The other people sound like SPs to me.
I don't know their types. One of them was a poet/writer woman though. Her boyfriend was the one that was the "hard to rein in" type.
Notice the way that you subjectively changed what the situation meant - you changed how you were looking at it. That suggests an introverted function, probably introverted perception. That became the "why" of the situation, and the action of spraying the gun became the "how" (extroverted judgment). STJ makes sense in that regard, but I can't say for sure that that's what it implies.
I don't think I changed how I was looking at it, that is, the situation itself remained "as is". As I described the happenings. That is what the situation itself looks like to me. I then made rules and justification for the behaviour, which I also described. That however did not change how I saw the situation itself.
Does this make sense?
As for the "why" of the situation, I don't understand that. I don't look for deep "why's", it just simply happened as it happened. I wouldn't even know where I would begin to look for a "why" beyond what's obvious, what I described already.
There was a "why" for my own behaviour that I chose to do, which explanation (my feeling not comfortable in any other way, I'd have felt too "out of line" and aimless if I had just kept up what the other two team members did) and justification (hot day, so they'll appreciate the refreshment) I already gave you.
I was able to give you the "why" explanation for my behaviour only though because of having increased my self-awareness a bit. The justification part (hot day...), that was conscious, I made it myself, and it was just logical enough to justify what I did.
It's not that I necessarily verbalise those questions, those were just the verbal forms of what I was doing. It is more of a look and do thing, but what I was getting at is that with Ti there's a disengagement from the task at hand to weigh up a decision. Extroverted judgment keeps moving according to protocol, and when an issue arises where you have to disengage from the task and inwardly decide something, that's introverted judgment.
OK, for me there would be no questions in the verbal form though. It would go something like (I don't have pets so I used another example about deciding on dinner), I have bread and to put something on it, for that I have an opened package of camembert and an opened can of sardine in the fridge, I feel more like eating camembert but the sardine will not last another day before it starts to taste less good (before it goes really actually bad), and I don't mind eating sardine too much, so I will make a sardine sandwich and then I'll make myself eat that. I will eat all of the remainder in the can so it still tastes good enough and there is not too much, I don't have to put too much on the bread, a bit more than I would by default but it is still just fine. And the camember will be very nice next time.
... So I end up eating the sardine sandwich which tastes good enough, and it's even nice that there is a little extra quantity of it on the bread. And I will enjoy the camembert next morning just fine.
Actually right now I had to make another decision, it's fresh enough so here we go and it'll show how I change plans easily enough lol even tho I don't necessarily want to...
So I was spending the night now at a family member's house and they have to leave 1:30pm for the train station so in 70mins from now. I have to go home too at that point. I knew this much last evening. So my plan was, I wanted to do a little short run, I'm recovering from illness so it was going to be short. I never ran in this area so I was looking forward to it. Okay the plan was, I get up 10am (long story, I didn't sleep much the night before, so I planned to sleep in), I have breakfast after that, then I go *start* the run between 12:00-12:30 pm. So that enough time passes after breakfast. Finish the run 12:50 the latest, quick shower, then get in a little lunch before we all leave the flat at 1:30.
I did get up around 10am (a few mins later, takes time for me to get out of bed due to my bad moods). I had breakfast alright. Checked emails, talked to my brother on Skype. Saw you replied to me. So now I started on this post, I was either gonna finish it or leave it in the middle before I go out. Family member just came up to me and said I won't have time to do my run because they really have to leave 1:30pm. She was nervous like she always is when she's not sure things will work out. I tell her, a tiny little irritated, that I will definitely have time and laid it out to her that I'll be back by 12:50 and I'll eat lunch quickly at 1:15. She calmed down and left. I then remembered I wanted to go to the tanning salon too the way back home. And then realised I'd like to shower only after that and didn't feel like showering twice, nor was it an option leaving the shower after the tanning salon until tomorrow evening. That's too long.
(PS Using the tanning salon shower isn't an option either, don't have the stuff on me to go do it there, as this wasn't planned)
I could have showered twice, but I didn't feel like it because I already would be like, trying to finish this post and trying to eat the lunch real fast, which is okay but add on top of that the showering twice and I just don't feel like doing that. Iguess you call it too non-optimal. So I instantly had the "picture" flash that I would just eat lunch here, go to the tanning salon, go home, and since the lunch isn't a big lunch, I would not have to wait long to go out and do the run around where I live. And so I can still do it before it goes dark and too cold (I'm recovering from illness or I would not mind that at all). And I can have fun like I wanted to with the new route next time I sleep over here at the family member's flat, it will be better conditions for that then.
Iguess this is an example of the comfort too that I talked about.
And yeah, no, while writing this is when I thought of the "PS" above. I already made the decision in a flash based on how all these options felt (to my body, not moral feelings). Another PS. It's not optimal that I packed and brought my running clothes here being ready to do the run here, and I was looking forward to trying out this new route as I never ran here like I said. It'd have been fun but when I'm fully recovered from the illness it's gonna be more fun anyway. And the showering twice with all the rest of the problems as above was a big no no so that was decisive for me I don't feel second guessing. BTW I never second guess my decisions. This writing it out here was too much verbalising and made me think of more options (like these "PS" options), too many, and almost second guessing. I most definitely do NOT like that lol. That's not me. I don't spend time on looking at further options, that takes me too far from my body and the present too. Too much in my mind or whatever. It's not normal for me with these things
I mean, I do it trying to do the "NF" grip and explore things there. I'm NOT!!!! going to do it for normal everyday situations. This options-seeking to see a more refined picture or whatever. Just no.
OK. That's as close as it gets, to my actual thought process as this is really fresh, just happened now.
I didn't feel like changing the plan at first but the resistance lasted about a second before I moved on to making the new plan. Which took me about 2 seconds and then I was set again. And I like redoing the plan on the fly it can be fun Iguess.
Does it tell you anything?
(Or anyone else reading by any chance)
It's not that I necessarily verbalise those questions, those were just the verbal forms of what I was doing. It is more of a look and do thing, but what I was getting at is that with Ti there's a disengagement from the task at hand to weigh up a decision. Extroverted judgment keeps moving according to protocol, and when an issue arises where you have to disengage from the task and inwardly decide something, that's introverted judgment.
OK I re-quoted this. I wasn't doing a task unless you mean I was doing the whole plan. I was following the plan decently well but I was gonna rush things because I didn't feel like getting to do the stuff earlier. So even if sticking to the plan I wasn't gonna go at some very comfy slow pace lol. Is that protocol to you?
And I definitely did disengage to weigh up and decide things. But that lasted for a short time only. I don't like weighing things up for these simple decisions for longer than like, two seconds. I know some people take half an hour where I take two seconds and I don't understand those people. I also don't understand people who second-guess these things. It feels like a pain in the ass to have to second-guess yourself all the time on simple everday things like the above
I did not use any moral feelings or moral judgments for the deciding. Just the above optimising. That doesn't need moral feelings. (I wasn't going to hurt anyone obviously)
Well, as an INFJ I do experience drinking a glass of water as just drinking a glass of water, but I'm not quite sure how an SJ would perceive the situation.
She was an NF too. I also do just experience the glass of water as just that, but she meant she was like fully in the moment like it never happened before, the drinking of the glass of water was its own event in the moment, not linked to anything else or whatever. And yeah that is how I am by default and she never is, except when she tried those drugs.
One of the ways I investigate type is to "activate" a particular cognitive function, or type (which is a configuration of all 8 cognitive functions), and then make a mental note of how my experience of things changes when I do so.*
I did this for the IxFx types this morning, so I'll give a brief description of how I experienced the perception functions.
So, for all 4 types there's a process of "scanning" (eyes moving across the environment), and "lingering" (eyes set in place on a specific object), and each of those can be either in-focus (perception is clear), or out-of-focus (perception is fuzzy).
OK... I either scan but I don't overdo that or I look/stare at something specifically and it's clear focus. I don't even know what it is supposed to be like when "perception is fuzzy" ??
INFJ (strong Ni, weak Se). I found myself looking around at things, and when I would stop on an object there would be a sense of the future, for example it may be: sees a drink, sees that this drink will be drunk later, but that it needs to go in the fridge. Or it could be: sees an artistic item, and feels a sense of personal transformation regarding the item.
No way in hell that I ever do that lol. LOL. Interesting tho' but I would die if I had to think of the future when I just look at some everyday object like that drink. It would be so draining.
INFP (strong Ne, weak Si). My eyes would moving in jumps from one thing to another. When I stopped on the item, this is where the sense of object-recognition came in. I would note what I was seeing, then move to something else. Ne can be thought of in terms of a creative impulse, so perhaps what I was doing was looking for things that would spur creativity.
No like I said I don't overdo the scanning, this is just pointless and aimless
ISFJ (strong Si, weak Ne). In comparison to Ne, there was much less jumping from one object to another, and more time spent looking at a specific object. It's hard to describe what I was perceiving about the object when lingering on it, but a word that comes to mind is that I was "inspecting" it. What I was inspecting it for, I'm unsure.
Why is it hard to describe what you perceived? I mean, was it not about how the object looked? Not about its details?
I mean if I inspect something I look at its details closely. That is what inspection is for. I do do that when needed.
ISFP (strong Se, weak Ni). Like INFJ, I was scanning while in focus to look at the different details around me, and like ISFJ I would spend a longer time looking at one object (but my eyes were drifting rather than staying fixed), but how ISFP differed would be that I was really enjoying what I was looking at. Whereas ISFJ is like "What do we have here...", ISFP is like "Wow, that's so cool!". INFJ is aware of the environment, but ISFP enjoys actually exploring it. (similarly, SJs are aware of the ideas that are "out there", but it's the NPs that really enjoy learning about it all. NJs tend to learning new things for the purpose of furthering their overall life philosophy, so it's more like going into new theoretical territory to find the next big idea, or update to the previous ideas).
That's not me because I'm not going to particularly enjoy exploring everyday stuff that I've seen a million times before
I mean I do enjoy it if I go on an unknown (and hard!!) trail in the woods, if I don't even know where it's leading that's extra fun, and the more hilly and hard it is the better lol but I do also want to feel my own strength like yeah I liek to be able to manage hard hilly trails and feeling like I can go forever if I want to lol, that's obviously not trivial either. I've worked hard on that goal too already. But the part about going really hard, that's more for when there is a race. When alone I'm more just enjoying the whole thing. I can go hard and enjoy that too when I feel like it but if the training plan doesn't allow for it then I can't. And if I make a plan that does allow it...then it would still not be the same going hard as when racing against others. Would be more impulsively random. When I race against others that is more controlled. But my training plan also makes me more controlled. ... Um I have to think about how much of it is enjoying the trail itself, it being hilly being fun variety enough, and how it's leading who knows where, and I'm not saying I look for danger specifically with that, it's just exciting. It is hard to explain, Iguess it's jsut the adventure itself. The more complex the better tho!!, I like that summary I think. As long as I can meet the challenge ofc. There is no fun in it if you set an impossible & completely unrealistic challenge in front of you, lol.
But I'm not gonna enjoy looking at whatever object in the flat around me if I've seen it a million times before. I don't know what objects you were looking at though. Bc if it's expensive shit that looks real cool, then I don't think I'll ever feel like I've seen it a million times before. I'll always feel that it's good to own it, lol. ...Sorry I hope that doesn't come off bad in any way either, I don't mean it like that.
Also that's not the same kind of enjoyment as with the adventure on the trails. But it's enjoyment too, just different.
I also am not emotional enough to just go like the ISFP on the whole. I don't go around like "wow so cool" all day. If I see something *actually* cool then I'll usually just think it to myself and I don't make exclamations easily. It would drain me fast emotionally. But I've been around people who do that all day and I don't mind that. It's fun even, seeing how they get emotional so easily lol.
No I'm more like the ISFJ with "what do we have here". I'm more unemotional like that, more stoic than the ISFP. I'm not 100% stoic but compared to this ISFP...yes I am.
Hopefully something in there is applicable to your own cognition.
Well I tried to describe what I could relate to and what I couldn't relate to, yeah.
None of it had me go "yes that's me".
The ISFJ was ok except that you indicated that the inspecting was not about the actual details of the object. Unless I misunderstood you.
The ISFP is ok too when something is cool enough but I don't feel it or express it like the ISFP does
* you might be thinking: if we can change type like that, what's the point of typing ourselves at all? What does it even mean to say we're that type?
Well, on the one hand, yes the potential to shift types at will does weaken type theory, and make it seem as though type is illusory, but on the other hand, there does seem be a particular type that we "default" to. When I'm done with the type shifts, I tend to just revert back to INFJ cognition without even trying to, because that's the configuration which requires the least energy for me to use. Type shifts can happen without trying to do them if there is a build up of energy that is creating an imbalance (e.g. being too "J", and shifting to a P type to unwind), or if an easy to use, but not default, configuration is best for a particular situation, e.g. a person may type shift a lot if they're in a line of work that is not optimal for their default configuration.
So one can think of a person as a mix of all the types, but with one strongest type, just as a particular type is a mix of all 8 functions, but with one dominant function.
That's my understanding, at least. It's not a view I've read anywhere else in that form.
It's a cool view actually. It makes sense.