Little Linguist's Type Rant

[Little Linguist]

I assert all that above is one or the other of these:

Tertiary Ne (ESxJ): "Ok, then, I'll bluff. We'll see how he responds to that. I don't know where this is leading, but at least it's leading somewhere new. This takes courage. Most people wouldn't have the courage to reach for the unknown at a time like this, but I can, because I can trust my principles to work in any new situation." The Secondary Function (Si) would say: "What are the facts here, really? Set the decision-making criteria aside and look at the facts freely, without without regard to any particular purpose or how the facts appear to others."

Tertiary Te (ExFP): "Unfair!! I have to stick to my guns, I will not be bullied or cheated. Any number of authorities agree with me. All my friends agree with me. Everyone can see that my response is directly mandated by the situation: anything else would be irresponsible. These facts absolutely settle the matter, and there is no point in looking at it any further." The Secondary Function (Fi) would say: "Fair or not, reasonable or not, recognized by anyone or not, what would truly accomplish some good here?"

Why? Because, as someone pointed out to me a while back, and as I currently over-state as a hypothesis: online, in-forum, we all tend to write from the tertiary. INTJs sound emo-whiners, ISXPs are wholistic world-viewers, ENXJs are slick sensory groovers, INFPs reminisce, ENTPs promote togetherness, and so on and so on. And--I corral the thesis further--the above quoted rant sounds like Ne or Te.


I almost hesitate to provide yet another link, extending the research phase weeks and months longer still, but: Which one is you?

If you ask me what tertiary temptation I have, I'd be more likely to say Se or Te rather than Ne or Fe, which are more natural for me.

Actually, when I wrote that, I was thinking something more along the lines of, "WTF IS THEIR PROBLEM??? Maybe if I reason it out by laying down my arguments in a rational way, they will finally understand me instead of misinterpreting everything I say, and if that doesn't work, then !"

LOL Just kidding - sort of - but I hope people now understand what I mean, and if not, I give up.

 

[Kalach]

Werl... you persistently refuse to conclude on matters theoretical, which is to say, on the matter of how MBTI theory applies to you. That's the interesting part of this whole, erm, discussion. It intrigues me, as INTJ, for I identify a great deal with the type descriptions that say INTJs put forth a lot of effort to translate their inner understandings into human mortal speak, making them accessible--or followable--to others. What it looks like is you, beg my pardon for being blunt, don't understand MBTI concepts. This could have a number of sources: disinterest in theory per se, interest in theory but disinclination to settle on one understanding of any given theory, or an interest in theory but in practice a lack of presentations of MBTI theory that you've found yourself willing to absorb.

Just out of interest, how do you know your husband is INTP? You've mentioned once or twice that he is, and you seem settled on that type attribution. How did you come by it?