Asperger's Syndrome and MBTI type.

[Pionart]

I have to wonder about why Ni will only consider possible doom, because that is something inferior Ne would do. And as you clearly explain later, that function 3 & 4 are the shadow functions. If the shadow functions are negative, then wouldn't it make sense that function 1 & 2 are positive and thus Ni-Dom/Aux would be positive and not just thinking doom and gloom?





I'm asking, because I considered being ISTJ based on that doom and gloom, which I then read up on happens to be associated with inferior Ne examples of ISFJ and ISTJ quickly imagining the worst possible outcomes in a new scenario, either people or objective, respectively.

I know a Ni-dom that definitely has feelings of "this bad thing is going to happen", like say they knew they were going to be fired from their job, and soon enough it happens.

I'm an ISTJ and I often get panicky about things that could happen, or could have already happened but I don't know about yet. But it's usually not at all accurate like a Ni-dom's prediction would be, it's just going all worst-case-scenario.

So I would think the position of a function would determine how accurate its prediction is? But I have read that the lower functions do have a negative sort of character. I don't know enough about it really.

 

[á´…eparted]

Just give Ni-doms some MDMA and happy pills and the result will be this. Blissful doom!

 

[Researcher]

I could not disagree more that Fe users are illogical. That is a baseless stereotype. Any type can be logical or illogical.

baseless? Fe is defined as illogical, the definition is the base. (Although a real human will not always fit the model, the Fe-type definition is exact)

If you do not believe in the definitions of the typing system, then how can you even talk about this system ? What are you doing here?

This shows you do not trust/understand typing at all.

To discriminate and categorize human behaviour IS stereotyping/archetyping. If you don't like to do that, you are on the wrong forum.

 

[Researcher]

Yes definitely, if said Ti user is a Vulcan.

You mean a Vulcan of Star Trek? Yes that is EXACTLY what Ti is. Its a stereotypical human with maximum Ti. These Vulcans also have second function Ne, because they are kind of weird and alien and abstract. So its a stereotypical INTP.

Please note that such Ti-Vulcan's are leaving a helpful-trail like an Fe! Their Ti-intent has an unintended Fe-shadow-effect. They do not have Fe, it's just that the act of Ti can be misinterpreted as Fe.

 

[Researcher]

To me, it doesn't seem rational or logical to put your life in a clear risk for the sake of another unless their life clearly and objectively outweighs yours. When it comes to strangers, there is no way to divine what their worth is, so I do not see worth putting yourself in explicit risk of causing two people to die instead of one.
.....

But yes, I am selfish in the sense that if I see that I am about to die, but if I save myself another person will die, I will save myself.

...

Financial gain. I am not spiritual and do not care about that. This has no bearing on type at all though.

If I take everything you say as the truth, this is the simple answer:

You are logically-selfish (nothing wrong with that). You are a Ti-user. (probably INTP).

You are not an ENFJ for sure. ENFJ's are very spiritual, they will never say financial gain. Also their Ni will avoid the possibility of negative stereotype being attached to them if they would say "financial gain" (They are like smart social snakes keeping things discrete, even if they actually wanted financial gain, they would never say it for fear of being seen as a bad person).
Also the fact that you write quite a lot is a sign you do not have Ni like an ENFJ, you are simply not discrete enough to have Ni.

But we were not talking about Ni, we were talking about the fact whether you were Fe or Ti as first function.
If you had Fe you would be willing to sacrifice yourself. An Fe roughly operates as a collective, not as an individual. Fe goes down with the ship, trying to keep it up even if its illogical from an individual/selfish perspective. Ti abandons the ship to save himself. You fall in the last category. (Nothing wrong with that).

 

[Researcher]

I have to wonder about why Ni will only consider possible doom, because that is something inferior Ne would do. And as you clearly explain later, that function 3 & 4 are the shadow functions. If the shadow functions are negative, then wouldn't it make sense that function 1 & 2 are positive and thus Ni-Dom/Aux would be positive and not just thinking doom and gloom?

Inferior Ne? Inferior Ne = 3rd/4th function Ne = shadow of 1st/2nd function Si. So you are talking about Si.
So you think that Si considers possible doom. But Si cannot see so far. Si only sees actual problems (you could call it "actual doom", but "actual doom" would be just smaller daily problems than ultimate destruction). Si looks closer, more the actual, more the details. Real doom is too far and too blurry for an Si. Only the Ni has its perceptual lens exactly tuned for far-far-far-away ultimate doom.

 

[Researcher]

While routine may be paramount for many aspies in their everyday lives, they do in fact perceive and understand other people's emotions well (cognitive empathy), but have trouble responding appropriately to them (affective empathy). Also the shitload of artists with the condition (Stanley Kubrick, David Byrne, Gary Numan, to name a few) speaks volumes about their capacity for imagination.

The understanding of emotions is perception, its Ne insight.

The very social and helpful ESFJs for example have totally no insight into others, they just blindly help:.
- Ne understands/perceives/has-insight-into the other, but it does not act upon it. (e.g. have trouble responding, trouble with affective empathy, as you said). Ne is perception only it doesn't act.
- Fe acts upon it / responds to it, but doesn't understand/perceive/have-insight into the other at all. Fe is judgement only, it cannot perceive.

And obviously Ne is imagination.

And obviously Ti is for the whole logical routine thing.

So stereotypical asperger is just stereotypical INTP

 

[chubber]

Inferior Ne? Inferior Ne = 3rd/4th function Ne = shadow of 1st/2nd function Si. So you are talking about Si.
So you think that Si considers possible doom. But Si cannot see so far. Si only sees actual problems (you could call it "actual doom", but "actual doom" would be just smaller daily problems than ultimate destruction). Si looks closer, more the actual, more the details. Real doom is too far and too blurry for an Si. Only the Ni has its perceptual lens exactly tuned for far-far-far-away ultimate doom.

I was actually referring to the inferior Ne of the ISxJ.

Catastrophizing

Whereas effective dominant Extraverted Intuitive types thrive on the exciting possibilities the future will bring, Introverted Sensing types in the grip of inferior Extraverted Intuition anticipate the future with fear and trembling. As their descent into the grip proceeds, they become ever more negative, less willing to tolerate the unfamiliar, and more wildly imaginative about disastrous outcomes. One ISFJ described this as “awfulizing.”

This is why I thought that Ne-Dominant is seen as positive where as Ne-Inferior as negative.

Which is why I questioned your original statement about Ni-Dominant predicting doom and gloom, which in my view would be negative. I would like to update my understanding, since I seem to be confused between the two.

Example, if Ni-Dominant is negative, would Ni-Inferior then be positive? (I don't see that happening for ISFPs where Ni is Tertiary, unless maybe they are real ESFJs)



edit: Or do you mean that when Ni-Dominant is in the grip of their inferior Se?

Dealing with details, especially in an unfamiliar environment, can trigger inferior Extraverted Sensing in Introverted Intuitive types. In fact, these types frequently mention that feeling overwhelmed by details often provokes characteristic inferior function reactions. Unexpected events that interrupt planned activities can also unsettle INTJs and INFJs enough to arouse their inferior function. One INFJ said that “sometimes it can be something like having to get from the airport to a hotel. It can happen if I’m driving a rental car in a foreign city, and even if I’m in my own country.”

 

[prplchknz]

Many forget, but Asperger's is not a personality disorder, is a neurological condition! They can be of any type, although they tend to introversion and have difficulty with the Fe (As to understand social rules, not empathy itself).

I completely missed this earlier. Yup. [MENTION=23846]Researcher[/MENTION] I think you're being too bias about [MENTION=20829]Hard[/MENTION]'s type. it seems as though after he said he was on the spectrum you immediatly started insisted he was an INxx type, which is fallacious as you do not have enough info from one thread to accurately type him. Also I am very weary of online typing the people I've typed in real life (which has only been about a handful but 100% correct) if I had typed them based off what they share online I would've been way off.

 

[robowolf]

You mean a Vulcan of Star Trek? Yes that is EXACTLY what Ti is. Its a stereotypical human with maximum Ti. These Vulcans also have second function Ne, because they are kind of weird and alien and abstract. So its a stereotypical INTP.

I agree that Vulcans are Ti-Ne, but they're not stereotypical INTPs. INTPs are Ti-Ne-Si-Fe, their feeling function is the last one and might be a bit underdeveloped but it's there. They're much more comfortable making logical decisions but they're still human.

 

[á´…eparted]

baseless? Fe is defined as illogical, the definition is the base. (Although a real human will not always fit the model, the Fe-type definition is exact)

If you do not believe in the definitions of the typing system, then how can you even talk about this system ? What are you doing here?

This shows you do not trust/understand typing at all.

To discriminate and categorize human behaviour IS stereotyping/archetyping. If you don't like to do that, you are on the wrong forum.

If I take everything you say as the truth, this is the simple answer:

You are logically-selfish (nothing wrong with that). You are a Ti-user. (probably INTP).

You are not an ENFJ for sure. ENFJ's are very spiritual, they will never say financial gain. Also their Ni will avoid the possibility of negative stereotype being attached to them if they would say "financial gain" (They are like smart social snakes keeping things discrete, even if they actually wanted financial gain, they would never say it for fear of being seen as a bad person).
Also the fact that you write quite a lot is a sign you do not have Ni like an ENFJ, you are simply not discrete enough to have Ni.

But we were not talking about Ni, we were talking about the fact whether you were Fe or Ti as first function.
If you had Fe you would be willing to sacrifice yourself. An Fe roughly operates as a collective, not as an individual. Fe goes down with the ship, trying to keep it up even if its illogical from an individual/selfish perspective. Ti abandons the ship to save himself. You fall in the last category. (Nothing wrong with that).

Wow, talk about pretentious and haughty.

I actually believe it is you who has a limited understanding of what the functions mean. In fact, I don't think very many (if anyone) here will find your view of the functions to be accurate or correct. Stereotypes have some basis, but they are exactly what they are, stereotypes. Not everyone is going to fit them, and to apply such rigid rules to functions break the system, as we're talking about something incredibly fluid and dynamic: personality.

I'll ask you a simple question: Do you believe that it is impossible for any atheist to be an ENFJ?

I'll be making another thread shortly to clear up my type for you.

 

[Researcher]

Wow, talk about pretentious and haughty.

I actually believe it is you who has a limited understanding of what the functions mean. In fact, I don't think very many (if anyone) here will find your view of the functions to be accurate or correct. Stereotypes have some basis, but they are exactly what they are, stereotypes. Not everyone is going to fit them, and to apply such rigid rules to functions break the system, as we're talking about something incredibly fluid and dynamic: personality.

I'll ask you a simple question: Do you believe that it is impossible for any atheist to be an ENFJ?

I'll be making another thread shortly to clear up my type for you.

Sorry, I did blurt out a lot, and I am unconventional and use a lot of non-consensus stuff, but I don't want to be pretentious.

I don't know you at all, I can't say things for sure through your text-only answers. I am just trying here. I don't mean harm.

And yes, an ENFJ can be an an atheist. In fact I know 2 such men of this scarce type (scarce for men according to statistics i read). I have a good friend ENFJ who is atheist, and an employee ENFJ who is atheist.

P.S. I did a built-in disclaimer when I said you are INTP, i started out with this humble sentence: "If I take everything you say as the truth", and only after that I followed-up to type you. (Its mostly about understanding each other truthfully first, and by this sentence I basically say that this has not been established yet, and I cannot know for sure, but that your answers taken at face-value pointed to INTP.)

 

[Nicodemus]

And yes, an ENFJ can be an an atheist. In fact I know 2 such men of this scarce type (scarce for men according to statistics i read). I have a good friend ENFJ who is atheist, and an employee ENFJ who is atheist.

I take it these statistics only cover US citizens. People in Europe, where Jung lived, generally are a lot less 'spiritual' and have outgrown it even more since Jung wrote his big book. Do you think your assumptions about ENFJs hold true outside the US, in Europe, for instance?

 

[Researcher]

I take it these statistics only cover US citizens. People in Europe, where Jung lived, generally are a lot less 'spiritual' and have outgrown it even more since Jung wrote his big book. Do you think your assumptions about ENFJs hold true outside the US, in Europe, for instance?

Are you trying to derail the subject? Haha, they have to blame you now, not me.

In California there is a lot of Ne (most new stuff comes from Cali, new inventions/movies/sports/whatever), as it attracted these types since the first Europeans came there. Ne helps to cross the ocean and reach the east coast, but you need even more Ne to imagine the West coast being the ultimate and leave your new East coast once you finally got there.
So Ne-users tend to ever-move to the next best thing, the thing coming up soon.

And Ne-users attract Ni-users. Because Ni-users are bored by the S-types, and only the Ne can break their ice. Ne-s are very shiny to Ni-users. Ni-s like to hide, but come out for Ne.

But Se-users follow in the Ne-users footsteps, and actually reap the profit/champagne/sun/food that the Ne never actually consumed, because the Ne goes out to the next thing. And Ni does not like the location anymore, because it slowly became all Se (their opposite, Ni-s don't like it), and they can't find the Ne-s anymore. Then when the Se-users have eaten it all, the Si-users remember it used to be a great place and still desperately try and keep it up.

So Si-users are still in the old towns of Europe. (And around 50% of the world's population is Si first or second function, did you know that?)

But any old town can become new potential, once the Ne-users see it in that light and go there. (A tax haven for example).

Of course this is just gross generalising, as in each new generation new types are born which differ from their parents. (although there might be a slight genetic filter to the types?)

 

[Nicodemus]

Are you trying to derail the subject? Haha, they have to blame you now, not me.

In California there is a lot of Ne (most new stuff comes from Cali, new inventions/movies/sports/whatever), as it attracted these types since the first Europeans came there. Ne helps to cross the ocean and reach the east coast, but you need even more Ne to imagine the West coast being the ultimate and leave your new East coast once you finally got there.
So Ne-users tend to ever-move to the next best thing, the thing coming up soon.

And Ne-users attract Ni-users. Because Ni-users are bored by the S-types, and only the Ne can break their ice. Ne-s are very shiny to Ni-users. Ni-s like to hide, but come out for Ne.

But Se-users follow in the Ne-users footsteps, and actually reap the profit/champagne/sun/food that the Ne never actually consumed, because the Ne goes out to the next thing. And Ni does not like the location anymore, because it slowly became all Se (their opposite, Ni-s don't like it), and they can't find the Ne-s anymore. Then when the Se-users have eaten it all, the Si-users remember it used to be a great place and still desperately try and keep it up.

So Si-users are still in the old towns of Europe. (And around 50% of the world's population is Si first or second function, did you know that?)

But any old town can become new potential, once the Ne-users see it in that light and go there. (A tax haven for example).

Of course this is just gross generalising, as in each new generation new types are born which differ from their parents. (although there might be a slight genetic filter to the types?)

Nice try.

But perhaps for someone as occupied with geography as you, a locally restricted theory of type is not such a bad thing.

 

[á´…eparted]

Sorry, I did blurt out a lot, and I am unconventional and use a lot of non-consensus stuff, but I don't want to be pretentious.

I don't know you at all, I can't say things for sure through your text-only answers. I am just trying here. I don't mean harm.

And yes, an ENFJ can be an an atheist. In fact I know 2 such men of this scarce type (scarce for men according to statistics i read). I have a good friend ENFJ who is atheist, and an employee ENFJ who is atheist.

P.S. I did a built-in disclaimer when I said you are INTP, i started out with this humble sentence: "If I take everything you say as the truth", and only after that I followed-up to type you. (Its mostly about understanding each other truthfully first, and by this sentence I basically say that this has not been established yet, and I cannot know for sure, but that your answers taken at face-value pointed to INTP.)

You'll really need to watch how you come across then or you'll run into a whole lot of trouble with people here. Typing others can very easily result in ruffled feathers if it's not done right. For example, saying that an ENFJ can not be logical is insulting. Granted, I don't take it as a personal insult, but it is still and insult and shouldn't be said. It's not even right either. Fe-doms might not be the best as using classic hard-logic in some individuals, but it's not impossible. Your presentation of the functions and types comes across as so polarizingly binary and simplistic that almost everyone is going to balk at it.

Ok then, so saying that an ENFJ can be an atheist (of which I am one), then stating (as you did previously) because I am not spiritual I can not be ENFJ is not valid. Religiosity has no bearing on type.

Edit: Sorry if this post comes across as acusatory or scolding. Not my intention!

 

[Coriolis]

I moved the latest interpersonal bickering to Off-Topic Posts. This isn't middle school. Please address such concerns elsewhere, and keep at least within spitting distance of the OP here.

 

[pureheart9]

Most of the aspies I've met have been INTP. Haven't met a single one who was INTJ.

 

[Pionart]

The only pattern I've noticed is that all the aspies I know happen to be N. But, with such a small sample size, that doesn't necessarily say much.

 

[Researcher]

I agree that Vulcans are Ti-Ne, but they're not stereotypical INTPs. INTPs are Ti-Ne-Si-Fe, their feeling function is the last one and might be a bit underdeveloped but it's there. They're much more comfortable making logical decisions but they're still human.

It has nothing to do with being human or not. Even a robot cannot be only Ti without showing Fe! (or Ne without showing Si)

You simply haven't heard of the shadow effect if you say something like that. (It's my duty to tell you, because it improves the world)

....Would you cry hard if I told you that your buddies at function 3&4 were merely shadows that don't actually exist?

THE PROFOUND THING IS:
It is physically impossible to do a Ti act without AT THE SAME TIME also do an Fe act. (This is deep philosophical Tao stuff!)

Real life example:
Lets say the logical robot/vulcan warns somebody upon that person's logical flaws (like he is Ti-ing the shit out of him ). The Vulcan/robot's intent is merely to correct faulty logic, it cares only about universally correct math/logic, it does not "care" about the other at all.
But what happens as a coincidence if you warn somebody for faulty logic??? >>>> YOU HELP THEM! >> you act like an Fe!!
Correcting logic (Ti-like) shows the same signal, as if you care for them (Fe-like)!

For a casual outside observer, who has never seen the Vulcan before, and just sees a quick shot of him, it will be impossible to determine: was he Fe-ing? was he Ti-ing? the observer won't know, all the observer sees is a double reflection on both sides of the Ti-Fe axis. That is, if he is a good observer, as a biased observer might only see it from one side. (A great example/metaphore about being biased: Think of that famous animated pic of a ballerina dancer's slihouette, turning left for some people, turning right for others, and only some really good observers can actually see the ballerina doing both, and even those good observers can alternate in both directions, but can never see both at the same time. You have to be quite a skilled observer to know that reality can hit you twice.).

We can only determine which side was the original intent, by following the Vulcan a bit longer. Actually we can never determine, we can only do statistics and until the chance that this guy is Ti is pretty big and the chance that he is Fe is pretty small, then we say : ok he's Ti. (but in real life its just calculated gambling)

The inside intent of a person is a black box, and remains so forever, we can only try to guess well by using statistics/chances, and the chances improve the longer you observe.