How is it like to be P ?

[Unique]

where is this country full of Ps, i want to live there?

i'll swap you, i'm surrounded by bloody annoying, controlling, pedantic, dogmatic, narrow-minded, deadline-pushing, style-cramping, anal-retentive Js !!!!

you almost made a thinking type cry... ok I lied... but I can very much relate to this

edit: actually you know what I find funny, the fact that Js often dislike Ps for the way they do things... but Ps only dislike Js because they keep trying to change the way we do things and won't accept that our way is just as good

 

[Amargith]

edit: actually you know what I find funny, the fact that Js often dislike Ps for the way they do things... but Ps only dislike Js because they keep trying to change the way we do things and won't accept that our way is just as good

 

[Virtual ghost]

I think intimidation has more to do with being NT than anything else. According to my wife people find me intimidating even though they find me likable as well. It seems like a weird combination to me.

I know what you mean but here I am talking about J-P .
I think that deficit of spontaneity can freak them out sometimes.
Also the behaviour that is typical Js can be too harsh for them.


This is just a observation.

 

[GinKuusouka]

I don't like to keep myself closed to options. Things can change at any given point in time, and I prefer to stay open so that I can change right along with it. I generally like going with the flow and find it irritating when someone seems to dislike that attitude. lol I actually have to say that it's pretty sweet all in all.

 

["?"]

There were some threads about other letters but I think this was never done for the P.

I am trying to understand why they like spontaneous behaviour and dislike or don't want too much organisation around them.

This should be enough to get us started.

Do we even dare to argue that by all accounts, you are a "P" since you dominate with a perceiving function (Ni) and since Myers-Briggs only proposes that we should develop our auxililary to be healthy, she never implied that it was a given? Ergo, you may be better at telling dominant judging types (Ti/Fi) what it's like.

 

[Llewellyn]

If you look up something too much it takes time and you can better aim at what comes across, you'll come across that other thing later.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Do we even dare to argue that by all accounts, you are a "P" since you dominate with a perceiving function (Ni) and since Myers-Briggs only proposes that we should develop our auxililary to be healthy, she never implied that it was a given? Ergo, you may be better at telling dominant judging types (Ti/Fi) what it's like.

Well I was talking about J-P in a standard way. But I guess that this is one way of looking at the things.

On the other hand I have very very well developed Te and Te is not exactly a perciving function. (as far as I know)

 

[bronte]

PPPPPP!

where is this country full of Ps, i want to live there?

i'll swap you, i'm surrounded by bloody annoying, controlling, pedantic, dogmatic, narrow-minded, deadline-pushing, style-cramping, anal-retentive Js !!!!

Ditto! Funny I was going to come home tonight and start a thread re how ps cope with very strong Js!

To me alot of P is about being open minded - enjoying imagining the possibilities and going with the flow. Schedules and timetables feel like a straightjacket. I've had a two hour meeting today to set my workload plan for the next year - its the stuff of nightmares for me personally! I know however that at work I have to plan and be responsible so I do - (I work with a couple of Ps who dont at all and drive everybody insane)

At home though and in my personal life I dont - I cant bear it - and have very little routine at all really.

I have a couple of J friends who plan their housework, weekend activities, visits to friends, content of their wardrobe etc - arrrgghhh!!!

I enjoy the NP partnership because the possibilities are endless!!

 

["?"]

Well I was talking about J-P in a standard way. But I guess that this is one way of looking at the things.

On the other hand I have very very well developed Te and Te is not exactly a perciving function. (as far as I know)

Good point, but keep in mind based on your own auxiliary do you strongly consider yourself orderly all of the time and planful? I personally am not that spontaneous but not as deliberate as ITJs, and although I would loathe being micromanaged I prefer organization and structure.

 

[The_Liquid_Laser]

I know what you mean but here I am talking about J-P .
I think that deficit of spontaneity can freak them out sometimes.
Also the behaviour that is typical Js can be too harsh for them.


This is just a observation.

To me J's may seem harsh only in that they are more definite about things that they really should not be definite about. It can make them look like simpletons. However, I think intimidation comes more from the T/F dimension. I can see how an FP would find a TJ intimidating, but I think it has more to do with T and F.

 

[JivinJeffJones]

I've yet to meet a J who's laughed when a situation has turned entirely to shit. There are exceptions (certainly on this forum), but I find most Js need a good run-up and advance warning to muster any kind of sense of humour at all. But that "Wow, this couldn't be turning out any worse" laugh seems to be the P domain.

 

[Jack Flak]

Do we even dare to argue that by all accounts, you are a "P" since you dominate with a perceiving function (Ni) and since Myers-Briggs only proposes that we should develop our auxililary to be healthy, she never implied that it was a given? Ergo, you may be better at telling dominant judging types (Ti/Fi) what it's like.

Well, I argue that Myers got it wrong there, causing a shit-ton of erroneous notions which have spread like a plague through type study on the whole.

 

[Orangey]

I've yet to meet a J who's laughed when a situation has turned entirely to shit. There are exceptions (certainly on this forum), but I find most Js need a good run-up and advance warning to muster any kind of sense of humour at all. But that "Wow, this couldn't be turning out any worse" laugh seems to be the P domain.

This is very much true. When plans go awry, J's (or at least people who I think are J's) find very little humor in the state of the situation.

 

[Amargith]

This is very much true. When plans go awry, J's (or at least people who I think are J's) find very little humor in the state of the situation.

True, very true. This morning, my boyfriend (J) overslept, causing him to miss his plane. He could book one later, but this caused his entire scedule to be at jeopardy. Oddly enough, I did the same thing on Friday and was unable to meet my ride to get to Holland, causing me to miss the morning part of a class I am following.

Though we were both equally pissed and stressed in the beginning, I was able to figure out a train route to Holland and still enjoy the class in the afternoon and get home in a good mood. He on the other hand did figure out how to get another plane, but I know that if I call him tonight, he's still going to be stressed and in a foul mood.

 

[FDG]

To me J's may seem harsh only in that they are more definite about things that they really should not be definite about.

It's a bit ironic that this statement is excessively definite, too - that "should"

 

[Virtual ghost]

However, I think intimidation comes more from the T/F dimension. I can see how an FP would find a TJ intimidating, but I think it has more to do with T and F.

Once again is see your argument and I agree with it but not completly.
It is true that F/T can make things much worse.
But even TPs can be intimidated if what you are planning lacks spontaneity for a larger degree.
But what is actually intimidating is that when plan works it is an attack on their way of doing things.
Ps usually feel uncomfortable with killing options and yet I am killing options and it still works. Probably intimidation is too hard word for this, but this can make them uncomfortable to some degree. What is again a form of intimidation.
The trick is not in killing of option(s) or not it is in when option should be killed.

True, very true. This morning, my boyfriend (J) overslept, causing him to miss his plane. He could book one later, but this caused his entire scedule to be at jeopardy. Oddly enough, I did the same thing on Friday and was unable to meet my ride to get to Holland, causing me to miss the morning part of a class I am following.

Though we were both equally pissed and stressed in the beginning, I was able to figure out a train route to Holland and still enjoy the class in the afternoon and get home in a good mood. He on the other hand did figure out how to get another plane, but I know that if I call him tonight, he's still going to be stressed and in a foul mood.

Would you mind telling me his type?
I will accept guess if you don't know.

 

[Amargith]

Would you mind telling me his type?
I will accept guess if you don't know.

INTJ Efficiency is his middle name, so him being late for a plane is something he takes very personally and beats himself up for, which he then in turn took out on the airline he was flying with as their emergency phoneline was not manned, causing him to wait till they actually got in at 9 am and answered the phone in order to resolve the mess *grin*

 

[The_Liquid_Laser]

Once again is see your argument and I agree with it but not completly.
It is true that F/T can make things much worse.
But even TPs can be intimidated if what you are planning lacks spontaneity for a larger degree.
But what is actually intimidating is that when plan works it is an attack on their way of doing things.
Ps usually feel uncomfortable with killing options and yet I am killing options and it still works. Probably intimidation is too hard word for this, but this can make them uncomfortable to some degree. What is again a form of intimidation.
The trick is not in killing of option(s) or not it is in when option should be killed.

This is probably true, but it just as easily goes the other way. J's get scared when P's don't have much of a plan or when the change the plan in the middle of the activity. The "intimidation" goes both ways equally.

It's a bit ironic that this statement is excessively definite, too - that "should"

People interpret the word "should" with different levels of definiteness. I doubt I meant it the way you are thinking.

 

[Amargith]

So wouldn't it be a lot more productive to have J's draw up the plans to follow, and P's step up to the plate when things go awry, so that J's don't have to stress?

(I am aware this is easier said than done)

 

[spirilis]

So wouldn't it be a lot more productive to have J's draw up the plans to follow, and P's step up to the plate when things go awry, so that J's don't have to stress?

(I am aware this is easier said than done)

That happens to me at work somewhat frequently