Mistyped TypeCentral Members

[cascadeco]

Why is the goal in typing yourself to be objective? It's a preference system isn't it?

"Do I prefer hawaiian or pepperoni pizza? I think I prefer hawaiian but I'll have to ask my friends (or random people on the internet) just to be sure..."

lol re. the pizza example. Not really the same thing, but I get what you're saying.

It's just something I've noticed about myself. I might *think* I'm such and such a way, or I might think I come across a certain way, but what I think/perceive about myself might be quite different from how I actually come across to everyone else, or in comparison/contrast to everyone else. And, even though I think I'm a certain way -- say, even if I think I'm the most awesome piano player in the entire world (which I don't think, lol) -- in comparison to people who actually ARE genius piano players, I am not.

If we were going by 'preferences' and assessing those preferences from things such as test-taking (which, ultimately is me assessing myself, but as has already been discussed, the questions themselves can be poor), I am INTJ. If this site had been up and running from 2000-2004, I'd be registered as INTJ, as I had only done the tests and didn't know much else nor had I interacted with the various types to really know.

End of story!! woo hoo!!

 

[Orangey]

INFP

(word choices & style, previous choices indicate - INP)
(wants to believe everyone is a special snowflake, doubts legitimacy of typing overall, repeats what has already been said in order to express agreement - F)

Seriously though, the "legitimacy" of typing depends on how you define the word (and I won't go into that right now.) And the whole "special snowflake" thing has, in my view, no bearing on typology. Sure, no single person has the same phenomenological experience as any other person. That is why it is the person themself that ultimately has epistemological authority when it comes to their own typing. But that is not to say that, because everyone is unique in some regard, that they cannot be more or less accurately categorized in a system like MBTI (not to say that MBTI is at all accurate.)

Oh, and finally, repetition is a key rhetorical strategy that is effective in embedding your argument into the consciousness of your audience. Moreover, I could just as easily been expressing disagreement with you as agreement with others.

P.S. I know you weren't being serious. I'm just in a typing mood :workout:.

You don't think though that when it comes to certain personality traits - notably external ones/behaviors - that outsiders aren't sometimes able to be more objective than you yourself?

I would agree outsiders can't possibly know the inner workings/thought processes, or even motivations, but I do think an outsider would be in a better position to label whether someone was utilizing Te more than Fe, for example. Or Ne vs. Se. I mean, mbti is just a categorical system, anyway - it's not the end all be all. So I guess I've never been offended when others have pointed out something about me... I'm more like, 'Huh? Really?' Now, I may not agree, but it would be interesting to me, as a lot of it can boil down to differing perceptions. So, with that, we also all have different ideas of what constitutes each particular personality type.

As for myself, I guess I've always tended to default my personality type to what everyone else views me as, because for one I don't particularly care, and for another thing, I tend to believe I am not in a position to be completely objective in terms of assessing my own personality -- *in terms of mbti categories* -- although I would agree with those saying it's ludicrous to think strangers can know you better than you yourself do. I'm not trying to contradict myself, I swear. I know who I am better than anyone else does, BUT I may not be in the best position to objectively place myself into one of 16 categories.

But being is not necessarily appearance.

 

[Resonance]

More ENTP propaganda. :rolli:

There are as many if not more Ts who make such arguments against MBTI around here.

Let's review: MBTI was created by an INFP.
INFPs are also one of the most common types to be interested in typology. Clearly, we buy into these categories happily.

And that's not even what Orangey's post was saying. She's just saying it's ridiculous to type an anonymous stranger online, especially considering it's hard enough to type yourself. Nothing about uniqueness or questing the theory.

Do you see how your arguments logically exclude each other?

Either she is INFP and isn't questioning the theory, or she isn't INFP and is questioning the theory. You've said INFPs tend not to question it, and also that she is not questioning it.

I'm clearly an ESFP.

Everyone stop humoring me.

-concise, meta, proper spelling/grammar: N
-aim at interrupting heated argument: F
-drawing attention to self, appealing to everyone: E
-overly firm and swift judgements: would be J, but due to ENF nature and lack of consistency, as well as debate context, P

Why is the goal in typing yourself to be objective? It's a preference system isn't it?

"Do I prefer hawaiian or pepperoni pizza? I think I prefer hawaiian but I'll have to ask my friends (or random people on the internet) just to be sure..."

"But you always eat twice as much pepperoni pizza as you do hawaiian... are you sure you actually like hawaiian better or are you just saying that for other reasons (friends like hawaiian, facilitate ordering, want to be seen as the type of person who likes hawaiian pizza etc.)"

~.~

Seriously though, the "legitimacy" of typing depends on how you define the word (and I won't go into that right now.) And the whole "special snowflake" thing has, in my view, no bearing on typology. Sure, no single person has the same phenomenological experience as any other person. That is why it is the person themself that ultimately has epistemological authority when it comes to their own typing. But that is not to say that, because everyone is unique in some regard, that they cannot be more or less accurately categorized in a system like MBTI (not to say that MBTI is at all accurate.)

Oh, and finally, repetition is a key rhetorical strategy that is effective in embedding your argument into the consciousness of your audience. Moreover, I could just as easily been expressing disagreement with you as agreement with others.

P.S. I know you weren't being serious. I'm just in a typing mood :workout:.

Defense of Tness: successful.

 

[ragashree]

What does an INTP girlfight look like again?

 

[Rainne]

What does an INTP girlfight look like again?

 

[Resonance]

What does an INTP girlfight look like again?

[YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnFWP0_RzOs"]artistic interpretation[/YOUTUBE]

 

[OrangeAppled]

Do you see how your arguments logically exclude each other?

Either she is INFP and isn't questioning the theory, or she isn't INFP and is questioning the theory. You've said INFPs tend not to question it, and also that she is not questioning it.

And your conclusion makes no sense, because I did not say that INFPs are the only type who do not question the theory. I didn't say no INFPs ever question the theory either. It's a perception bias that some around here carry & like to purport as fact.

Typical response from an NTP though - latching onto some nonexistent claim and making ridiculous, unfounded statements to back an idea that had no basis in reality to begin with.

 

[Thalassa]

-concise, meta, proper spelling/grammar: N

Tsk, tsk...I think this is also a trait of SJs, not just Ns,but I suppose you're saying that if I were ESFP it wouldn't be the case. I tend to agree, actually, simply based on my personal experience with SFPs.

-aim at interrupting heated argument: F
-drawing attention to self, appealing to everyone: E
-overly firm and swift judgements: would be J, but due to ENF nature and lack of consistency, as well as debate context, P

Thanks!

 

[Orangey]

Defense of Tness: successful.

Hoorah

 

[garbage]

Why is the goal in typing yourself to be objective? It's a preference system isn't it?

"Do I prefer hawaiian or pepperoni pizza? I think I prefer hawaiian but I'll have to ask my friends (or random people on the internet) just to be sure..."

because the eight cognitive functions as theorized by Jung are scientifically proven to exist, to be mutually exclusive, and to span the entire domain of thought when taken as a complete set

oh

wait



naw dudes, this ain't so bad.. there's one forum out there that gave serious consideration to forcing people to take on types that "made sense" so that the theory could be explored and understood meaningfully

 

[Resonance]

And your conclusion makes no sense, because I did not say that INFPs are the only type who do not question the theory. I didn't say no INFPs ever question the theory either. It's a perception bias that some around here carry & like to purport as fact.

Typical response from an NTP though - latching onto some nonexistent claim and making ridiculous, unfounded statements to back an idea that had no basis in reality to begin with.

Typical response from someone not being taken seriously: assume they are being taken seriously and make a bunch of character judgements and stereotypes based on that assumption

Tsk, tsk...I think this is also a trait of SJs, not just Ns,but I suppose you're saying that if I were ESFP it wouldn't be the case. I tend to agree, actually, simply based on my personal experience with SFPs.

Thanks!

well, correctness yes, conciseness sometimes, meta rarely if ever.

I was just demonstrating a point though.

because the eight cognitive functions as theorized by Jung are scientifically proven to exist, to be mutually exclusive, and to span the entire domain of thought when taken as a complete set

oh

wait

 

[BlackCat]

I want those who believe the ENPs who frequent this site, who are, in fact, to them ESPs to explain their thoughts/rationalizations.

Unless someone is uncertain of their type, and they ask for help, I really have a disdain for those who view themselves as typology experts criticizing other people's types.

If you are self-aware enough, and you take the test, you will come out as a type that, according to the parameters, and according to how well you identify with it, will be your MBTI type.

I think it is presumptuous and PUSSY to exclaim that "many self-proclaimed" EPs on this site are Ss instead of Ns, and yes, BlackCat, I am talking to you.

I don't doubt my type, and neither do most people on this site, but I am sticking up for my EP brethren who you basically told and implied don't know themselves, and are lying to themselves and to us by claiming to be something they are not.

I realize when you first joined you were an INFP and then you switched to ISFP, perhaps you are close on the S/N dichotomy, but don't project your own confusion on others.

Many of us ENPs find solace here, a place where we can be accepted and understood for the weirdos we are.

So, please, oh wise one.

Tell us which ENPs, are in fact ESPs.

I'm sure they'd love to hear your "insights".

-SS

Wow, way to jump to conclusions and accusations. What gives you the authority to patronize me (and others on here) like that, all based on a few assumptions without proof about a post? Projecting my own confusion???? I didn't tell ANYBODY that they didn't know themselves, tell me where I did.

All that I was attempting to do was to get you guys to think outside of the box and consider that some of these "Ns" on here may in fact be Ss. With a couple of examples to help.

 

[Jaguar]

But that is not to say that, because everyone is unique in some regard, that they cannot be more or less accurately categorized in a system like MBTI (not to say that MBTI is at all accurate.)

Hi Orangey, seen any rotting rice around the forum?
Let's just play a quick game of what-if.

There are 3 working theories on the tert function attitude alone.
Because of this, it doesn't make a lot of sense to claim only one profile description for an alleged ENFP when other possibilities exist.

The three theories are as follows:

#1

E I
I E
I E
I E

#2

E I
I E
E I
I E

#3

E I
I E
E/I I/E
I E



Theory #1 assumes the Dom is so strong it needs the other 3 functions to oppose in attitude, just to achieve balance.
Theory #2 assumes balance merely by having the perceiving and judging function attitudes alternate.
Theory #3 assumes balance by allowing the tertiary to operate in either an extraverted or introverted attitude-interchangeably- depending upon the situation.

You might get a mental picture of some very different people, yet all are allegedly ENFP.
( I favor theory #3 for its inherent flexibility. That is not the theory MBTI uses.)

Just to throw out some ideas - what would an ENFP who prefers Tert Te think like compared to an ENFP who prefers Tert Ti?
What about an ENFP who "uses" Te and Ti interchangeably?
Would any of it matter, and to what degree?

I'm not expecting concrete answers to the above questions.
I'm merely throwing out information to get people to begin thinking.
Ignoring possibilities isn't exactly a route to discovery.

I have spoken to several MBTI coaches over the last decade who are against forcing people to choose a type that doesn't fit.
They have no problem being honest with people and telling them, "Look, MBTI doesn't work for everyone."

For people to claim what someone's type is with cock-suredness, is just a sign of ignorance.

There are as many if not more Ts who make such arguments against MBTI around here.

True.

Let's review: MBTI was created by an INFP.
INFPs are also one of the most common types to be interested in typology.

One of my favorite authors on typology is a self-proclaimed INFP.
Her name is Naomi Quenk. An insightful clinical psychologist who has used type theory in practice for many decades.
She's a great read -always looks for all the possibilities and the positive potential, rather than taking the pathology approach that so many negative people are known for.

 

[Orangey]

Hi Orangey, seen any rotting rice around the forum?
Let's just play a quick game of what-if.

There are 3 working theories on the tert function attitude alone.
Because of this, it doesn't make a lot of sense to claim only one profile description for an alleged ENFP when other possibilities exist.

The three theories are as follows:

#1

E I
I E
I E
I E

#2

E I
I E
E I
I E

#3

E I
I E
E/I I/E
I E



Theory #1 assumes the Dom is so strong it needs the other 3 functions to oppose in attitude, just to achieve balance.
Theory #2 assumes balance merely by having the perceiving and judging function attitudes alternate.
Theory #3 assumes balance by allowing the tertiary to operate in either an extraverted or introverted attitude-interchangeably- depending upon the situation.

You might get a mental picture of some very different people, yet all are allegedly ENFP.
( I favor theory #3 for its inherent flexibility. That is not the theory MBTI uses.)

Just to throw out some ideas - what would an ENFP who prefers Tert Te think like compared to an ENFP who prefers Tert Ti?
What about an ENFP who "uses" Te and Ti interchangeably?
Would any of it matter, and to what degree?

I'm not expecting concrete answers to the above questions.
I'm merely throwing out information to get people to begin thinking.
Ignoring possibilities isn't exactly a route to discovery.

I have spoken to several MBTI coaches over the last decade who are against forcing people to choose a type that doesn't fit.
They have no problem being honest with people and telling them, "Look, MBTI doesn't work for everyone."

Haha, no rotting rice in sight, unfortunately. And I get your point, which is why I added in parens that MBTI wasn't necessarily one of those systems that encompasses everyone accurately at all. Call me an optimist, but I'm just not willing to rule out the possibility that sooner or later there might be a system that is comprehensive (or at least more so than what we are currently working with.)

 

[ragashree]

^^ Great post Jag

I don't think any of the theories fits what I believe my own preferred function usage to be though, assuming I've understood it correctly on a quick reading. I'd just like to see people using it as a descriptive system - if it works for you and helps you get in touch with your own or others' thinking, and facilitate communication and self-knowledge, great. If it doesn't, stuff it; it's not helping anyone, no matter how interesting and internally coherent the theory may be in itself. It's only as good as its applicability in practice

 

[OrangeAppled]

Typical response from someone not being taken seriously: assume they are being taken seriously and make a bunch of character judgements and stereotypes based on that assumption

I'll take that weak, hypocritical response which fails to actually counter my point as a concession. It's always a "joke" when you're flat out wrong, isn't it?

 

[BlueScreen]

Which is frequently the case. One of the silliest things I have read in this forum was Elaur's post.
She never revealed the person's name, but someone contacted her in private and said:

"We have to correct your type."

Simply ridiculous.

I got the same when I started. I was arguing something in one of the NF threads then was told I had to be an ENTP over PM. I didn't mind it though. I actually found it interesting, except the certainty part.

I did tell marmalade I thought she was an ESFP... . (Obviously she isn't.)

 

[Jaguar]

^^ Great post Jag

I don't think any of the theories fits what I believe my own preferred function usage to be though, assuming I've understood it correctly on a quick reading. I'd just like to see people using it as a descriptive system - if it works for you and helps you get in touch with your own or others' thinking, and facilitate communication and self-knowledge, great. If it doesn't, stuff it; it's not helping anyone, no matter how interesting and internally coherent the theory may be in itself. It's only as good as its applicability in practice

Those three working theories are commonly known/used in the type community.
By no means do I think that's all that's possible. When it comes to the human psyche, I think anything is possible.
And just because something-or someone- deviates from a known theory, doesn't make them unbalanced or unhealthy.
I've mentioned that before, elsewhere in the forum.

I agree with you - use what works for you and throw out what doesn't.

 

[Quinlan]

Everyone in the last few pages is so STJ that it makes me sick!

 

[Thalassa]

Everyone in the last few pages is so STJ that it makes me sick!

NO!

I am an ESFJ. Get your shit straight.