I have no type... help me

[Glycerine]

I appreciate the feedback from actual ENFJs (btw, why haven't you been on vent Pitseleh?) I would really like it if people gave me some feedback on my crazy function development theory on this page ^^^

I haven't emailed Ivy yet for a vent ID, lol.

 

[Glycerine]

I really like the tertiary temptation thing. I especially like this George Costanza breakdown:



Okay, now reverse it:

"No one has to like me. Logically, there are reasons why no one should or does like me."
--inferior Ti

What makes one lean on this mindset in the first place? How would one jump to this unhealthy view of Ti? When the ego can't locate the truth of this world view:

"The relationships of friend-friend, parent-child, husband-wife, teacher-student, teammate-teammate, leader-follower, and many others are all ultimately defined by and exist in the medium of gestures exchanged between people--gestures that they recognize as defining that relationship."
--Fe

When the Fe ego is under pressure, it will first appeal to its tertiary helper: Se.



When the ego can't locate the truth of its world view, it will simply take everything "as is". I then take everything literally. The fact that I haven't said anything today, is because I literally have "no one" to talk to. Like George Costanza's poor use of Ne, I dont really "want to" use Ni effectively here. Instead I use it poorly, to back up my Fe-Se axis: "The deeper meaning is that people have a sinister dislike for me. No one sat next to me, its because there is a deeper dislike of me". The conspiracy thus re-enforces what my Se tertiary temptation was feeding the ego: "factually, there simply is no one here, right here and now".

Thus the Fe inadequacy of the situation deepens, and the Se help is justified continually by warped and untrusted parent Ni. The appeal of a Ti understanding of the social world thus becomes lower and lower hanging fruit, "No one has to like me".

So if this is the operational definition ^^^
Then it could explain what we all plainly observe:
1. I worry about Fe, a lot
2. I default to Se, but reluctantly (im clearly not Se-dom)
3. I use Ni
4. I have some aspirational Ti
5. I have some Fi

I will only address 1, 2 and 5 (the others have been addressed before).

1. I worry about Fe, a lot
As a young kid (pre-middle school), I had some issues learning to talk. I could not express myself or connect as I wanted to. I would either cope through force, or climb into my head (imagination). I think I never really learned how to properly operate Fe, though its still at the front of my concerns. I think this is what separates me from ESTP or ISTP (they just dont seem to care).


2. I default to Se, but reluctantly (im clearly not Se-dom)

I do not "like" Se. I hate most typical Se activities. What I do like, is self expression, which can be Se. This sounds much more like tertiary than primary Se. Secondly, as a child, I often resorted to 'violence' (when ur little, its not as 'brutal' as the word 'violence' seems to represent) when my primary mode began to fail me (ive been a nice guy since then ).

5. I have some Fi

http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/online-personality-tests/14022-functions-analysis-what-s-my-mbti-type.html
At a glance, the ENFJs tended to have rather equal Fi/Fe (and the INFPs also sometimes had rather equal Fi/Fe). Its only a self report inventory, but its worth noting that even the "strong identifiers", seem to overlap.

------------------------------------
So this "messed up ENFJ" functional analysis would leave me as someone who:

• appears Se > Ti when there is little faith in Fe, (I have been told by a close friend that people who don't talk to me, get the ESTP frat boy impression).
  
• runs on the Fe-Se axis when carefree attention whoring (think ventrilo).
  
• probably runs best when Fe-Se is broken with some well adjusted Ni.
  
• is happiest when Fe works like it should
  
• gets stuck in a conspiracy theory loop of Ni-Se-Ti when over analyzing
  
• can simmer with weak Fi and outward guilt, justified by unhealthy Ti, like any EXFJ can

Now, there might be a simpler theory than all of this. It would be the exact opposite:



...I like my theory better. I posted earlier about my ISTP father. I love him, but I just don't see myself as ISTP.

To me, that makes sense. However, I question my ENFJness all the time but most people would probably say I'm no introvert.

I sometimes think I have broken Fe because some days I just don't care about people even though I still try to consider them.

Also, I am obsessed w/ trying to be objective and analytical but at the end of the day, I know that I SUCK at it (aspirational Ti?).

Se makes me observant of things in the present moment and adds an urgency for me to do things NOW or else.

Fe makes me form an immediate opinion but Ni forces me to step back and look at things from other angles.

I don't really know if I get into FeSe loop much but I get more into NiTi loop when I get EXTREMELY stressed (trying to avoid Fe at all costs, I guess).

Make what you will of it. Sorry if it doest really answer your question though.

 

[Little Linguist]

I really like the tertiary temptation thing. I especially like this George Costanza breakdown:



Okay, now reverse it:

"No one has to like me. Logically, there are reasons why no one should or does like me."
--inferior Ti

What makes one lean on this mindset in the first place? How would one jump to this unhealthy view of Ti? When the ego can't locate the truth of this world view:

"The relationships of friend-friend, parent-child, husband-wife, teacher-student, teammate-teammate, leader-follower, and many others are all ultimately defined by and exist in the medium of gestures exchanged between people--gestures that they recognize as defining that relationship."
--Fe

When the Fe ego is under pressure, it will first appeal to its tertiary helper: Se.



When the ego can't locate the truth of its world view, it will simply take everything "as is". I then take everything literally. The fact that I haven't said anything today, is because I literally have "no one" to talk to. Like George Costanza's poor use of Ne, I dont really "want to" use Ni effectively here. Instead I use it poorly, to back up my Fe-Se axis: "The deeper meaning is that people have a sinister dislike for me. No one sat next to me, its because there is a deeper dislike of me". The conspiracy thus re-enforces what my Se tertiary temptation was feeding the ego: "factually, there simply is no one here, right here and now".

Thus the Fe inadequacy of the situation deepens, and the Se help is justified continually by warped and untrusted parent Ni. The appeal of a Ti understanding of the social world thus becomes lower and lower hanging fruit, "No one has to like me".

So if this is the operational definition ^^^
Then it could explain what we all plainly observe:
1. I worry about Fe, a lot
2. I default to Se, but reluctantly (im clearly not Se-dom)
3. I use Ni
4. I have some aspirational Ti
5. I have some Fi

I will only address 1, 2 and 5 (the others have been addressed before).

1. I worry about Fe, a lot
As a young kid (pre-middle school), I had some issues learning to talk. I could not express myself or connect as I wanted to. I would either cope through force, or climb into my head (imagination). I think I never really learned how to properly operate Fe, though its still at the front of my concerns. I think this is what separates me from ESTP or ISTP (they just dont seem to care).


2. I default to Se, but reluctantly (im clearly not Se-dom)

I do not "like" Se. I hate most typical Se activities. What I do like, is self expression, which can be Se. This sounds much more like tertiary than primary Se. Secondly, as a child, I often resorted to 'violence' (when ur little, its not as 'brutal' as the word 'violence' seems to represent) when my primary mode began to fail me (ive been a nice guy since then ).

5. I have some Fi

http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/online-personality-tests/14022-functions-analysis-what-s-my-mbti-type.html
At a glance, the ENFJs tended to have rather equal Fi/Fe (and the INFPs also sometimes had rather equal Fi/Fe). Its only a self report inventory, but its worth noting that even the "strong identifiers", seem to overlap.

------------------------------------
So this "messed up ENFJ" functional analysis would leave me as someone who:

• appears Se > Ti when there is little faith in Fe, (I have been told by a close friend that people who don't talk to me, get the ESTP frat boy impression).
  
• runs on the Fe-Se axis when carefree attention whoring (think ventrilo).
  
• probably runs best when Fe-Se is broken with some well adjusted Ni.
  
• is happiest when Fe works like it should
  
• gets stuck in a conspiracy theory loop of Ni-Se-Ti when over analyzing
  
• can simmer with weak Fi and outward guilt, justified by unhealthy Ti, like any EXFJ can

Now, there might be a simpler theory than all of this. It would be the exact opposite:



...I like my theory better. I posted earlier about my ISTP father. I love him, but I just don't see myself as ISTP.

Wow. This really makes a lot of sense, and it's crazy how much I relate to you! I'm glad you found the answer!

 

[Thalassa]

marmalade, marmalade, marmalade... "detail-oriented" is not a pre-requisite for SJ... If it were, there's no way I'd make the cut.

That said, I also wouldn't read too much into that weird time-travely thing. It makes it sound like all NPs live their life on acid.

Also, if you do start a separate thread, count me in to play along. You'd make an interesting guinea pig.

Actually I already had a thread in August that has long since been forgotten:

http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/what-s-my-type/20249-infp-enfp-4.html

I think the strong development of my Fi and recognition of Si in myself leans toward INFP. I've also been told repeatedly that I am too serious, analytical, or that my posts are too structured for me to be an ENFP...but there are a couple of other ENFPs on here that seem that way too.

I have a hard time accepting INFP because IRL I am not "behind-the-scenes" temperament at all. If anything I'm extremely direct, start conversations with others, talk a lot, and will vocally defend people I care about.

I wonder if I should do the "this is what I was like as a kid" think that Little Linguist did. Eh - I don't care right now. I'm sleepy. But your input is welcome, Ruthie or anyone else.

 

[Ruthie]

Actually I already had a thread in August that has long since been forgotten:

http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/what-s-my-type/20249-infp-enfp-4.html

I think the strong development of my Fi and recognition of Si in myself leans toward INFP. I've also been told repeatedly that I am too serious, analytical, or that my posts are too structured for me to be an ENFP...but there are a couple of other ENFPs on here that seem that way too.

I have a hard time accepting INFP because IRL I am not "behind-the-scenes" temperament at all. If anything I'm extremely direct, start conversations with others, talk a lot, and will vocally defend people I care about.

I wonder if I should do the "this is what I was like as a kid" think that Little Linguist did. Eh - I don't care right now. I'm sleepy. But your input is welcome, Ruthie or anyone else.

When you're not so sleepy, you should start another thread - either what you were like as a kid, or just some standard bullet points for each argument. I just read through the INFP or ENFP thread, and nothing in it really jumped out as indicative of one type or the other.

 

[Venom]

I've been thinking about how there are possibly different levels of inferior projection than for instance VagrantFarce talks about in his thread. I think this could really affect how one sees typing through inferior projection:

example:ENTJ
level 1: absent Fi --> lex luther exerts his will with no concern for Fi
level 2: Fi pedestal --> ENTJ sits on his butt (shadow ISFP), depressed

example:ENFJ
level 1: absent Ti --> Martyr extends his influence with no concern for Ti
level 2: Ti pedestal --> ENFJ sits on his butt (shadow ISTP) and thinks, "Logically, no one has to like each other".

 

[Venom]

I saw this in another thread and I thought, "hmm, could be a good gut instinct measure of my type". Though I admit it sounds very "folk typology".

not me = could never see myself doing/saying the thing described
all others ill just leave as "neutral"

ISFJ - Let me be your doormat.
not me
INFJ - I invented Jesus in my image.
not me
ISTJ - Ofcourse I'd love to die for my country!
not me
INTJ - I know everything about life, but I don't have one.

INTP - I take social awkwardness to a whole new level.
not me
ISTP - Killing people for money is a job I'd seriously consider, as a dream job you know.
not me
ISFP - Yes, I am saying that this pile of bicycle tires and seats is art!
not me
INFP - I was born depressed.
not me
ESFJ - Buying stuff I don't need and making babies makes me happy.
not me
ENFJ - I am the nicest, most moral and kind person in the world and you should follow me and act like me.

ESTJ - I love getting up early and working my ass off every day so I can brag about my achievements and rub them in everyone's face.

ESTP - Yo, chill man, have a beer.
not me
ENTJ - God doesn't exist so I'm a good enough replacement.
not me
ENTP - Last night I solved the Riemann hypothesis while on LSD but I ripped my papers into shreds because I was so fucking high.
not me
ESFP - Hey, look at me everyone, I can drink through my nose!
not me
ENFP - I can persuade a professor to give me a chance to take a test after arriving 90 minutes late for it. (this actually happened with my ENFP friend. He did the test in 2 minutes and got a B)
not me

Maybe someone can guess if any of these stereotypes even jokingly fit me sometimes?

 

[Venom]

Is this a good test? HumanMetrics

Your Type is
ENFJ
Extraverted.....Intuitive.....Feeling.....Judging
11................... 88............62............89

• slightly expressed extravert
• very expressed intuitive personality
• distinctively expressed feeling personality
• very expressed judging personality

 

[SillySapienne]

INFP.

 

[JustHer]

I like the human metrics test a lot. Wow that is actually a really high Feeling score, so is there no longer any doubt to ENFJness?

 

[Thalassa]

I get INFP on the HumanMetrics test: moderate introvert, moderate intuitive, moderate feeler, mildly expressed perceiver.

 

[Venom]

INFP.

Why?

I think it stems from one convo we had where we thought I was a 4 (like years ago). Im 1000000% positive that im 1w9 sp/sx (I have no uncertainties on my E type).

I think I've had skewed views of how these types actually manifest (i've started giving my friends the test -- spreading the cult ). Now that I can actually attach what, for example, an ENTJ or INTJ looks like in real life, I realize that I'm probably not them. The same goes for INFP.

I think my actual self irl, is probably a lot different than what I project online. I have to thank JJ for bringing this to my attention .

 

[SillySapienne]

I remember your intro thread, dood.

You seemed like an INFP, and you came as an INFP.

First impressions are lasting impressions.

 

[Venom]

I remember your intro thread, dood.

You seemed like an INFP, and you came as an INFP.

First impressions are lasting impressions.

what if I told you I was probably under some sort of depression then? I had basically lost my identity around that time. I had had the athlete role my entire middle school through highschool experience. I then suddenly in college felt like I had no crowd (no more sports team). I think there's some truth to the joke that anyone who is depressed types IXFP. I started not typing INFP around the time I started feeling comfortable as "the pre med guy" (I think that would be about 2 years ago)...

 

[Xander]

From a testing point of view isn't it more usual that if someone types as "kind of" a J that they are more likely to be a P?

I'm fairly sure that's true from a test moderators point of view.

Just thought that might help.

 

[Venom]

From a testing point of view isn't it more usual that if someone types as "kind of" a J that they are more likely to be a P?

I'm fairly sure that's true from a test moderators point of view.

Just thought that might help.

I think this assumes that J is some sort of "improvement" or something to be "earned" above the P. I'm not saying that you actually intentionally meant that. I do however relate it to the "INFP until proven otherwise" bias that I see on various forums.

The assumptions go like this:

I's have to be E sometimes. Therefore if you're not super E, then you're an I trying to be E.
F's have to be T sometimes. Therefore if you're not super T, then you're an F trying to be T.
Ps have to be J sometimes. Therefore if you're not super J, then you're a P trying to be J.

I think the assumptions are flawed (and I'm not accusing you xander of having this sentiment). If it really only worked uni-directionally like the assumptions above, then it really would make ENTJ seem like this earned type above INFP. A hierarchy where the INFJ is "earned" above the INFP begins to emerge.

Why can't it work like this too:
E's have to be I sometimes. Therefore if you're not super I, then you're an E trying to be I.
T's have to be F sometimes. Therefore if you're not super F, then you're a T trying to be F.
Js have to be P sometimes. Therefore if you're not super P, then you're a J trying to be P.

Logically the above is no more ridiculous than the first set of assumptions. Yet, it still bugs most people to read the second ones more than the first ones. I think it uncovers in an inherent "improvement" bias related to E, T and J.

Any thoughts or critics?

 

[Little Linguist]

Response: Some people are just effing stupid. Some of those people make stupid claims. I wouldn't take it too seriously.

 

[Lauren Ashley]

From a testing point of view isn't it more usual that if someone types as "kind of" a J that they are more likely to be a P?

I'm fairly sure that's true from a test moderators point of view.

Just thought that might help.

That seems to be the thinking, after all, the pace of life is more conducive to Js. But I guess it would depend on the J as well. Most INFJs I know don't test as strongly J, but they are still J. It has been my experience, however, that Ps are more likely to mistype as Js than vice versa.

I think this assumes that J is some sort of "improvement" or something to be "earned" above the P. I'm not saying that you actually intentionally meant that. I do however relate it to the "INFP until proven otherwise" bias that I see on various forums.

The assumptions go like this:

I's have to be E sometimes. Therefore if you're not super E, then you're an I trying to be E.
F's have to be T sometimes. Therefore if you're not super T, then you're an F trying to be T.
Ps have to be J sometimes. Therefore if you're not super J, then you're a P trying to be J.

I think the assumptions are flawed (and I'm not accusing you xander of having this sentiment). If it really only worked uni-directionally like the assumptions above, then it really would make ENTJ seem like this earned type above INFP. A hierarchy where the INFJ is "earned" above the INFP begins to emerge.

Why can't it work like this too:
E's have to be I sometimes. Therefore if you're not super I, then you're an E trying to be I.
T's have to be F sometimes. Therefore if you're not super F, then you're a T trying to be F.
Js have to be P sometimes. Therefore if you're not super P, then you're a J trying to be P.

Logically the above is no more ridiculous than the first set of assumptions. Yet, it still bugs most people to read the second ones more than the first ones. I think it uncovers in an inherent "improvement" bias related to E, T and J.

Any thoughts or critics?

I disagree. If anything, on this forum, there is bias towards Perceiving and a slight bias towards Introversion. E and J are not aspired to, especially not in the same type. I'll give it to you that T is preferred.

I agree that INFP seems to be what people tend to type those who are questioning their type for a while. It is not for the above reasons though. xNFPs just seem to question their type more often, or wish to be another type, for whatever reason.

 

[cascadeco]

Is this a good test? HumanMetrics

Your Type is
ENFJ
Extraverted.....Intuitive.....Feeling.....Judging
11................... 88............62............89

• slightly expressed extravert
• very expressed intuitive personality
• distinctively expressed feeling personality
• very expressed judging personality

Wow...if you got that high of an F on the Humanmetrics test, seems likely you're F. That's a pretty marked preference, as opposed to the E/I.

As for myself, I never liked that test, because I always tested INTJ on it. But that's probably more Me than the test itself. In the end my F/T isn't a terribly obvious preference - at least when it comes to typical mbti questions asked - which seems to be why the tests are very hit-or-miss for me. (Or perhaps I'm fooling you all and I'm really INTJ. Bwhahaha)

 

[Venom]

I disagree. If anything, on this forum, there is bias towards Perceiving and a slight bias towards Introversion. E and J are not aspired to, especially not in the same type. I'll give it to you that T is preferred.

I agree that INFP seems to be what people tend to type those who are questioning their type for a while. It is not for the above reasons though. xNFPs just seem to question their type more often, or wish to be another type, for whatever reason.

If you will allow me to point out: I think you actually agree with me in belief, yet you disagree in attitude.

I agree that there is a bias towards I and P, as in people are more likely to be I and P here. The belief I was pointing out was actually one you seem to agree with (even if you dont know it), that E T and J are seen as something "built on top" of I F and P. I dont mean all Is and Ps aspire to be E Tor J. What I do mean is that its almost like people look for positive confirmation of E T and J. Minus this positive confirmation, people then just default to I F and P. This implies that there is almost a hierarchy, even if the IPs claim to not aspire to EJness. It implies that I F and P are simply the absence of E, T and J.

Your reasoning about INFPs further elucidates that you agree in belief, but are of the attitude that this is okay.

When an ISFJ talks about how she might be ESFJ, things usually go normal. When an INFP questions her type, people want to put her back in her box, which implies that she lacks the "positive confirmation" that folk typology requires of E T or J. Its almost like the burden of positive proof lies on the I F and P to "earn" E T J. There seems to be no burden of proof on the E T or J to "earn" I F or P.