Are you just going by overall vibe or do you sincerely think I seem like an Fi dominant with inferior Te?
No, because you aren't 'predictably stable' in the slightest.
People who call you an ISFx I think see you as being simple-minded and emotionally volatile.
Frankly, you can come across that way (and I can come across similarly to people as well, except for the emotions part in substitute for reasoning).
My grandma is supposedly an ISFJ, and she gets really freaked out by things that are unexpected and just seem too dang strange.
You, on the other hand, are (in my opinion) one of the most mentally bright individuals I know, not so much in a rationalistic sense, but more in your intense focus on the creation.
That being said, I just don't think ISFJ works, and even if it has vague fittings for you here and there, it has way too many boundaries that you break.
This post screams Ne to me.
You mean the part that goes, "and I don't believe I'm SFJ, so there you have it"?
Which type holds that belief is more important that facts and reason?
I used to think green was INFJ, but the information here in this thread is making INFP seem like the better option.
That's not what I meant. I meant by "there you have it" that it follows that I believe I'm NTP, not that I'm right.
Quick question: does anyone see Te in any of my posts? If I am INFP it should probably be there.
Quick judgments would be my best guess. She has received lots of input from various members of the forum, but is very slow to adapt her opinions accordingly.
It took me a very long time to arrive at my current typing though, since I questioned so many people about it, so I guess there's pros and cons both ways.
That's not what I meant. I meant by "there you have it" that it follows that I believe I'm NTP, not that I'm right.
Quick question: does anyone see Te in any of my posts? If I am INFP it should probably be there.
And what makes you think I am using a different process than yours? Have I not obsessively examined my type for the past year I have been on here? I had done the same thing for months before even joining. If that looks like a quick judgment, there's something wrong with your thinking.Quick judgments would be my best guess. She has received lots of input from various members of the forum, but is very slow to adapt her opinions accordingly.
It took me a very long time to arrive at my current typing though, since I questioned so many people about it, so I guess there's pros and cons both ways.
What I am trying to do is figure out where I am going wrong in my reasoning if I am wrong. I have a certain opinion, but I want to make sure it's correct by examining all the things it is based on. When people pose different suggestions I want to examine whether they are correct by picking it apart.Why don't you stop asking people what you are, when you've already decided what you are anyway?
From watching this unfold over and over, nothing anyone says is going to change what you already want to believe about yourself.
Why keep asking? What purpose is this serving? And why are you seemingly confused about your type if you seem so sure about your type (and what it's not) when someone makes a suggestion? At some point, you'd figure it out and just stop asking for affirmation.
My thoughts are as follows:
Talking to you and reading your posts is not like talking to / reading about any other NTPs I know and talk to. (And it's not because you're some kind of amazing, new, unique snowflake NTP.)
You simply don't structure your arguments in the ways that NTPs do, even when it's being done very informally. I might disagree with other NTPs on certain topics, but it's never because I think they're being irrational -- it's because the assumptions and info is different. I totally get where they are going and I can even predict the argument they will be making, because it follows from the initial data they accept.
When I argue a point with you, I feel like I'm trying to pick my way through a bowl of goulash. You try to talk the talk and use the right vocabulary, but the ideas are not balanced in nuance with each other, no actual argument is really being built. It's just assorted details jumbled around in a bowl based on how they feel to you at the time or based on how you want to view yourself. That is my impression. It all makes sense to you, but won't make sense to someone who is not you. That's not Ti.
Te also rebutts points without looking at a bigger conceptual picture. I scan a lot of your most recent posts as some version of Te, just filtered through other functions.
I see a problem with this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individuation#Carl_Jung
Short lesson in typology: When typing someone you have to look at all four function comparisons.
Short lesson in MY typology: when typing someone, look at everything possible and from every aspect. Don't limit yourself to one system.
Shouldn't everything be consistent within every system you are using?
When I argue a point with you, I feel like I'm trying to pick my way through a bowl of goulash. You try to talk the talk and use the right vocabulary, but the ideas are not balanced in nuance with each other, no actual argument is really being built. It's just assorted details jumbled around in a bowl based on how they feel to you at the time or based on how you want to view yourself. That is my impression. It all makes sense to you, but won't make sense to someone who is not you. That's not Ti.