I actually searched for a better example of a cognitive functions test result for me, and found this one which is a bit more conclusive.
Cognitive Process Level of Development (Preference, Skill and Frequency of Use)
extraverted Sensing (Se) **************************** (28.8)
average use
introverted Sensing (Si) ******************* (19.3)
limited use
extraverted Intuiting (Ne) ************************************** (38.9)
excellent use
introverted Intuiting (Ni) ******************** (20.4)
limited use
extraverted Thinking (Te) ******************* (19.2)
limited use
introverted Thinking (Ti) **************************** (28.5)
average use
extraverted Feeling (Fe) *********************** (23.5)
limited use
introverted Feeling (Fi) ************************************************************* (61.2)
excellent use
I really don't know why I posted that other one, it was kind of one of those "What?!" results that I usually retest because it seems so out there...
This one even kind of explains why I tested as INTP from time to time (at least I think it does).
Wow... now I know who to call with help with my feeling-decisions
The fact that it shows Ti as one of my higher functions, back when I was on mood stabilizers my feelings weren't exactly reliable so it would have meant I relied more on Ti wouldn't it? I don't know, I don't fully understand this stuff yet so I may just be guessing...Where are you seeing that?
The fact that it shows Ti as one of my higher functions,
back when I was on mood stabilizers my feelings weren't exactly reliable so it would have meant I relied more on Ti wouldn't it? I don't know, I don't fully understand this stuff yet so I may just be guessing...
Not really.... because Fi isn't really about the actual experiencing of emotions. It's not "just guessing" it's just kind of hard to understand.... I would try to explain it better but I don't understand it much either
Yes, I do not believe you are an INTJ MBTI-wise or Jungian psychological types-wise. You also do not show introversion well enough for the order to work in the way you believe it may work. You have not yet presented any significant deal of Ni in difference to Ne.Your not alone in your doubts.
Good advice. Gifts Differing is what I usually recommend if someone wants an introduction to MBTI. It explains the history and origins of the theory, is relatively short and very readable.I don't consider MBTI to be separate from cognitive functions at all really since that is originally what it was based on - the ordering of cognitive functions that you have. It got simplified/bastardized for the masses in later books, but the origin was with Jung's work. You can see this if you read Gifts Differing carefully.
This brings up a good question: does anyone past the age of 16 truly have a very weak or unused aux. function?
Yes, I do not believe you are an INTJ MBTI-wise or Jungian psychological types-wise. You also do not show introversion well enough for the order to work in the way you believe it may work. You have not yet presented any significant deal of Ni in difference to Ne.
These tests and anecdotes often describe the type examples assuming the person to be optimistic, altruistic, happy, etc., because a lot of people reading these just want to hear nice things about themselves, so best to make it sound nice. However, if the assumption is false, then obviously the description is inaccurate. Anyone (INFPs, ESTJs, ENTPs, anyone) can be pessimistic, misanthropic, unhappy, etc.To be more specific, it's usually the overwhelming theme of being a caring person. I mean I'm no monster, but more often than not I am pretty indifferent to people, and I often come across as insensitive. In addition "Sees the good in everything" seems to be a recurring theme, which totally made me laugh.
These tests and anecdotes often describe the type examples assuming the person to be optimistic, altruistic, happy, etc., because a lot of people reading these just want to hear nice things about themselves, so best to make it sound nice. However, if the assumption is false, then obviously the description is inaccurate. Anyone (INFPs, ESTJs, ENTPs, anyone) can be pessimistic, misanthropic, unhappy, etc.
So there are theoretically descriptions that could be written for the Dark Side of the INFP, while still being just as INFP as the Bright Side. No MBTI letters or type functions are inherently happy or good-natured.
On MBTI vs. Type functions: They are kind of two separate theories, even though based on the same ideas, so it is possible for you to "accept" one theory while rejecting the other theory. Many people prefer one over the other; others prefer a reconciled combination of the two.
I have been trying to decide upon my type for a while now, and have a few threads on the matter. In one of those threads where I was debating upon whether I was an INTP or INFP someone suggested that I decide based on what cognitive functions came naturally to me rather than MBTI tests or type descriptions...
Anyways, I am almost positive that my two most used functions are introverted feeling and extraverted intuition. This aligns with the type of INFP apparently. However, I identify very little with the common descriptions of an INFP.
Is this kind of contradiction common? Does this mean I actually am an INFP despite not identifying with the type descriptions?
I don't have a good understanding of the Myers-Briggs or whatever so clarification from someone who understands it a bit better would be appreciated.
Are these internet type-descriptions of the INFP? Those are very sketchy and these days often dominated by "function talk."
The older and original MBTI does not sound like internet descriptions of types. I'm going to select some text at random from a book I have with me, just one paragraph about the INFP. You can decide how well it fits you personally.
"INFPs decide early on what is important to them, what is of value. They tend to rely on themselves for direction and are reticent to ask others for help. They would rather do things themselves, to make sure they are done properly. INFPs have found this to be both a strength and a curse. Depending only on themselves and being careful not to show mistakes to others is important. One INFP child was curious about the meaning of the D.C. in Washington, D.C. She was sure that everyone else knew and that she should know also. Having grown up in Brooklyn, she pondered a while and then decided D.C. means "Da Capitol."
So what do you think? Does that describe you at all? Not in the details but just regarding the self-reliance aspect.
I've noticed that INFPs have the greatest problem with self-identifying type. ENFPs are a close second.
Hah, yes, I am referring to the internet descriptions.
And that paragraph was actually a lot closer to me than most of the ones I have read online. Maybe I should go out and get a book about them rather than relying on the web.
Self reliance is only for INFPs?
The quote does not use the term "self-reliance." But let's assume that ALL Introverts like to "do things for themselves." In that case, every Introverted profile should indicate this, in the context of their other interests. INFPs figure out their own values; INTPs like to figure out their own ideas; ISTJs like to figure out their own strategies; etc.
Now you will say, "Extraverts don't like to do things for themselves?" But it's just an assumption to be judged as such.
You used the term "self-reliance," and asked how well Tyrinth related to the description on that aspect alone, which kind of suggests that you think it has some relevance to being INFP or not.... this is what I wanted to explore.