Dichotomically close call

[Ezra]

The problem with the way in which we test using MBTI is that it doesn't quite work when connecting your 'letters' to your actual type. Consider the following scenario:

You are an ISFx. You normally score as ISFP, but recently, J has become more evident. So what does this mean, you suddenly go from having Fi and Se to having Si and Fe as dominant and auxiliary functions respectively? It means your whole psychological makeup changes, just because of the way in which you're scoring? Of course not. This is why, as Splittet often professes, typing by functions is far more effective. It makes much more sense, and is so much more logically consistent.

 

[Maverick]

The problem with the way in which we test using MBTI is that it doesn't quite work when connecting your 'letters' to your actual type. Consider the following scenario:

You are an ISFx. You normally score as ISFP, but recently, J has become more evident. So what does this mean, you suddenly go from having Fi and Se to having Si and Fe as dominant and auxiliary functions respectively? It means your whole psychological makeup changes, just because of the way in which you're scoring? Of course not. This is why, as Splittet often professes, typing by functions is far more effective. It makes much more sense, and is so much more logically consistent.

No. The official MBTI test is better. Just take several measures.

Function typing is prone to more biases.

 

[OctaviaCaesar]

I know that as we age, we integrate our preferred and non-preferred functions in our consciousness. I don't think this changes a person's original preference, it simply "rounds him out," so to speak.

 

[Grayscale]

speaking from experience, i have found the testing and type descriptions to be largely subject to interpretation. since there is no "right" answer except to correctly match yourself to one of the answers, how you answer depends on not only how realistic you are with yourself, but more importantly your conceptual understanding of the question and the answers.

when looking at cognitive functions, it was extremely easy for me to identify my primary function, as well as two modes of thinking i have in terms of secondary and tertiary functions (Se w/ Ni and Ne w/ Si). Unsurprisingly these correlated to two type descriptions that i was relatively split between due to testing both ways and identifying with parts from both descriptions.

 

[ThatsWhatHeSaid]

I was thinking about this recently. There might be something about having a high preference for closure (J) that causes one to internalize their intuition (Ni) or sens...ation (Si) and externalize their decision-making functions (Te/Fe). If that's the case, then yes, you would expect a reorganization of function-preference. I can see it happening. Why not? Personality isn't that stable anyway, imo.

 

[cascadeco]

I've thought about this at times, when it comes to my own personality. In my early 20's, I would test as INTJ and even recognized much of myself in the INTJ descriptions - at that time. Now? Not at all. (however, there was also a lot about the theory that I did not understand back then, and this included F stereotypes, and my taking the test thinking that there was no way I could be an F; but, as a child, there was almost zilch NT temperament to my personality - so perhaps I was just in my Ti phase in my early 20's).

Because much of my life to date has been internal, it's highly possible I've done so much thinking/reflecting/philosophizing/etc that I've consciously switched some of my functions and rejected others, based on life experiences that have come my way. I've thought about this. I do think that a lot is possible when it comes to re-ordering/rewiring your internal world and perceptions, if you so desire it.

And to me, if over time someone does 'balance out' many of their functions, and their personality becomes less extreme, then can't they, for all intents and purposes, 'be' a different personality at that point?? I mean, they're certainly different from where they started. I guess it depends on how one wants to use mbti theory, or how one views it. If one is using the theory in an attempt to predict behavior and look for overall patterns, then if a person has evolved over time, far enough from where they started, so that both others as well as themselves view themselves in a new light...then in effect could they 'be' a new personality? (in terms of the 16 types - obviously they're still the same living being) Maybe. I mean, say someone's starting point is INTJ. By the time they're 60, they may have shed so many of the typical INTJ traits, and brought in many other traits to complement their 'baseline', that in effect, are they still an INTJ? What if when they're 60, they read the INTJ description and it's meaningless to them because they don't even behave like that anymore, or have broadened their functions so much that the description (and even theory?) is worthless?

Oh, but I know most of the other arguments about this, that one is always the same personality, that never changes, under stress the 'true'/more instinctual traits will come out..etc...people tend to balance and mature over time, and an INTJ at 60 is going to still have a distinctively different flavor than an ESFJ at 60...which is true. Sorry, I think I'm wasting everyones' time here.

I'm just musing. There are definitely many other ways of looking at it. These are just some of the weird thoughts I have. ;-) Basically, I view the human personality as flowing and evolving over time. I guess too it depends on how one as an individual views themselves. Many might not even desire to 'grow' or balance themselves out, in which case they'll stay pretty constant. Some might view building up ones' strengths as the most effective method of reaching their potential, which would also mean they wouldn't suddenly 'morph' into another type; others might view working on lesser traits as the more effective goal, and that's where the personality type might become murkier.

I go back and forth quite a bit on the usefulness and validity of many of these personality theories, but it's definitely interesting stuff.

P.S. I completely understand if no one can follow what I am saying!

 

[Lateralus]

I agree with pretty much everything you've said.

 

[Nocapszy]

In light of his OP I'd like to invite Ezra into my club. It's a club of people who aren't stupid.

Thank goodness for someone other than dissonance and splittet finally fucking getting it.

 

[Mort Belfry]

I hate it when people say things like, "I'm an INTJ, but I'm quite P, maybe I'm an INTP sometimes." MBTI comes down to the eight functions, people aren't P'ish or J'ish, they just either have dominant Ti, Fi, Ne & Se or dominant Te, Fe, Ni & Si.

Some people seem to chop and change from one type to another. It's like they're saying their inborn dominant functions have changed from one day to the next. I think people should really study MBTI before making these choices in the first place instead of changing five weeks later. I'm sorry to say it, but ALL of these people are ESFPs.

 

[Ezra]

I hate it when people say things like, "I'm an INTJ, but I'm quite P, maybe I'm an INTP sometimes." MBTI comes down to the eight functions, people aren't P'ish or J'ish, they just either have dominant Ti, Fi, Ne & Se or dominant Te, Fe, Ni & Si.

Some people seem to chop and change from one type to another. It's like they're saying their inborn dominant functions have changed from one day to the next. I think people should really study MBTI before making these choices in the first place instead of changing five weeks later. I'm sorry to say it, but ALL of these people are ESFPs.

You legend.

 

[zarc]

I hate it when people say things like, "I'm an INTJ, but I'm quite P, maybe I'm an INTP sometimes."

You chose the wrong Type to use with INTJs. Heh. They aren't real INTJs. You're just jealous. But, what people? I've never heard such a thing before of INTJs. Really.

MBTI comes down to the eight functions, people aren't P'ish or J'ish, they just either have dominant Ti, Fi, Ne & Se or dominant Te, Fe, Ni & Si.

Not P-ish or J-ish but they indicate which one of your functions get used outwardly or inwardly according to I or E. From what I've somewhat guessed, it'd be: IJ or IP explaining how odd CPs are motivated outward by the even CPs. EJ or EP explaining how odd CPs are motivated inward by the even CPs. Within the first 4 CPs and then switched with the last 4 CPs.. (Sorry, can't Ti well enough to explain it better. But I know it or am coming to know it... Ha--*awaiting certain people to either explain better or chew me out*) For ex, ENP. Dom Ne wants to keep possibilities open outwardly. Auxiliary Ti/Fi wants to order and focus inwardly. And so on down the CP musically coloured spectrum.

The J vs P stereotype is unbelievable, anyway. Well, not unbelievable..just incorrect. Dom Ni is a perceiving function while the J renders both INFJs/INTJs an overall Judging one. And people just get that "P or J" = stereoTypes. N + S are perceiving functions which gathers information while T + F are judging functions which make decisions. So we all use both "J" and "P". It just depends for which function and how their used. Our Doms (and Auxiliary) take more precedence unless people evolve and become more balanced with the rest of their CPs. That's when we appear more similar, not boxed in by our (conditioned) mentalities. But we'll still return inside the box with our Doms/Auxs when under stress. It'll be our understanding of our CPs (whether one knows CPs or not) which can help get us out and become balanced again.

Some people seem to chop and change from one type to another. It's like they're saying their inborn dominant functions have changed from one day to the next. I think people should really study MBTI before making these choices in the first place instead of changing five weeks later.

Belfry! Suggest that people study before tackling it or claiming shit?! Please create a system to ensure it. Oh, but you can't control the people? Ahh.. Do as Hitler did and perfect your Fe...until you Fe-overload crash...

I'm sorry to say it, but ALL of these people are ESFPs.

Oi.

 

["?"]

Consider the following scenario:

You are an ISFx. You normally score as ISFP, but recently, J has become more evident. So what does this mean, you suddenly go from having Fi and Se to having Si and Fe as dominant and auxiliary functions respectively? It means your whole psychological makeup changes, just because of the way in which you're scoring? Of course not. This is why, as Splittet often professes, typing by functions is far more effective. It makes much more sense, and is so much more logically consistent.

Just from your example, it should be reminded that the J/P dichotomy only determines how you prefer to extravert. With that being said, and from your example, the first four preferences for ISFP are: Fi-Se-Ni-Te. You may know that you are a feeling type in general and since Fi does not equate to Fe, then you're really not using the latter function. Instead you are using Te most likely.

As for your final comment on using the cognitive test, it's not a good idea for the exact reasons given. If anyone wonders why they can't determine their best fit type after retaking test, but the cognitive test specifically, then consider that your preferences for different functions are constantly changing to adapt to your immediate needs. Solution: Get away from test and do some honest self-reflection. Test are only as viable as person taking it is honest with themselves.

 

[Mort Belfry]

You chose the wrong Type to use with INTJs. Heh. They aren't real INTJs. You're just jealous. But, what people? I've never heard such a thing before of INTJs. Really.

INTJ was just an example, I haven't heard an INTJ say it either. But me, jealous of an INTJ? How dare you? I'm more likely to be jealous of a glass of water.