Orangey's Type Post-500 Post Count?

[ajblaise]

So Js don't value accuracy and truth as much as Ps, you're asserting..?

That seems to be the major risk you run if you rush to judgment.

 

[disregard]

So what are you saying?

Js are more inclined to blindly adhere to their initial convictions and Ps are more disposed to explore in depth for accuracy?

(If you haven't noticed, I'm reiterating my initial question)

 

[ajblaise]

So what are you saying?

Js are more inclined to blindly adhere to their initial convictions and Ps are more disposed to explore in depth for accuracy?

(If you haven't noticed, I'm reiterating my initial question)

Yeah, for the most part. Although I think an INxJ, for example, would tend to be more pensive then an ESTP.

 

[disregard]

Can we try to tie that claim to some facts on extraverted judgment in contrast to introverted judgment?

The reason I've caught onto this little bit is because as I've learned about MBTI, I've tried to avoid these non-CP traps (Is are quiet and shy, Es are loud and obnoxious; Js are organised, Ps are messy procrastinators), because, as evinced by my type being (apparently) INFP and my being extremely neat, which is just one example, they do not help in accurately assigning a type to a person.

 

[ajblaise]

Can we try to tie that claim to some facts on extraverted judgment in contrast to introverted judgment?

The reason I've caught onto this little bit is because as I've learned about MBTI, I've tried to avoid these non-CP traps (Is are quiet and shy, Es are loud and obnoxious; Js are organised, Ps are messy procrastinators), because, as evinced by my type being (apparently) INFP and my being extremely neat, which is just one example, they do not help in accurately assigning a type to a person.

Makes sense. There are definitely exceptions (like, aren't you a left-brained INFP? that could explain the neatness), but for the most part, all of those generalities and tendencies exist for a reason. But I wouldn't follow them as a rule.

 

[Salomé]

Js seek closure. Ps don't.

MBTI 101.

I don't understand why you are questioning this. It's not a stereotype. If you take the test you answer questions which specifically indicate one or other preference. Why is this controversial?

 

[disregard]

I encourage asking questions. You clearly do not.

 

[ajblaise]

Js seek closure. Ps don't.

MBTI 101.

I don't understand why you are questioning this. It's not a stereotype. If you take the test you answer questions which specifically indicate one or other preference. Why is this controversial?

True, but not everyone's a strong or even definite J or P. Lots test close the 50/50 mark. And that's where we start noticing anomalies.

 

[Salomé]

I encourage asking questions. You clearly do not.

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Love 'em. But found it difficult to believe you didn't understand what aj was getting at. Thought maybe you were cutting the grass.

True, but not everyone's a strong or even definite J or P. Lots test close the 50/50 mark. And that's where we start noticing anomalies.

Don't you start!

 

[disregard]

Oh look, you made a play on words.

 

[ajblaise]

Don't you start!

Thought you were going to contest that more.. I was all set to call you a J...

 

[Simplexity]

It's simple really.

You can put a positive spin on anything you wish and a negative spin on whatever you wish. If you want to do one, you might as well do both. Deliberately contrasting to prove a point in one skewed direction doesn't accomplish anything. I think the better comparison would be "Js blindly adhere to their initial convictions while Ps are rarely capable of coming to a defined conclusion." Equal weight to the negative aspects and equal weight to the positive aspects. That's more in line with neutrality than the initial statement, which I realized was more tongue in cheek.

 

[disregard]

Yes, that would be more consistent.

I just have not committed myself to "J and P" (like I and E) being their own.. trait. Those letters only tell you about the CP preference.

 

[Salomé]

^ Maybe you should start your own "guess my type" thread. Instead of derailing this one?

 

[disregard]

Ah, we weren't discussing my type (unless you were..?), but this could certainly be split.

 

[Simplexity]

Well see asking those questions necessitates a long drawn out argument/conversation on the fundamentals of MBTT. I think it would be best to tailor the responses specifically to the individual. Yes that does introduce a lot of subjectivity, human error, biases, and the like... but sometimes it is the best course of action. Or we should at least have an imperfect consensus on what we agree on and proceed from there. I don't think the answer lies in specifically attacking what we feel is wrong within the system. IMO it would be best to look at the case of the individual and tease out the "facts" from there and then begin the analysis.

 

[Orangey]

How many introverts would describe themselves as socially confident? I wouldn't take that into consideration, IIWY. The fact that you are/can be absolutely sure about anything, says J to me.

True.

Orangey, are you any closer to a conclusion? If not, you might be a P after all.

Well, if you don't think that my type doubt is totally unfounded, then you would see that I came to a decision prematurely and am now reconsidering its validity in light of new realizations. J means coming to quick decisions (for the sake of closure), not dogmatically adhering to them despite legitimate evidence to the contrary.

So what are you saying?

Js are more inclined to blindly adhere to their initial convictions and Ps are more disposed to explore in depth for accuracy?

(If you haven't noticed, I'm reiterating my initial question)

Yeah, for the most part. Although I think an INxJ, for example, would tend to be more pensive then an ESTP.

The way I see it, making decisions easily is a separate issue from adhering to them forever and ever. A J will just as quickly decide that their decision was wrong. It's the ease with which they commit to a decision, not how stubbornly they stick with it after the fact.

If an INTJ knew that they were wrong, for instance, would they continue to adhere to a decision? That's irrational behavior that I wouldn't readily attribute to an INTJ.

 

[kyuuei]

I posted INFJ. I meant to put INTJ, my dyslexic eyes switched them around on me :blushing:

The posts I have read remind me of slightly more (slightly) winded conclusions than the INTJs I talk to? >.> .. I'm no good with these things.

 

[Sniffles]

I posted INFJ.

Yes such a tragedy that isn't really so.

 

[ajblaise]

Well, if you don't think that my type doubt is totally unfounded, then you would see that I came to a decision prematurely and am now reconsidering its validity in light of new realizations. J means coming to quick decisions (for the sake of closure), not dogmatically adhering to them despite legitimate evidence to the contrary.


The way I see it, making decisions easily is a separate issue from adhering to them forever and ever. A J will just as quickly decide that their decision was wrong. It's the ease with which they commit to a decision, not how stubbornly they stick with it after the fact.

If an INTJ knew that they were wrong, for instance, would they continue to adhere to a decision? That's irrational behavior that I wouldn't readily attribute to an INTJ.

I think wanting to "have matters settled" implies a propensity towards not wanting to bring back those matters into question. It's a separate issue, but seems very connected. But of course everyone has to adapt and re-adjust their decisions to some degree just to function in society.

You're MBTI limbo seems well founded though. You probably wouldn't want to settle with the INTX label would you?