Legitimate Type Me Thread

[Sil]

In general, [MENTION=22628]Sil[/MENTION], while you say you relate strongly to Si descriptions, you seem like the sort of person where, if nothing was based on precedent and everything was different, you would roll with it, not stress out, and calmly try an alternate method. Which is absolutely not an Si-aux way to react. ESxJs are so strongly invested in our modus operandi, that we have a very hard time being flexible about it.

Not to mention the fact that I almost never relate to the way you describe your thought processes.

I wish that were true, but it would stress me out to an extent if I didn't have a precedent to work from. How stressed I get largely depends on whether or not I am a fish out of water in a social setting where my knowledge of the right thing to do is crucial versus in private where the only person impacted is myself.

I'm more comfortable working from no knowledge if I'm the only one I have to answer to.

However, as a default, I would prefer to have some skeleton of a guideline to start with. It makes it much easier down the road. Like the sandwich scenario your Si example discussed.

And yes, I'm continually surprised you're not connecting to anything I say. It's an unusual first for me. Perhaps my communication skills are poorer than I thought.

 

[Sil]

This sounds very ENTJ to me.


Kind of? One of my weaknesses is only planning for one or two of the most likely scenarios, and then getting thrown off if things don't work that way. My planning is not very fluid.

The Ne-use in my planning relates to what I'm going to do, vs. what could happen. (Most Ne ideas re: what could happen are dismissed by my Si as unlikely, based on precedent, and therefore are dismissed.) I filter all my ideas of what I could do next, through my Te/Si filter -- making sure the plan is realistic, efficient, and meets all my other needs and standards. This is a big part of the "tactician vs. strategist" dichotomy that often gets thrown around to distinguish ESTJs and ENTJs.

That sounds about right for me re: Ne/Si/Te use on the whole.

I can do both strategy and tactics but prefer and am naturally better at tactics.

- - - Updated - - -

[MENTION=22628]Sil[/MENTION]

To be honest you are an interesting puzzle.

But there is something that I would really like to know: Have you figured your Enneagram type ?

I have not. I quit the theory after 3-4 years of looking into it.

I only know I am a strong sp-dom.

- - - Updated - - -

Indeed. One who is about to file a corporate bankruptcy for not seeing future implications and strategizing accordingly. In short - Ni that died.

Unlikely, but okay.

 

[Sil]

Seeing future implications is what I posted. To not see future implications can run a company right into the ground and/or get a CEO shit-canned. And rightfully so. Thinking in terms of future implications is how some people's brains are wired. Mine is. I'm working with an ISTJ who couldn't see future implications to save his own life. Consequently, everything he set up is turning into a total disaster which I knew was going to happen. Frankly, I'll be amazed if I don't sue him for stupidity. "Well I've never seen X happen before, so . . ." What kind of thinking is that? Dealing with the guy is like forcing me to drive a car looking in my rear-view mirror, driving the car in reverse, or having wheels spinning around going nowhere in the snow.

As for this person's type? If I had a dollar for every FP who thinks they're a TJ . . . but it's their decision to make.

I believe I mentioned in the OP that I was considering ENFP, and have been for some time. I feel I use an excessive amount of Ne for an ESTJ.

However, as I stated, I don't relate to the inferior description of Si and largely don't relate to most ENFP posts or descriptions outside their penchant for possibilities. And their seemingly common issue of having trouble focusing on any one thing, although I suspect my problems with that are not comparable to an ENFP on the whole.

I suppose those are superficial type issues, but they feel present enough that it's brought me to re-evaluate my type.

So far though I'm not seeing much case for ENFP though, which us surprising.

 

[Virtual ghost]

I have not. I quit the theory after 3-4 years of looking into it.

I only know I am a strong sp-dom.

The trick is that through Enneagram I am trying to explain why you and EJCC don't relate to each other. Especially since Enneagram is actually much more important when it comes to dealing with reality/life.
For example if you are strong Sp-dom then you are opposite from EJCC. Also she is 1w2 and therefore stereotypical ESTJ but if you have a ennegram type that is more flexible in ideas (like 3 or 8) the two of you will not be able to fully relate to each other, even if you have the same MBTI type.

 

[Sil]

The trick is that through Enneagram I am trying to explain why you and EJCC don't relate to each other. Especially since Enneagram is actually much more important when it comes to dealing with reality/life.
For example if you are strong Sp-dom then you are opposite from EJCC. Also she is 1w2 and therefore stereotypical ESTJ but if you have a ennegram type that is more flexible in ideas (like 3 or 8) the two of you will not be able to fully relate to each other, even if you have the same MBTI type.

I understand where you're coming from, although shouldn't MBTI be able to stand alone in terms of explaining some of our differences?

Regarding my past enneagram types, I vacillated between 3, 1, and 8, with a short stint as a six. I know for certain I would not be a nine, four, or two.

 

[existence]

However, as I stated, I don't relate to the inferior description of Si

You could very well have inferior Si, considering what you posted as an example of Si wasn't even Si.

ENFP isn't out of the question for sure. Much more likely than ESTJ, at this point.

For me, it has almost nothing to do with stability. It's more about the fact that there are a lot of exciting possibilities for what to do with life and I can't settle on just one or two and be okay with that. So I have more I want to do; only, in order to try on all these futures, I have to be much more planned about my life than I might otherwise be. Or else I will lose track and miss exploring some of these life possibilities.

Good case for the ENxP here.

I wish that were true, but it would stress me out to an extent if I didn't have a precedent to work from. How stressed I get largely depends on whether or not I am a fish out of water in a social setting where my knowledge of the right thing to do is crucial versus in private where the only person impacted is myself.

I'm more comfortable working from no knowledge if I'm the only one I have to answer to.

That's normal, anyone would say this.

 

[Virtual ghost]

I understand where you're coming from, although shouldn't MBTI be able to stand alone in terms of explaining some of our differences?

Regarding my past enneagram types, I vacillated between 3, 1, and 8, with a short stint as a six. I know for certain I would not be a nine, four, or two.

I am one of the few people on this forum that is not from a English speaking country. Therefore I made a number of claims on this forum that the types are not that well defined (as people here think)
For example Si will pick up data and social norms of its own environment and family, the only problem here is that all countries and families don't have the same values and living conditions.
Plus when you add the differences in enneagram type that actually defines worldview it can be quite possible that two people of the same type will not look alike. After all there are 7,300,000,000 people on this planet and there is only 16 MBTI types.



Interesting, you are heavy on enneagram types that are typical for Te-doms.

 

[Sil]

I am one of the few people on this forum that is not from a English speaking country. Therefore I made a number of claims on this forum that the types are not that well defined (as people here think)
For example Si will pick up data and social norms of its own environment and family, the only problem here is that all countries and families don't have the same values and living conditions.
Plus when you add the differences in enneagram type that actually defines worldview it can be quite possible that two people of the same type will not look alike. After all there are 7,300,000,000 people on this planet and there is only 16 MBTI types.



Interesting, you are heavy on enneagram types that are typical for Te-doms.

All good points. There is indeed a lot of room for variance within a given type.

As to enneagram...well they're the ones that were closest.

 

[Sil]

You could very well have inferior Si, considering what you posted as an example of Si wasn't even Si.

ENFP isn't out of the question for sure. Much more likely than ESTJ, at this point.

Good case for the ENxP here.

That's normal, anyone would say this.

So what do you think I am confusing for Si?

 

[Yama]

Interesting! Okay, that is definitely very different for me. So for you, if the primary planned path fails, you have to struggle to engage your Ne and explore new alternative paths.

Do you find yourself looking back towards your original plan at all or wishing the first option had worked out, even as you try a new possibility? Also, how do you go about exploring new possibilities? What do you do to find them?

I beat the dead horse and continue to analyze and re-analyze the original plan, even as I'm already moving on to another. It's very stressful to me when things don't go as planned and I have to work around it. I always wish in these situations that the first plan would have worked out, because 1. My first plan is always my "best" plan that leads to the results I want the most and 2. Going back to the planning stage and figuring out a workaround and trying to re-ground myself and make sense of the situation causes me a lot of stress. My response to my plans not going as planned is to jump into inferior-Ne panic mode. I see 2,354 ways that everything is going to go wrong now because my plan is running amok. I've had my ENFP mother with me during one of these freak-outs and she got so frustrated with me that she just up and left me mid-panic attack, because I become ridiculous. Si wants to stick with the plan, why didn't the plan work, it was supposed to work, now we're screwed, because this was supposed to be the best option and all the other options suck so now what do I do? That sort of stress.

To be quite honest I don't really explore new possibilities all that much. I'm not very adventurous and am very comfortable with the same-old same-old. Why try different dishes at Panda Express when I could just get orange chicken every time because I love the orange chicken? It's not so much that I'm terrified of trying new things, but that I'm just comfortable with what I already am already familiar with. I am always a little skeptical of new things at first (like yeah I can try the teriyaki chicken instead but what if I don't like it, or what if I don't like it as much as the orange chicken and then I'll be disappointed that I didn't just get what I always get because I know for sure that I like that). I don't actively seek new opportunities and possibilities. If they come to me, I may consider them.

I believe I mentioned in the OP that I was considering ENFP, and have been for some time. I feel I use an excessive amount of Ne for an ESTJ.

However, as I stated, I don't relate to the inferior description of Si and largely don't relate to most ENFP posts or descriptions outside their penchant for possibilities. And their seemingly common issue of having trouble focusing on any one thing, although I suspect my problems with that are not comparable to an ENFP on the whole.

I suppose those are superficial type issues, but they feel present enough that it's brought me to re-evaluate my type.

So far though I'm not seeing much case for ENFP though, which us surprising.

I have a very hard time seeing ENFP for you, especially when compared to other ENFPs I know. ENTP would be more likely than ENFP, but I still think Te-dom fits more.

I understand where you're coming from, although shouldn't MBTI be able to stand alone in terms of explaining some of our differences?

At first I wasn't very interested in enneagram, but I've learned that it plays a large part in personality-typing, even when you're trying to figure out MBTI. For example, 4 strikes me as a very "Fi" enneagram type that is probably more likely to be the enneagram of an Fi-type than an Fe-type, but it's not impossible for a non-Fi type to be a 4. I also get a lot of aspects of enneagram 9 mixed up with Fe. As an ISFJ 9w1, I am similar to, but vibe differently, than and ISFJ 2w3. Cognitive processes and preferences are the same, but enneagram is more about how we behave or vibe than how we think and cognate (is cognate a word?).

 

[Sil]

I beat the dead horse and continue to analyze and re-analyze the original plan, even as I'm already moving on to another. It's very stressful to me when things don't go as planned and I have to work around it. I always wish in these situations that the first plan would have worked out, because 1. My first plan is always my "best" plan that leads to the results I want the most and 2. Going back to the planning stage and figuring out a workaround and trying to re-ground myself and make sense of the situation causes me a lot of stress. My response to my plans not going as planned is to jump into inferior-Ne panic mode. I see 2,354 ways that everything is going to go wrong now because my plan is running amok. I've had my ENFP mother with me during one of these freak-outs and she got so frustrated with me that she just up and left me mid-panic attack, because I become ridiculous. Si wants to stick with the plan, why didn't the plan work, it was supposed to work, now we're screwed, because this was supposed to be the best option and all the other options suck so now what do I do? That sort of stress.

I've heard the Ne supplying negative possibilities is also a pretty common thing for ISTJs as well. I can see how it would work that way, although it sounds pretty awful.

To be quite honest I don't really explore new possibilities all that much. I'm not very adventurous and am very comfortable with the same-old same-old. Why try different dishes at Panda Express when I could just get orange chicken every time because I love the orange chicken? It's not so much that I'm terrified of trying new things, but that I'm just comfortable with what I already am already familiar with. I am always a little skeptical of new things at first (like yeah I can try the teriyaki chicken instead but what if I don't like it, or what if I don't like it as much as the orange chicken and then I'll be disappointed that I didn't just get what I always get because I know for sure that I like that). I don't actively seek new opportunities and possibilities. If they come to me, I may consider them.

Honestly, I can relate to an extent. If I've found something I'm comfortable with that works (like a food order), I will stick with it until I'm dead or feel randomly compelled to abandon it. Not because I dislike new things, I just don't care. If it works, great; one less thing for me to think about while I focus on other stuff.

However, I'm not skeptical about trying new things. My rule is try (almost) anything once, then decide.

I think maybe the better way to phrase what I meant is that I actively seek new opportunities or possibilities in the face of challenges. Or in areas where I perceive that I've been shying away from something uncomfortable. I think that's one of the reasons I was briefly a CP six on the enneagram; if I realize I'm moving away from something, I start moving towards it.

I don't like letting limits be defined by myself.

I have a very hard time seeing ENFP for you, especially when compared to other ENFPs I know. ENTP would be more likely than ENFP, but I still think Te-dom fits more.

It's a bit difficult; I relate to some of the more universal ENFP "problems," such as distaste of boredom, need to be inspired/engaged/interested, but on the whole I'd say the type isn't very fitting.

But at this point, that's pretty much my only option unless I'm secretly an ISTJ, which I highly doubt.

At first I wasn't very interested in enneagram, but I've learned that it plays a large part in personality-typing, even when you're trying to figure out MBTI. For example, 4 strikes me as a very "Fi" enneagram type that is probably more likely to be the enneagram of an Fi-type than an Fe-type, but it's not impossible for a non-Fi type to be a 4. I also get a lot of aspects of enneagram 9 mixed up with Fe. As an ISFJ 9w1, I am similar to, but vibe differently, than and ISFJ 2w3. Cognitive processes and preferences are the same, but enneagram is more about how we behave or vibe than how we think and cognate (is cognate a word?).

Yeah, I've been through the enneagram before. It's just not a system I believe in; its oversimplification is what cripples it from being useful IMO.

But I can understand what you mean.

Thanks for the detailed post.

 

[Sil]

Ni =/= good at financial planning.

The part that sounded ENTJ to me was this:

What do you think Sil's type is?

As an aside, don't read the chess comment as a buzzword. I'd planned to write checkers, but then realized chess made more sense in context.

 

[Sil]

I could see some kind of SFP, maybe. Poor Ni use, instead of no Ni use altogether. Would explain why [MENTION=22628]Sil[/MENTION]'s descriptions of Fi seem so connected to physical experience. That would be Se+Fi.

Just spent some time going through both SFP cog functions.

I don't use Ni or Se, especially not as they relate to those types. Re: Se, I think most everyone on here has managed to read far too much into my posts and missed the larger point; I don't live in the present or connected with my surroundings (on an Se sort of level). I simply use Si to pull myself into the present for short periods of time as a way to indulge myself.

If I were already predominantly present-focused, I wouldn't be escaping into it. I sit solidly in the future in terms of where my mindset most often takes me.

Also, to clarify some, I understand that Si isn't a present function. But the feelings Si conjures up are in the present. So Si for me is a matter of bringing the past to the present...and then reliving the past in the present in a present sort of way.

Eh, that's probably confusing. Needless to say, I'm not present focused. Se does not apply.

At this point, it's pretty much back to ENFP or ESTJ for me. Ni/Se can fall off the table.

 

[existence]

So what do you think I am confusing for Si?

Sorry for the delay in replying - I'm not quite sure, it's possible it's Si but it does not sound like high order Si in the "function stack". If you could generalize more on how you do Si, that would be more meaningful in terms of having strong enough Si for it to be auxiliary.

However, I'm not skeptical about trying new things. My rule is try (almost) anything once, then decide.

This (and other stuff you are saying) is very very Ne. Yeah I guess ENTJ is out of the picture for real.

It's a bit difficult; I relate to some of the more universal ENFP "problems," such as distaste of boredom, need to be inspired/engaged/interested, but on the whole I'd say the type isn't very fitting.

Can you explain why ENFP isn't very fitting - I'm looking for a concise summary here, without quoting a lot of text from descriptions where only a few lines are bolded

But at this point, that's pretty much my only option unless I'm secretly an ISTJ, which I highly doubt.

Lol no way that you'd be Si dom, your Ne seems much stronger than that.

Yeah, I've been through the enneagram before. It's just not a system I believe in; its oversimplification is what cripples it from being useful IMO.

This is off topic a bit but can you say what seems oversimplification in it?

I don't use Ni or Se, especially not as they relate to those types. Re: Se, I think most everyone on here has managed to read far too much into my posts and missed the larger point; I don't live in the present or connected with my surroundings (on an Se sort of level). I simply use Si to pull myself into the present for short periods of time as a way to indulge myself.

If I were already predominantly present-focused, I wouldn't be escaping into it. I sit solidly in the future in terms of where my mindset most often takes me.

Now I wonder why you don't relate to Si inferior then?

Also, to clarify some, I understand that Si isn't a present function. But the feelings Si conjures up are in the present. So Si for me is a matter of bringing the past to the present...and then reliving the past in the present in a present sort of way.

It does make sense that Si would be in the present in that fashion, hmm.

At this point, it's pretty much back to ENFP or ESTJ for me. Ni/Se can fall off the table.

I'm still leaning towards ENFP. You did mention you're not that strong on Te either - what makes you think so?

 

[existence]

[MENTION=22628]Sil[/MENTION] what do you think?

 

[Sil]

[MENTION=22628]Sil[/MENTION] what do you think?

Sorry, jump on this later today. Haven't had the chance to sit down and do any lengthy, serious writing.

 

[existence]

Sorry, jump on this later today. Haven't had the chance to sit down and do any lengthy, serious writing.

No worries.

 

[Sil]

Sorry for the delay in replying - I'm not quite sure, it's possible it's Si but it does not sound like high order Si in the "function stack". If you could generalize more on how you do Si, that would be more meaningful in terms of having strong enough Si for it to be auxiliary.

Hmmm. Let's assume for this that Si is a subjective experiential sensation tied to past experiences (but not correlated to memory).

I often use this 1) when I am trying to remember how to do something I've done before, but don't recall how exactly to do it or 2) when I have to find my way back from somewhere (basically anything with directions where I don't actually have any directions).

For example, let's say you put five or six bottles of sake in front of me that I've tasted before, but don't exactly remember. You want me to remember which one was sweetest (let's assume for this argument that I don't actually know sake polish grades). I can look at each bottle and feel around inside myself for a subjective, emotional "snapshot" that goes with each bottle. It's not remembering the taste or the actual past experience of drinking from that bottle, I'm remembering the emotional experience that was associated with the act of drinking from it. I can then use that emotional "memory" of drinking the sake to identify which was sweetest. If you asked me, I couldn't tell you anything about my experience drinking the sweet sake. I could only tell you it was sweet because I remember the emotional resonance that the bottle produced.

On a side note, this makes me really good at blindfold drinking games, because identical drinks produce the same emotional resonance.

I think the more tried and true example of Si is the first, task-based example. The rest are just the things that I've always considered an extension of Si.

This (and other stuff you are saying) is very very Ne. Yeah I guess ENTJ is out of the picture for real.

I wouldn't consider this terribly Ne though, since it's not about possibilities. It's more a life philosophy.

Can you explain why ENFP isn't very fitting - I'm looking for a concise summary here, without quoting a lot of text from descriptions where only a few lines are bolded.

The short of it is that I feel that I use an extensive amount of Ne for an ESTJ, but probably not enough to be an Ne-dom.

The other part is that I don't see any similarities between myself and other ENFPs I see on forums. And this is after years of interacting with ENFPs. They are generally a lot more...emotionally tuned into themselves. There's a marriage between them and their emotions I don't connect with. I tend to view most of my emotions as things separate of myself. Not always, but often.

There are parts of inferior Si I do relate to, but having re-read both pieces, I think inferior Fi is more applicable.

Lol no way that you'd be Si dom, your Ne seems much stronger than that.

It's funny, I was just discussing in a different forum that most fictional characters I relate to are ISTJs. I also find ISTJs to be very easy to understand and get along with.

However, I am not an introvert. I guess if we were looking solely at cognitive functions, then maybe. But in terms of introversion/extroversion, I'm an extrovert. A lower-ish extrovert, but still an extrovert.

This is off topic a bit but can you say what seems oversimplification in it?

It reduces human motivations to absurdity. Humans are much more nuanced.

Now I wonder why you don't relate to Si inferior then?

I do to an extent...I think one of my earlier posts addressed it. But as I was reading it, there were some major "nope, don't relate" moments. Such as the ENFP withdrawing for periods of time.

I'm still leaning towards ENFP. You did mention you're not that strong on Te either - what makes you think so?

Ne, Si, and Fi feel very strong and apparent to me. I notice them easily. Te feels more unconscious. I use it, but I couldn't say I notice it.

 

[Sil]

Here are some descriptions from a user in another forum named lookslikeiwin:

1. Se: An external physical/factual awareness. Se notices and identifies the bare reality of it's surroundings separate from any abstract interpretation or possibilities. It is only what is.

Don't relate. The present is always filled with some abstractual context. I look at the world around me and it is always tied to something beyond what is just there. Sometimes that is ideas, sometimes its over-arching theories/ideas about universal truths, sometimes it's just past experiences.

2. Si: An internal physical/factual awareness. Si notices and identifies the bare reality of it's own being, separate from any abstract interpretation or possibilities. It is what it is according to the internalized facts which it is continually building upon.

Relate, but on a minimal scale. I'm not sure what's mean't by "bare reality of its own being." I consider abstract interpretations and possibilities an extension of myself; they are a part of me. Maybe not the core part, but a significant part. They're not separable from me because they comprise a part of who I am.

But maybe that's what the last sentence alludes to...

3. Ne: An external abstract/theoretical awareness. Ne notices and identifies the possibilities presented by it's surroundings which may not yet be reality or presented as facts.

Yes. I relate to this. It's strong, although I'm hesitant to say it's my default function. But it's definitely heavily present, especially if I'm not focused on some task.

4. Ni: An internal abstract/theoretical awareness. Ni notices and identifies theoretical concepts based upon information already internalized and builds upon it's theories continually as more facts are presented to it to work with.

I relate to this to an extent. I am constantly taking in new information to generate new ideas, which are then held up against a larger internal idea, much like putting a puzzle piece up against another puzzle piece to see if they fit.

However, if there's a mismatch and it's unexpected (let's say the facts don't fit the idea), I'll see what my gut says and then decide from there whether to discount the theory or the facts. If I discount the theory, I try to go back to facts and re-piece a new image together. If I dismiss the facts, I have to find a reason why they don't fit that makes sense within the theory.

5. Fe: An external emotional awareness. Fe recognizes and utilizes the emotional situation/atmosphere in those around it.

Hmmm...I don't consider myself Fe, although I am somewhat aware of others' emotions. I can pick up how someone feels on a general level (mostly in tone of voice, choice of words). But beyond that, no. Not very good at this. I often have to ask to confirm if people are feeling one way or the other about something. It's not natural.

6. Fi: An internal emotional awareness. Fi recognizes and utilizes it's own emotional situation/aura.

Yes. Very aware of how I feel about things. Often ignore it, especially if it feels irrationally-based (as in there are no immediate facts on hand that justify the emotion). Ignore doesn't mean I can act against it...I can't act against the value-feelings I have. But I can control how they are displayed in public, especially how often.

7. Te: An external logical awareness. Te recognizes and utilizes the systems and patterns surrounding it.

Yes. But I take facts and build them into patterns? Kind of like taking information and re-arranging it into an organized system of understanding.

Anyways, I rely heavily on facts.

8. Ti: An internal logical awareness. Ti recognizes and utilizes it's own collection of systems and patterns.

Eh, I don't know about an internal logical awareness. I think I notice whether or not there are logical consistencies in ideas, but it's more gut than head based (Si reacts first and then I have to spend some time pouring over the details for my brain to catch up and identify what it is that's rubbing me wrong).

*additional note* It has been brought up that judging functions (thinking and feeling functions) may be more about decision making than awareness. Since I won't be able to edit this post by the time a conclusion is reached, I will allow you to draw your own. At the moment, I am inclined to say both are involved. I don't know which is more important.

 

[Sil]

If I am making decisions at work, I want facts first, which I cross check with my gut/feelings (not feelings as in Fi/Fe values, but as in my internal...system? An accumulation of thoughts/experiences that I rely on as a backup reference when I am unsure the facts can speak for themselves).

Values come into play later and then are weighed in value depending on how they stand up to their logical necessity in a given situation.