Please help me type myself – xNxx ???

[Vendrah]

[MENTION=32874]Vendrah[/MENTION] , dude, welcome back! It’s a pleasure to hear from you again.

I know, the OP is far gone after almost 40 posts, and some stuff is a bit OT. Nonetheless, as the “Ni vs Ne” debate is at the heart of my typing doubts, I thought it was important to share it here.

I am not a cognitive function believer, so take all that I say regarding to that approach with a grain of salt. That being said, the comparison I made referred to Ne and Ni as dominant functions (the part of the neo-Jungian typology I’m less in disagreement with).

With that in mind, an Ni-dom is on the Ni-Se axis with Se inferior, that supports my view of the outside-to-inside movement, inwardly. On the other hand, an Ne-dom is on the Ne-Si axis with Si inferior, which implies the inside-to-outside movement, outwardly. That is in line with the common view of INxJ as bookworms, know-it-all, life-long learners: they gather patterns as they see them in the world, and store in their N memory. In contrast, ENxP look for patterns that they actively create, so that they are more experimenters, adventurers, button-pushers. It all fits nicely.

When you start considering N in other function roles (e.g. auxiliary) it starts to get messier, and dichotomies and functions models start to diverge, but for the scope of this thread (that is, typing myself!) I assume that we can skip that mess.

In my personal case, I could also add that I’ve been pondering on all this for quite a time, and eventually I came to the realization that this outward-to-inward movement is what I do naturally, effortlessly, all the time.

[MENTION=32874]Vendrah[/MENTION] , you know I bought into your insight about me being either I+J or E+P quite a while ago. Since you told me, I examined my daily activities and came to realize that I am J, maybe just mildly but I have that urge for things being settled, that need for closure, especially in the world of concepts and ideas.

All this is because my strong N is what dominates my type so, for example, J-ness has to be examined in the N world, not in the usual “order vs mess” thing. I’ve read something that made me think: N has a “pull” towards P and T, because it can look like logic/analysis (resembling T) and scattered/not in the moment/not dealing with “things” (resembling P); therefore, a strong N can mask your natural F and J preferences. I believe it’s my case!

In dichotomies speak, my view now is that being I and N and J is a strange combo: looking for patterns to come to closure. The pattern is “the” pattern in the sense that you have it inside (introverted), detached from the object, but comes from outside. Then you use your inner symbol and forget about the real thing (inferior S). This is understanding the deeper meaning, I guess.

On the other hand, if you change that to E + N + P, you get that active exploration of the world, generating possibilities and following them wherever they may lead. I don’t see that as an introverted activity, on the contrary, it looks pretty extroverted, from inside to outside. As I said, discovering by pushing, pulling, twisting, metaphorically – I’m talking about patterns and abstracts. The pattern ends up being there in the world because you put it there, a quintessential E behavior.

(I am not looking into the other two combos, ENJ and INP, as they don’t fit in my case, and I’m not knowledgeable enough to go any further!)

N/S interfering in J/P is a funny thing, the MBTI dichotomies are all independent, at least when you are not using cognitive functions.
However, in terms of world population, there are more NPs than NJs and more SJs than SPs, creating somewhat a connection between N & P and S & J. However, the same is no way at all for F/T, it is pretty indepedent. I dont really think that N disconnects feeling, at least not in general.

 

[noname3788]

N/S interfering in J/P is a funny thing, the MBTI dichotomies are all independent, at least when you are not using cognitive functions.
However, in terms of world population, there are more NPs than NJs and more SJs than SPs, creating somewhat a connection between N & P and S & J. However, the same is no way at all for F/T, it is pretty indepedent. I dont really think that N disconnects feeling, at least not in general.

I actually looked into the dichotomies and type destribution, and there are definetely some trends - the most noticeable one is indeed S/N and J/P correlation. In theory, each dichotomy is independent, but in practical results, they aren't. To quote the MB foundation website's description of N preference:

Paying the most attention to impressions or the meaning and patterns of the information I get. I would rather learn by thinking a problem through than by hands-on experience. I'm interested in new things and what might be possible, so that I think more about the future than the past. I like to work with symbols or abstract theories, even if I don't know how I will use them. I remember events more as an impression of what it was like than as actual facts or details of what happened.

and now for P preference:

I use my perceiving function (whether it is Sensing or Intuition) in my outer life. To others, I seem to prefer a flexible and spontaneous way of life, and I like to understand and adapt to the world rather than organize it. Others see me staying open to new experiences and information.

Since this pair only describes what I prefer in the outer world, inside I may feel very planful or decisive (which I am).

Remember, in type language perceiving means "preferring to take in information." It does not mean being "perceptive" in the sense of having quick and accurate perceptions about people and events.

To be fair, it doesn't line up as decently for J and P preferences. Beside that one, there seem to be minor correlations between thinking and judging, extroversion and intuition, sensing and thinking, but those are less prevalent and often too close to be distinguished from measurement variablity. However, it does explain why INFJ is the "rarest" type, despite I, F and J all being more common than their direct counterparts - those preferences contradict each other, at least to some level, making the combination unlikely. It also lines up with ENFP being the most common intuitive type.

Just to add some more off-topic random stuff... how about we create a new thread named "mancino's random thoughts and discussion thread about typology?" (okay that one sounds terrible)

 

[Vendrah]

I actually looked into the dichotomies and type destribution, and there are definetely some trends - the most noticeable one is indeed S/N and J/P correlation. In theory, each dichotomy is independent, but in practical results, they aren't. To quote the MB foundation website's description of N preference:

and now for P preference:


To be fair, it doesn't line up as decently for J and P preferences. Beside that one, there seem to be minor correlations between thinking and judging, extroversion and intuition, sensing and thinking, but those are less prevalent and often too close to be distinguished from measurement variablity. However, it does explain why INFJ is the "rarest" type, despite I, F and J all being more common than their direct counterparts - those preferences contradict each other, at least to some level, making the combination unlikely. It also lines up with ENFP being the most common intuitive type.

Just to add some more off-topic random stuff... how about we create a new thread named "mancino's random thoughts and discussion thread about typology?" (okay that one sounds terrible)

That would be a blog.
We could create a blog for us 3 to do that instead.

The problem is that, when I (and several people on Google Scholar), do the study in terms of % of preferences, there is no correlation between N and P and S and J. I mean, when instead of comparing types as 15% ISTJ, 7% ENFPs, etc... the comparison between each result of % of N (90% N like you and Manciono), the correlation between N and P disappears and everything become independent. I dont know why this only happens when evaluating populations of types but it disappears when evaluating the % of dichotomies.

 

[mancino]

Just to add some more off-topic random stuff... how about we create a new thread named "mancino's random thoughts and discussion thread about typology?" (okay that one sounds terrible)

AHHHH!!! Sorry for derailing this. But as you seem to be enjoying it...

Very interesting analysis about relationships among dichotomies, a lot of stuff that I wasn't aware of. However, when I said that N can mask your preferences, I was referring more to messing your answers in self reports, and even in self analysis and introspection.

For example "Am I orderly/scattered?" appeals more to SJ vs SP. NJ can be disorderly. Also with "thinking": a strong N-user can have the impression that she's in her head all the time "thinking", although she's a feeler. Your dominant function can distort your self perception a lot.

 

[noname3788]

AHHHH!!! Sorry for derailing this. But as you seem to be enjoying it...

Very interesting analysis about relationships among dichotomies, a lot of stuff that I wasn't aware of. However, when I said that N can mask your preferences, I was referring more to messing your answers in self reports, and even in self analysis and introspection.

For example "Am I orderly/scattered?" appeals more to SJ vs SP. NJ can be disorderly. Also with "thinking": a strong N-user can have the impression that she's in her head all the time "thinking", although she's a feeler. Your dominant function can distort your self perception a lot.

Yeah you're right about self-reports... I got like 7 or 8 different types from online tests. I guess being imaginative and adaptive can make accurate self-description surprisingly hard, as I might start thinking "it depends on the circumstances" on every test item. I always thought about this as a flaw... as a lack of knowledge about myself and as a sign that I lack something others have. Now I guess the absence of a clear pattern is also a pattern in itself, and yet I still acknowledge that there's often a disconnect between what I think and what my inner self believes. That one being caused by strong N preference could actually explain it (even though I usually only get 80% N, not 90% [MENTION=32874]Vendrah[/MENTION]).

And yeah, NJ can be messy and J/P relating to S/N.. true, but I honestly don't like to overcomplicate things, at least when it not necessary. Maybe there exists a better version of the type instrument which accounts for different expressions of J/P in intuitives, or it could be developed, but it would also go quite beyond the scope of what previous research has shown. Maybe NJ's have their own organisation style, which is different from what NP's use, but both may appear messy from an SJ perspective. And things become extra complicated when also introducing things from outside MBTI into the equation (which is something I like to do - I'm always trying to get a complete holistic answer, and often it simply fails, but I like to have some final result). I guess people are build up of many different factors, type may be one of them, but there are always various other influences which can describe different aspects, and it's likely impossible to overview everything at once. I mentioned a bit of that in my first answer in this thread, my foolish attempt to keep you away from the MBTI rabbit hole, and I also broke with something there, as I said I was comfortable with no type... and now I have a label. I'm not too confident whether it is 100% accurate, likely not, but it's still close.

Oh and I very much enoy this thread, I just thought it may be cluttering the type-me section, but there aren't too many other posts and they get answered as well... so I guess it's alright.

 

[Vendrah]

[MENTION=40271]mancino[/MENTION] [MENTION=39780]noname3788[/MENTION]
Problem is, this is getting into way too many pages.
Its a matter of pages for some MOD coming here, see the thread derailing, and start moving our posts to the graveyard, so, yup, we need a new topic... Or a private message board (although there should be a few people reading us here), or perhaps a community group (example of a community group: https://www.typologycentral.com/forums/groups/ambiverts-un-anonymous.html).

 

[pep talk]

Yeah you're right about self-reports... I got like 7 or 8 different types from online tests. I guess being imaginative and adaptive can make accurate self-description surprisingly hard, as I might start thinking "it depends on the circumstances" on every test item. I always thought about this as a flaw... as a lack of knowledge about myself and as a sign that I lack something others have. Now I guess the absence of a clear pattern is also a pattern in itself, and yet I still acknowledge that there's often a disconnect between what I think and what my inner self believes. That one being caused by strong N preference could actually explain it (even though I usually only get 80% N, not 90% [MENTION=32874]Vendrah[/MENTION]).

And yeah, NJ can be messy and J/P relating to S/N.. true, but I honestly don't like to overcomplicate things, at least when it not necessary. Maybe there exists a better version of the type instrument which accounts for different expressions of J/P in intuitives, or it could be developed, but it would also go quite beyond the scope of what previous research has shown. Maybe NJ's have their own organisation style, which is different from what NP's use, but both may appear messy from an SJ perspective. And things become extra complicated when also introducing things from outside MBTI into the equation (which is something I like to do - I'm always trying to get a complete holistic answer, and often it simply fails, but I like to have some final result). I guess people are build up of many different factors, type may be one of them, but there are always various other influences which can describe different aspects, and it's likely impossible to overview everything at once. I mentioned a bit of that in my first answer in this thread, my foolish attempt to keep you away from the MBTI rabbit hole, and I also broke with something there, as I said I was comfortable with no type... and now I have a label. I'm not too confident whether it is 100% accurate, likely not, but it's still close.

Oh and I very much enoy this thread, I just thought it may be cluttering the type-me section, but there aren't too many other posts and they get answered as well... so I guess it's alright.

I enjoyed reading this thread as well- it brought oh-so-many memories of my younger typing self The J/P is one of the most difficult to pin down, specially if you are fairly balanced between the two. This is why I feel I'll always consider myself an INFX. I'm happier that way, also because I would consider myself an ambivert, too ;P

 

[skimpit]

I think INP is good for you. INTP.

I read some of your reasoning against it, and it didn't seem to hold so much water for me. You are definitely an Fe-user as you say.

Did you ever decide on a type in a definitive way, [MENTION=40271]mancino[/MENTION]?

 

[mancino]

This is a very old thread, but I did eventually decide on a type.
The rationale is so long that I though I'd better open a new thread to share it, in case other people find it useful. You can find it here:

Advice about typing Intuitives (N)

I'm curious to see what you think about it!

 

[yeghor]

You are not an ENTP. ENTPs troll like hell.

You are in your 40s, you are courteous, people-person i.e. Fe, were chubby as a kid low S, engaged in Judo, crossfit etc means you have now developed your Se. Likes addressing crowds and teaching groups, Fe-dom.

ENFJ enneagram 3 with strong 1.

 

[yeghor]

Extraversion-Introversion = Balanced
Agreeableness = Feeler
Conscientousness = J
Openness = N
Neuroticism low = ?

xNFJ, I would lean towards ENFJ as you like teaching/handling groups. I've always thought Paulo Coelho to be an ENFJ.