Mistyped TypeCentral Members

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

Enjoyed the video, and I concur with your analysis of the INTP and INTJ styles.

Had I been Dawkins in the video, I would have probably taken a much more aggressive stance and hammer in some ideologies being perfected now that suggest a cyclical universe over one that has a beginning, thus eradicating the whole concept of the beginning in the first place. Specifically, I would have honed in on Ben Stein's quote of "8 billion people" and put that in relation to his own question requiring specificity from Dawkins in the percentages and shown that Ben Stein's figure was, in fact, wrong, as well, just as a sort of treatise (Te attack, requiring objective statistical data?) to deflate the aggressive posture presented by Stein. The INTP method seems to be a bit more laid-back and a tad more open minded.

Imagine a Stein vs Hitchens (most likely INTJ) debate! I am unsure that they ever met or debated, but it would have been epic, to say the least.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

Alright, I'm going to go off topic a bit more, but [MENTION=20385]Alea_iacta_est[/MENTION], do you consider Obama ENTP? I've noticed he debates in a similar style. There were moments in '08 and '12 when both McCain and Romney appeared red in the face and flabbergasted during the Presidential debates. Whether or not you agree with his politics, it's very hard to deny that, when he's at the top of his game, Obama can be a devastating debater. It almost appears effortless, which only further enrages his opponents. I'd have loved to have seen him debate GWBush or any of the Kennedys. There should be a video game...Ultimate Debate Cagematch or something, where you can match up dream opponents, say, Teddy Roosevelt vs Gandhi, for instance.

 

[Red Herring]

Enjoyed the video, and I concur with your analysis of the INTP and INTJ styles.

Had I been Dawkins in the video, I would have probably taken a much more aggressive stance and hammer in some ideologies being perfected now that suggest a cyclical universe over one that has a beginning, thus eradicating the whole concept of the beginning in the first place. Specifically, I would have honed in on Ben Stein's quote of "8 billion people" and put that in relation to his own question requiring specificity from Dawkins in the percentages and shown that Ben Stein's figure was, in fact, wrong, as well, just as a sort of treatise (Te attack, requiring objective statistical data?) to deflate the aggressive posture presented by Stein. The INTP method seems to be a bit more laid-back and a tad more open minded.

To be fair, I found Stein's arguments/questions painfully poor and, in the shoes of Dawkins, would also have questioned both his numbers and his phrasing, i.e. "you are asking the wrong question/using a false premise/etc." Considering the aggressive image he has Dawkisn reacted very calmly and friendly to some pretty stupid questions.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

Alright, I'm going to go off topic a bit more, but [MENTION=20385]Alea_iacta_est[/MENTION], do you consider Obama ENTP? I've noticed he debates in a similar style. There were moments in '08 and '12 when both McCain and Romney appeared red in the face and flabbergasted during the Presidential debates. Whether or not you agree with his politics, it's very hard to deny that, when he's at the top of his game, Obama can be a devastating debater. It almost appears effortless, which only further enrages his opponents. I'd have loved to have seen him debate GWBush or any of the Kennedys. There should be a video game...Ultimate Debate Cagematch or something, where you can match up dream opponents, say, Teddy Roosevelt vs Gandhi, for instance.

I had initially typed him as ENxP, but I think he is more ENFP than ENTP, I have never seen him engage anything in a Ti, logical-principle, type of manner. I've seen him deal with issues regarding morality and ethics quite strongly however, though I can't seem to recall any specific speeches. I've seen him typed ENFJ as well however.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

To be fair, I found Stein's arguments/questions painfully poor and, in the shoes of Dawkins, would also have questioned both his numbers and his phrasing, i.e. "you are asking the wrong question/using a false premise/etc." Considering the aggressive image he has Dawkisn reacted very calmly and friendly to some pretty stupid questions.

I do think Dawkins had the edge, but compared to the shit you usually hear from the creationist side in debates, Stein did a better job than most would. I ultimately think that one's opinion of who won that debate is going to be influenced by their own personal opinions, no matter how impartial or objective they strive to be.

Creationists will watch it and see strengths in Stein's points.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

To be fair, I found Stein's arguments/questions painfully poor and, in the shoes of Dawkins, would also have questioned both his numbers and his phrasing, i.e. "you are asking the wrong question/using a false premise/etc." Considering the aggressive image he has Dawkisn reacted very calmly and friendly to some pretty stupid questions.

Stein's argument appeared to have arisen out of Fe, and if he is indeed an INTP, then it would illustrate his lack of strength in his key questions. Dawkins seemed to have been caught completely off-guard and attempting to mobilize his evidence that he didn't have prepared at the tip of his tongue.

 

[badatlife]

thank you everyone for replying to me (also the person who sent me a message through reputation, idk how to send one back ). yes I would love help

the thing is though I would appreciate it if I wasn't typed by cognitive function method. I don't know how true it is, I don't like it for personal reasons. for example, let's take the letters estp. these letters are meant to represent extroverted sensing thinking perceiving. that's the letters. if you are typed by cognitive functions as Se-Ti-Fe-Ni, then you are Se-Ti-Fe-Ni, but you can't be an estp if you don't fit the letters. and I would like to be assigned a type by letters, not a function model. that's the way myers wanted her letter types to be used anyway

so, I did start a thread before about how I was Ixxx. when I was little I was always quiet and calm and well behaved and didn't cause any trouble. I am told that I was talkative and outgoing in class by peers and might distract the group during projects (only by one teacher though), but I always hated attention and was shy. now I am only wild when we play games, like the werewolf game (gets me excited). so anyway, pretty much an introvert?
the rest of the letters are a mess; I think j/p are the hardest! I was j as a child but now I seem like a mix, maybe more p? can anyone relate?

 

[Red Herring]

Stein's argument appeared to have arisen out of Fe, and if he is indeed an INTP, then it would illustrate his lack of strength in his key questions. Dawkins seemed to have been caught completely off-guard and attempting to mobilize his evidence that he didn't have prepared at the tip of his tongue.

That's probably true. Citing evidence also isn't our strongest suit (due to the above mentioned differences between Te and Ti - our arguments tend to be based on internal coherence rather than on external evidence).

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

They make a case at celebritytypes for why they think Stein is an INTP who has masqueraded as something else. I don't always agree with that site, but I think they are right on the money with Stein, so if he appears to be Fe-driven in that debate, it could be the result of a very carefully crafted albeit artificial style he has been forging for years.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

Creationists will watch it and see strengths in Stein's points.

That's because Stein's argument appeals to Je and specifically Fe. Plus, I am willing to bet that majority of the religious are Fe-users and possibly SJs in general. Methinks that ESFJ would be the front runner in this case, though that would be a hasty generalization on my part due to a lack of evidence, so it is speculation.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

thank you everyone for replying to me (also the person who sent me a message through reputation, idk how to send one back ). yes I would love help

the thing is though I would appreciate it if I wasn't typed by cognitive function method. I don't know how true it is, I don't like it for personal reasons. for example, let's take the letters estp. these letters are meant to represent extroverted sensing thinking perceiving. that's the letters. if you are typed by cognitive functions as Se-Ti-Fe-Ni, then you are Se-Ti-Fe-Ni, but you can't be an estp if you don't fit the letters. and I would like to be assigned a type by letters, not a function model. that's the way myers wanted her letter types to be used anyway

so, I did start a thread before about how I was Ixxx. when I was little I was always quiet and calm and well behaved and didn't cause any trouble. I am told that I was talkative and outgoing in class by peers and might distract the group during projects (only by one teacher though), but I always hated attention and was shy. now I am only wild when we play games, like the werewolf game (gets me excited). so anyway, pretty much an introvert?
the rest of the letters are a mess; I think j/p are the hardest! I was j as a child but now I seem like a mix, maybe more p? can anyone relate?

Alternative method: MBTI Dichotomy. Standard J vs P, F vs T, E vs I, N vs S. That or, you can go muck about in Socionics and then attempt to correlate a type with MBTI, but that's a much more complicated system with more complicated function descriptions.

Typing in JCF requires a substantial amount of self-awareness (understatement), so I can see why you wish to take a more traditional route, but I must add that MBTI Dichotomy seems to be a breed of Astrology compared to JCF.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

thank you everyone for replying to me (also the person who sent me a message through reputation, idk how to send one back ). yes I would love help

the thing is though I would appreciate it if I wasn't typed by cognitive function method. I don't know how true it is, I don't like it for personal reasons. for example, let's take the letters estp. these letters are meant to represent extroverted sensing thinking perceiving. that's the letters. if you are typed by cognitive functions as Se-Ti-Fe-Ni, then you are Se-Ti-Fe-Ni, but you can't be an estp if you don't fit the letters. and I would like to be assigned a type by letters, not a function model. that's the way myers wanted her letter types to be used anyway

so, I did start a thread before about how I was Ixxx. when I was little I was always quiet and calm and well behaved and didn't cause any trouble. I am told that I was talkative and outgoing in class by peers and might distract the group during projects (only by one teacher though), but I always hated attention and was shy. now I am only wild when we play games, like the werewolf game (gets me excited). so anyway, pretty much an introvert?
the rest of the letters are a mess; I think j/p are the hardest! I was j as a child but now I seem like a mix, maybe more p? can anyone relate?

If you are turned off by the function theory, perhaps you could try a Keirsey based test... Keirsey's system, although it works with the same 16 types and 4 letter dichotomy codes, was based not on function theory but on typing people based largely on what could be observed in their behavior and personalities.

It's a system a lot of people tend to look down on in the typology community, but I think it has its merits and uses, if for no other reason than it can be the easiest way to pinpoint one's basic temperament.

 

[badatlife]

Alternative method: MBTI Dichotomy. Standard J vs P, F vs T, E vs I, N vs S. That or, you can go muck about in Socionics and then attempt to correlate a type with MBTI, but that's a much more complicated system with more complicated function descriptions.

Typing in JCF requires a substantial amount of self-awareness (understatement), so I can see why you wish to take a more traditional route, but I must add that MBTI Dichotomy seems to be a breed of Astrology compared to JCF.

yup, definitely the standard dichotomy for me! I just don't like the cognitive functions, and I have less than 0 self awareness (I blame it on enneagram + age)

so, I was like a j when younger and a p now. like, before I would always plan everything, pack my bag for school the night before, practice things, study, not procrastinate. now I procrastinate, do things at the last minute, wait until the deadline, and am usually relaxed. could it be that I was always a p and just acted as a j because of pressure or something? I still use an agenda though for like school, but who doesn't?
oh I was always a flexible and adaptable person though, I would say

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

Alternative method: MBTI Dichotomy. Standard J vs P, F vs T, E vs I, N vs S. That or, you can go muck about in Socionics and then attempt to correlate a type with MBTI, but that's a much more complicated system with more complicated function descriptions.

Typing in JCF requires a substantial amount of self-awareness (understatement), so I can see why you wish to take a more traditional route, but I must add that MBTI Dichotomy seems to be a breed of Astrology compared to JCF.

For many people, the dichotomy route is more than enough. I'm not saying it should be preferred or that it is better, but Jung isn't for everyone.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

yup, definitely the standard dichotomy for me! I just don't like the cognitive functions, and I have less than 0 self awareness (I blame it on enneagram + age)

To maintain reputation among the JCF community, take this test. It'll provide a bit more accuracy (it still uses the functions, but it'll tell you your type).

 

[badatlife]

To maintain reputation among the JCF community, take this test. It'll provide a bit more accuracy (it still uses the functions, but it'll tell you your type).

I can't. I already know what the answers to it mean like confirmation bias

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

I can't. I already know what the answers to it mean like confirmation bias

Well its going to be worse by tenfold for simple (and wrong) questions that go "Do you base your decisions on logic or feelings" with regular dichotomy based testing. There's no escaping the Forer Effect now.

 

[badatlife]

Well its going to be worse by tenfold for simple (and wrong) questions that go "Do you base your decisions on logic or feelings" with regular dichotomy based testing. There's no escaping the Forer Effect now.

yup, that's why I came here, I need to talk with someone and kind of spill all of my doubts out so we can decide, "ok this does not make you a j" or "oh, everyone does that". or even examples/scenarios I guess. just like to confirm if the way I acted when I was little doesn't necessarily make me a j, or even if the way I act now doesn't necessarily make me a p, you know? but I would like to find my type because of self discovery, and I kind of have none right now which is why I'm so confused. and look... I'm both indecisive and in a rush for closure (or I could also subconsciously not want to be boxed in )! haha, doubts like that happen...

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

Alright. I'll start with an opening bid on [MENTION=20906]badatlife[/MENTION]'s type as INFP. Based purely on my subconscious association (child archetype) to my relief function that is being projected onto him at this present moment and the fact that I initially typed him as an INxP (specifically INTP).

 

[Glycerine]

Lol...dude, come on, I cannot hold a candle to an actual ENFJ. Too bad you never actually met [MENTION=1456]Domino[/MENTION], but just comparing me to [MENTION=5109]Glycerine[/MENTION] should do the trick, tbh.

Tertiary Ti temptation for the win

No... I am a younger, less evolved eNFJ...