not sure

[citizen cane]

i have no clue what my MBTI type is. i'll start by saying i'm definitely IxxP, and definitely NOT ISTP- granted, my fine motor issues are a slight factor, but i'm not the adrenaline junkie at all- i've always hated rollercoasters and fast speeds much more than my peers, i'm no good with tools, ie woodworking and craftsmanship. i love listening to music and play two instruments and sing in the church (ugh) choir- but i'm mediocre at all the above. according to various sites, my career interests line up best with ISFP, and i certainly am capable of the intense SP fit of anger, and i do have ADD. i've often been accused of being overly-emotional and sensitive over stupid things, mostly by peers my own age. that said, i've also been accused of the opposite, mostly by adults. i do love debate, philosophy, and a grammar nazi. i despise math, and i have a nonverbal learning disability which interferes with abstract higher-math type thinking. my favorite board games are scrabble and backgammon, and i love crosswords and word searches. ernest hemingway is probably my favorite author, i'm one of the few people that finds vonnegut average, although i've only read two of his books. i'm reading walden right now, and i can't wait to finish the damn book.
i also test as an enneagram 6, and i think it sounds like a condensed version of what i think of as my weaknesses.

 

[phthalocyanine]

have you tried reading anything about the cognitive processes?

 

[citizen cane]

i can find vague similarities to Si, but some of these traits are also ones that piss me off to the core...

i can sort of identify with Se, insofar as the "oneness with the physical world" seems to describe my love of nature- birdwatching, going for a walk/ wheel in the woods, etc.

for some reason the Ne description seems rather shabby and just plain nonsensical, like someone wanted to use a bunch of large words to show off. reminds me vaguely of George Will's writing, in an incredibly annoying way (didn't Se say something about finding resemblances?) looking more closely, i can somewhat relate to this, but deciphering this paragraph is only slightly less infuriating than reading for my english lit class...
EDIT: read through it again, while relatable, most likely not this.

the Ni description is slightly less confusing, and more easy to identify with, on par with or perhaps slightly moreso than Se.

didn't get halfway through the first sentence of Te...absolutely NOT me.

Ti certainly sounds plausible.

not Fe.

Fi also seems a possibility.




while i found something in common with Se, looking at another site, i realize i'm NOT that...i don't think i am actually capable of simply taking in stimuli without analyzing it.

 

[citizen cane]

anyone care to provide further insight?

 

[gromit]

while i found something in common with Se, looking at another site, i realize i'm NOT that...i don't think i am actually capable of simply taking in stimuli without analyzing it.

I don't know if that's the idea behind Se. Whatever had a nice thread about Se floating around here somewhere... let me see if I can find it.

 

[gromit]

Found it!

 

[citizen cane]

thanks!


of the ones listed in the beginning of the thread, now it seems like Ne is the most plausible. granted, it could be Ni...but i'm realizing it's quite unlikely that i'm Se or Si. i enjoy going down endless trails of thought in my own head, or trying to figure out other peoples' heads. of course this pays no mind to the T preferences...

 

[VagrantFarce]

1. Try not to think of the functions as tools that you "use", or even as "functions" - they're over-arching ways of thinking and perceiving. Think of them as "perspectives".

1. Take my super-short test! It seems to work for a lot of people. Also, check out http://www.typologycentral.com/foru...27-quick-guide-double-checking-your-type.html - it's not fool proof, but it's something to chew on.

2. Also, consider your tertiary, auxillary and inferior functions - they're easier to spot in my opinion. The dominant function might be harder to spot because you might not be aware of its influence - you might even be assuming that everyone thinks the same as you!

3. Finally, a quick tip: the four functions in each type essentially come in two pairs - Dominant/Inferior and Auxillary/Tertiary, and the two functions in each pair always sit on opposing axes. For example, if you decide on your auxillary being extraverted sensing, your tertiary is going to be introverted intuition. The four possible pairs are:

Introverted Thinking / Extraverted Feeling
Introverted Feeling / Extraverted Thinking
Introverted Sensing / Extraverted Intuition
Introverted Intuition / Extraverted Sensing

Hope you figure something out! :hi:

 

[citizen cane]

well, i can say with a fair amount of certainty that my interaction style is informing and responding. i'm really not sure about the abstract vs concrete language, or the affiliative vs pragmatic.

i'm about 90% sure i'm either ISFP or INTP.

 

[VagrantFarce]

I would recommend considering the differences between Introverted Intuition (which ISFPs have) and Extraverted Intuition (which INTPs have). Here's some stuff I wrote once trying to express the different succinctly, that's gotten a few positive comments:

Giving it another go:

Extraverted Intuition makes you aware of the wider context of whatever is being perceived, allowing you to create interesting responses and alter meaning on-the-fly. From this standpoint, context is inferred from what can be observed and otherwise outwardly perceived, like following a link labelled "relevant websites".

[youtube=1ioBZ5fNJO8]Ne[/youtube]

Introverted Intuition makes you aware of all the potential frameworks that could be applied to a situation, changing the meaning by simply approaching things in a different way. You're not "looking" for a wider context in the observable world, you're shifting perspective. From this standpoint, context is inferred from the assumptions we bring into the world, like changing the lens on a camera.

[youtube=GeixtYS-P3s]Ni[/youtube]

[youtube=JlSzWJ0-r24]Tertiary-Ni[/youtube]

The difference really just seems to be where meaning and context are thought to emerge from:

• Ni-types think of meaning and context as defined by the assumptions we take into the world -the perspectives we choose to hold as individuals. You change the meaning of reality and the possibilities available to you by allowing yourself to "look" at things in a different light - to actively ignore what simple observation suggests.
• Ne-types think of meaning and context as defined by what we observe in the world - the web of connections that are just already there. To change the meaning of reality and the possibilities available to you, you have to allow yourself to be open to what observation suggests, and to not be arbitrarily dismissive of possibilities at first glance.

An Ne's thoughts could be construed as Ni, and vice versa, on the surface - but behind the scenes, I still see them as completely different ways of thinking that opposing types tend not to share. For example, I can certainly see how other people will think the way I described Ni, but I certainly don't think that way - indeed, my instinct is usually to dismiss that sort of thinking as contrary and dismissive to what is being discussed.

See these for a better explanation for what I'm talking about:

Holistic Spiraling

The typical rhetorical style of NPs, especially INTPs: appeal to Extraverted Intuition, pointing out relationships among disaparate things, to trigger an "aha!" of Introverted Judgement.

In Holistic Spiraling, one makes a contrast or comparison to establish reference for a term, then uses that term to state a proposition. That proposition is then contrasted or compared with other propositions, creating a new vocabulary for proposing yet more hypotheses, and so on, hence the "spiraling". "How does this relate to that? Now that we understand that relation, how we can we better understand these other things?"

In contrast to rhetoric guided by Extraverted Thinking, the conclusion cannot be stated at the beginning. Nearly all of the rhetoric is concerned primarily with establishing a shared understanding of reference points in reality, in terms of which the conclusion will be framed. The rhetoric of Extraverted Thinking more typically begins with a conclusion framed in terms of an already shared conceptual framework, followed by reasons to establish that conclusion as opposed to contrary conclusions.

Type From Scratch

A conversation between two NPs has a distinct pattern: you could call it Holistic Spiraling. When NJs talk together or an NP talks with an NJ, the spiraling seldom takes off even though there's still lots of reframing of ideas.

The peculiar disconnect that nearly always happens between INTJs and INTPs. From the INTJ's standpoint: "He seems awfully attached to his model, as if it's the only possible one. There are so many possibilities he hasn't ruled out. His argumentation is simply unfair: he is choosing observations to stack the deck to favor his interpretation over all others. He seems oblivious to the complexity of the subject. He does not seem to know what he's doing." From the INTP's standpoint: "I'm trying to point things out and draw distinctions in order to define a vocabulary that carves out some aspect of the subject matter. That would be forward progress. But he refuses to look. He keeps translating everything I say into some moronic vocabulary that he's already familiar with, where what I'm saying is a trivial goof. He seems completely stuck in his box."

 

[citizen cane]

i took a test at keys2cognition.com and got INFP...i'm not entirely convinced by any means though, so i'll cross-reference my thoughts with what you just posted as well as my quiz answers and results.

thanks!

 

[citizen cane]

i DEFINITELY identified with the bob dylan video...especially around roughly the 1:30 mark on. i could see the validity in the perspectives in the second vid. the third vid didn't really strike me as having the depth of thought involved in the latter two...and it just didn't have anything to identify with, imo.

 

[citizen cane]

feel like adding- something about either of the context definitions seems rather frustrating. i can see how meaning could be different for each individual in the same exact situation, but the external (i'd think this is what most people think of as context, especially when differentiated from meaning) situation would be the same...the physical reality didn't change, the perceptions simply differed.

that may or may not have made any sense whatsoever...

 

[Nonsensical]

i like you, wheelchairdoug. I think you're a very interesting person and hope you stay around man.

 

[phthalocyanine]

for some reason the Ne description seems rather shabby and just plain nonsensical, like someone wanted to use a bunch of large words to show off. reminds me vaguely of George Will's writing, in an incredibly annoying way (didn't Se say something about finding resemblances?) looking more closely, i can somewhat relate to this, but deciphering this paragraph is only slightly less infuriating than reading for my english lit class...

i LOL'd.

 

[citizen cane]

i LOL'd.

i get that alot, especially when that's not the effect i'm trying for...

 

[VagrantFarce]

Try this site: ISFP

What about this? Extraverted Sensation

 

[citizen cane]

i think i've come to the conclusion that i'm an ISFP that everyone else thinks is an INTP. i should mention that half the stuff on INTP Profile sounds like me. especially the "being lost in my own head" thing and the love of logic and word games.

thanks everyone!

 

[citizen cane]

Nvm, I can now say with virtual certainty that my dominant function is introverted thinking...I saw somewhere about this being easily observed in earlier childhood and it made immediate sense...so, I'm gonna have to change that part of my profile. Now, to figure out my other functions.