Sorry, I ended up getting overwhelmed with other things and procrastinating the hell out of this...
Ohh no worries, I doubly appreciate your reply!
Yes to the latter, he's very ambitious in that sense. He's into both mathematics and also alternative energy/energy in general research as far as I've spoken to him about. I think he's looking towards either creating something himself or perhaps something more hands on, something that's helpful to society as he things on a more global scale I believe.
Sounds cool
Lower Ni/ reference for Fe above Ni. Se would still dominate in an ESTP as well, temperament wise they'd just be less people oriented and a bit less repulsed by introspection. You could have more ambiverted ISTPs as well, there'd still be a distinct preference from the dominant function though and a preference for the teritary function over the inferior.
Yeah, I saw the function model stuff, but the specifics you gave about the more introverted ESTP here, that is more concrete (thus more usable
) to me. Would you say it's a mandatory trait for ESTP to have the "animalistic" impulsivity? I've seen described it that way lol. I was told by someone who knows me IRL that I do not have that "animal" thing in me and I agree. She would otherwise have no problem seeing me as ESTP because she thinks I'm pretty action-oriented e.g. when I want to help someone. And yeah it's mostly when I want to do it for something, otherwise I must've learned as a small kid how to sit on my ass fine if needed for tasks or stuff
. She also insisted I can't be ISTP though because she can't see me as apathetic uncaring as ISTPs in her opinion are. Again I agree with her assessment about how I am there but it's really just because she experienced how I am when I care. When I don't get involved... I do look like I ignore people. It's just not apathetic because it's easy for me to get involved if I see a point to it. And whenever anyone engages me, I will pull out that socially conscientious mode, so again not apathetic/bored like the bad ISTP stereotype.
They can both be indulgent to some degree, I just find it manifests in different ways. Si is very particular with what it likes and is more oriented around creating an environment which is really appealing to them subjectively (or perhaps o others as well but I'd focus on the particularlness of it). Se is more experiential in that respect, sometimes more active or generally more internally stimulating I suppose?
Ah ok, I would say my approach to aesthetics is that it must satisfy my own taste *and* must also be appealing objectively (so not just to myself). So I'm like, I have both Si and Se for this one.
Also, by default I do have some of my own tastes where I get very particular, but I find if I make myself accept change, it's not hard to do it in quite some cases. I just have to make the *decision* for it. Then there is a little discomfort but not much while I make myself do the change. And in a similar fashion, I've learned to play with variety in certain things (clothing, food, etc). So that's the experiential stuff right? But it's like... planned or organised variety. Does this phrase make sense? It's like I plan/decide that I'm going to make myself have variety in something, when for some reason I decide it's necessary, and I just force myself to go into it. Or when I just have an impulse for it sometimes, I have a need to control it and organise it (the impulse and the variety). It can get pretty compulsive at that point, that need for control and organisation.
I also have always had a strong collector streak, and then of course there is variety too in a sense when you are for expanding your collection of something.
But again it's really "organised variety".
So again... I'm not sure how to interpret this one, does it sound anything like type related? It's ok if it doesn't ring a bell, but do please let me know if it does.
That's really interesting. I don't think that's exclusive to ISTPs (or would be super common among all ISTPs? You're the first person who's brought this up in the typing process), I've heard others have similar sentiments like that from others (primarily ISxx types, occasionally from ESxx but less). I must be honest, I'm not sure how to classify this in a typing sense.
So this is specific to / most characteristic of all ISxx types in your experience?
Again like I said, for me the task orientation is more important than to pay attention to the internal states so that's why it's not a continuous attention on them. When I say task orientation it doesn't have to be *very* action focused, it can just be that mode of mine with doing routine tasks and steps calmly and patiently.
Nah, they could both be stressing, it's not exclusive to one or the other.
The basic difference between Se and Te is perceiving vs judgement. The two get confused with one another because they're both generally action and progress focused. When looking purely at stereotypes, both Se and Te get associated with business a lot, Se in a more entrepreneurial way since it is a perceiving function; attentive to timing, action oriented, attentive to cues and the environment in a way that is separate and not directly associated to the self outside of judgement made. Te is associated with the more linear/typical business persona... You might benefit from some of these resources:
Dropbox - Jungian theory et al - Simplify your life
Yeah for sure action and concrete progress are important to me. I think if I'm forced to, I'm ok with trying to be entrepreneurial* in business or in other stuff too, sure, but I don't like too much change at one time otherwise. I don't know about being linear. Sometimes I am, sometimes not. The calm patient way of doing tasks is decently linear for me though. The more adaptably action focused way isn't as linear. Though obviously it's still about tasks to be done so it can't be a completely random ordering of things.
*: EDIT: about the bit on being
"attentive to timing, action oriented, attentive to cues and the environment in a way that is separate and not directly associated to the self", I would say I do have a sense for timing in some things, but I don't think I just operate on cues. That makes me think of a very gut instinct mode and I definitely don't fully rely on that alone. It depends on the situation, sometimes I do rely on that a decent lot but I get to rely on rules a lot more in social situations, in business, etc.
It's getting difficult for me to explain at this point, but your style of interaction in particular sounds distinctly Ti to me. Not this in particular, but your speech style... Very clarification and definition oriented, specifically aware of subjective differences in perception and thought, not relying heavily on some objective standard. I'm going to stick with my judgement for a STP type for you, I don't think you're high Te. I'm still going to respond to the above though.
OK, thanks for the input again. The compliment as well hahaha, about being aware of "subjective differences in perception", I'm not by default, this MBTI stuff is helping me see some of that though for sure.
Your first paragraph goes back to you having a relatively strong preference for T over F. It doesn't really strongly sound Ti > Fi (or vise versa), but only really rules out the possibility of you being a high Fe type, which we had settled from the get go since you're a T type. Your last point in that paragraph is particularly relatable and something I actually get yelled at about a lot lol.
Lol, I see, though I think if anything then you are even more impersonal than me.
I've definitely got comments on being smooth in a robotic way though.
Again, the biggest difference here goes back to percieving vs. judgement, environment vs emotional atmosphere. Both are attentive to body language and such, the focus for Fe dould be recognizing and clarifying an emotional state while Si could be focused on confront or discomfort in this sense. Si isn't related to judgement, but is derived from the self and internal knowledge/experience from perception (and with judgement from a judging function). Fe is oriented outwardly, assessing the situation from outside of itself (via pairing with a percieving function).
I can just tell you I don't ever spend time on clarifying emotional states in the body language of people. It's either obvious and easy to read for me, or it isn't, and then I don't bother. But even when it's obvious, I don't really usually comment on it then either. That'd again just be jarring personal stuff.
Assessing the situation from outside of oneself.... I think that's a really neat way actually to summarise what extraversion is, right? I'm oriented outwardly in the sense I am not focusing on my deep or subjective internals, but on the external situation - but somehow I don't really look at/assess the external situation without me also being in it. Like... here's the (external) situation that *I* am looking at. Which would be introversion... does this make sense?
Also can I ask, did my answer to your question on mobilisation make sense in any way? In terms of J/P?
EDIT: Ah also thanks for the link to the resources, forgot to say.
