...
I get bored in these situations. For me, the place needs to be beautiful, modern & full of adventures & thrills, & new things.

I love my family (esp very few of them), but I also care very much about aesthetics & being active.

â– 8) she believes in traditional roles (like of men & women) alot more than me. (Women should be this/that way, men should be this/that way, etc.) Or this is only for men/women, etc.

While I think there should be no "traditional view"! There should be balance.

& in relationship men & women should help eachother & be like friends.
______________________________________

What do you think?

Can two INFPs be thaaaat different?

Those descriptions make me a little more inclined to doubt your cousin's INFP typing than yours. To address a few of your comments...

An INFP isn't more likely than an ISFP (or INFJ) to be "two-faced" and "gossipy."

An INFP's interests in creativity and the arts can revolve around all different kinds of creation/design/etc. and all different kinds of arts, and won't necessarily make them avid readers — and I'd say that's quite a lot more true today than it was 50 years ago.

A childhood interest in scientific books is quintessentially IN. INT even more than INF, but hardly uncharacteristic of INF (and more characteristic of INF than ISF).

And your interest in variety and adventures makes you sound more NP than your cousin.

E and J are the preferences that are most associated with bossiness (with EFJs tending to be more diplomatic than ETJs). So if I assume you and your cousin are both introverts, then the fact that she's bossier potentially points to you being more of a P than her (although if she's closer to the borderline on E/I, that could also be a factor). And her rudeness makes it sound like she might be more T-ish than you, at least in that department.

And the fact that she's more of a believer in traditional roles, and respecting hierarchy (even when the higher-ups are wrong) makes you sound like more of an NP than her. All other things being equal, SJs tend to be the most traditional, hierarchy-respecting types, and NPs are at the other end of that particular spectrum.

To recycle a couple bits from earlier in this thread on E/I, T/F and sociability:

Another complicating factor when it comes to sociability is that both E/I and T/F have a significant impact, on average and all other things being equal, on somebody's propensity to engage in social activity, with EFs being the most social, ITs the least, and ETs and IFs in between. (And as long as I'm rambling, I'd say male/female and S/N can also, each in its own way, have some influence on someone's social propensities, with the result that I'd be inclined to peg female ESFs as the likeliest social butterflies and male INTs — like me — as the likeliest MBTI candidates for hermithood.)​

IFs are introverts, and that means they'll tend to favor social interaction that involves what's often referred to as their "inner circle," but it's not at all uncommon for IFs — and this is more true during their school years than later in life — to end up having a regular gang (or two) who they spend a lot of their free time hanging out with. And it's always important to keep in mind that, in general, the differences between introverts and extraverts tend to be substantially more pronounced when they're dealing with strangers or not-too-close acquaintances than when they're dealing with their family, friends and familiar classmates.​

And here's you (from one of your PerC posts)...

I'm shy & have anxiety which makes me a kinda serious, boring & reserved person around some ppl/groups I get bad vibes from & feel uncomfy around.

I'm probably not like them. I hate being alone 90% of times, & I love being with ppl I'm comfortable with (they could be strangers or ppl I know well & I'm close to). I love being around warm, active & talkative & exciting ppl (who I'm kinda sure are not going to hurt me, cause drama, or gossip behind my back, or bully me) & It gives me energy & happiness!

As among EFs, IFs, ETs and ITs, that combination of shyness/awkwardness with people you're not close to and a strong preference to be with people you're comfortable hanging around with (rather than being alone) — "I hate being alone 90% of times" — is a significantly better fit for IF than the other three.

You've also noted (at PerC) that you like to "think about weird paranormal theories, like why we live, what happens after we die, 4th dimension, & other creatures that might exist, astral projection, suicide, etc."

And as you probably remember from the second post in my Inis Mona type-me analysis, I think NFPs are the types most prone to have a strong interest in that kind of stuff, but INFJs and INTPs are probably the runners-up.

 

[Ellyn]

Thanks for all of these.
So based on these posts, would you type me INFP? Or INFJ?

 

[reckful]

Thanks for all of these.
So based on these posts, would you type me INFP? Or INFJ?

I'd read those posts (except the ones you hadn't made yet) before I made my August 3rd posts, and I'm still where I was. Mixed signals on J/P, but with a mild J lean.

But don't forget I also think it's possible there may be a not-that-tiny group for whom "x" might really be the most appropriate designation.

And I know you really, really, really want to feel like you've found the answer — and as you know, I think that gets you INF points (along with the Enneagram 4 points).

 

[INTJMom]

[MENTION=18736]reckful[/MENTION]
Wow! That's a lot of work! Bravo!

 

[Ellyn]

[MENTION=18736]reckful[/MENTION]
Wow! That's a lot of work! Bravo!

Yeah, indeed!!! thanks to him!!!

 

[miya]

Yeah, indeed!!! thanks to him!!!

Hello, Ellyn! Little late but I just have to comment! I read the thread, ok, not entirely, but I've got surprised how much I saw myself reading your description.
It takes me months to figure out my type, I finally came to the conclusion I'm an ISFP!
Unhappily, tests are not reliable at all as answers depend so much on the situations... i lost count of how many tests I did, 90% resulting INFJ but I'm not an INFJ and never felt convinced, so I decided to read and learn more about MBTI theories and I'm just loving!! <3
To give you an idea, I asked some close friends how they see me and their answer was I "looked" like a T person (and I'm 100% a Feeler!)
Even thought Reckful gave so many incredible explanations (really impressed, just add this thread to my bookmarks!), I just want to give my 2 cents (cos I'm really a novice in MBTI!!). I don't want to confuse you!! But I think it's important to find on your own what's the type you most recognize not only because there're lots of nuances, but I believe this can bring a better knowledge of yourself and lead to developing for a better version of you as well! <3

"
These are some important points to keep in mind:

• Make a clear distinction between cognition versus behavior. Cognition is how a person mentally processes information; behavior refers to the actions that others can observe or measure. Type analysis uses behavior to infer cognition and cognition is most important.
• Type describes a person’s cognitive processes: how they see the world, what they value in life, and how they go about making decisions. A person’s cognitive processes motivate them to behave in certain ways. To type someone accurately, do not take a single or random behavior at face value, rather, look for consistent patterns in behavior that inform you about the underlying cognitive processes.
• There are factors other than personality that can influence a person’s behavior, such as: past learning, life experiences, accumulated skills, genetic predispositions, environmental pressure, situational stress, mental illness, etc. Account for extraneous factors so that you do not misattribute behaviors to personality when the cause was something else. In other words, type does not explain all behaviors, so ask yourself whether you have identified the true cause of the behavior." From: Type Spotting Guide - Type Theory

I've been learning a lot from this site Type Theory It opened my mind for so many stereotypes about types!
Hope you can enjoy spending some good days reading all theory explanation there!
And sorry my broken english, it's not my first language! ;]

 

[kittenke]

[MENTION=18736]reckful[/MENTION]

MBTI J/P is a hopeless mess of mix of mechanisms where general psychology explains things much much better.

Just randomly two comments on the whole J/P post stuff


"By contrast, why would a J with a temperamental tendency to be on time want to willfully adjust their attitudes and practices to be habitually late?"

Not willfully but due to depression, for example.

"Let's say you've got a bunch of stuff that you're responsible for getting done next week, and you think it might be more than a week's worth of stuff. And let's say it's not really your fault that you're in that position. Are you more the type to, if anything, err on the side of letting your responsibilities weigh too heavily on you, and worry and maybe lose sleep about being "out of control" in that scenario even though you know worrying doesn't do any good? And in any case, under those circumstances, are you likely to pretty much spend every waking hour tending to your responsibilities? Or are you more the type to, if anything, err on the side of taking your responsibilities a little too lightly, and have an attitude more like my ENFP friend — hey, I'm only human, and I'm going to work reasonably hard this week, and if I end up missing a deadline, it won't be the end of the world? For that matter, might we even find you scheduling some play time for yourself at some point that week, despite the risk that it'll increase the amount that you don't get done on time?"

How about, you schedule the play time because otherwise you'd die from too much discomfort (due to depression)?

Look up the concept of adaptive vs maladaptive procrastination.

 

[Jaguar]

"By contrast, why would a J with a temperamental tendency to be on time want to willfully adjust their attitudes and practices to be habitually late?"

I enjoy competing against myself to see if I can walk in the door with only 30 seconds to spare. Getting somewhere early is definitely not a challenge.

 

[typologyenthusiast]

An ISFP