Does your type describe you or do you conform to it?

[Morpheus]

I have grown more and more sceptical about all archetype theories of late. They propably do have some truth to them, but it's only generalization. In the end all humans are, simultaneously, both virtually identical and infinitely unique. Personality isn't a deck of cards: in reality everything blends together in an extremely complex way. I don't even think that nature and nurture are separable influences.

But we do have those idealized versions of ourselves, and we thrive to be them. Something like an MBTI result will naturally influence our self-images and thereby actually change our behaviour. So, to answer the original question, I think we do conform to the types, but we are also described by them.

 

[acd]

Yep. Great point May:

So in a way, we might be constraining ourselves to behave in a certain way because of what type we believe ourselves to be.

Understanding ourselves and other people is one of life's greatest tasks. I mean, you never master understanding in either, it's a lifelong thing.

So when I discovered the mbti I figured I had hit a pot of gold for insight (on myself at least). But I always had more questions and the description didn't completely fit. I couldn't mold myself into it or make it me. Not really sure what I'm saying other than: identity transcends this theory. To conform to it is to limit yourself and your awareness.

Not to say it's not a valuable theory, but it does potentially create a lot of cognitive dissonance for some people who expecting to find all their answers within it, and instead are confronted with finding themselves the good old fashioned way or fitting themselves into a page long description they don't completely identify with..

I know someone who left an mbti forum over this frustration with fitting into a type.

 

[TurtleTrooper]

I like reading type descriptions because sometimes I feel like their dead on. I don't try to conform or act like an INFJ at all, I just do whatever I think I should be doing. But I'll sometimes use the type descriptions to explain, oh I have this quirk because I'm an INFJ.

Maybe that's not the best way to explain things.

 

[VH]

Tell a kid 100x that they're bad at maths and eventually they'll believe it, and never want to touch a maths book.

I agree with your sentiment, but sometimes people do have aptitudes and biases whether or not someone points them out.

In my case, I actually AM bad at math. Specifically, I'm bad at rote. I do very well with problem solving, so long as I can use whatever resources are available to me to do so. Problem solving within the constraints of rote is extremely difficult for me, as my mind tends to ignore the rote if there is a path of less resistance.

It might encourage or discourage someone... then again it might piss them off and prove you wrong despite their inherent talents or handicaps.

Tell a person they're INFJ (or whatever) and maybe they believe it too....? Even if they're not, maybe their belief will subconsciously compel them to express those parts of their personality that are more INFJ ish and suppress those parts which don't fit with their mental image of who they are.

Again, I agree with this sentiment, humans are likely to make self identifications... usually based on observations.

However, I've noticed that INFJs in particular are predisposed to questioning their type, even when everyone around them insists they are INFJs. We seem to ask the question, "Do I really fit this?" more often than most. This implies that we're less susceptible to self identification than seeking the truth. (And yes, I understand how ironic that statement is, hehe.)

IMO your perception of who you are GREATLY if not entirely controls what you actually act as and do. So those parts of the profile which actually aren't very positive or beneficial, eg. that INFJs can't logically explain how they're coming to decisions, are doing you more harm than good, because you might take it as an acceptable limit - just one part of your indelible personality type. And the longer you identify with any particular profile, the stronger would be the association between it and what you're willing (perhaps even able??) to do.
So in a way, we might be constraining ourselves to behave in a certain way because of what type we believe ourselves to be.

I look at type descriptions as commonality, never rules.

I never see "INFJs can't do this or that..." I see "INFJs are less inclined to..." The opposite is also true. I never see "INFJs always do..." I see "INFJs are inclined to..."

The reason for this is that personality type is not dictated by the strength of our functions, but by our preferences with our functions when they come into conflict. It is common for INFJs to have a less developed Te due to the nature of the type's preferences, however some INFJs have an extremely well developed Te due to life experiences. Niether of these conditions affect whether or not the INFJ prefers Ni and Fe over Te, even if their Te is stronger than their Ni and Fe combined.

Personality is a function of preferences. Intelligence is a function of capacity. They are easy to confuse, especially with self identification. Cognition preference is inherent. Self opinion doesn't affect it much. Self opinion affects choices once cognition is applied.

For example, someone might be an INTP who thinks they are an INFJ due to test results. The INTP mind would make decisions and process information based on how it understands things to work (Ti) and the possibilities it sees (Ne)... which could then make decisions based on the possibilities of how it understands the INFJ personality to work and seek to conform to those parameters. This would be made easier if the INTP had a well developed Fe and Si, as the INTP could 'lean on' their Fe... consciously tapping it to support their Ti, and use their Si and Ne in tandem to approximate Ni to support how their Ti understands Ni to work. They'd be consciously making choices with their inherent cognitive functions to simulate something that they are not.

In other words, anyone could convince themselves of anything, regardless of whether or not it is accurate, which can be a very beneficial thing if the end result is beneficial. Choosing to believe you are a truly good person will have you acting like one, even if you're not, so the end result is beneficial. The only problem with this appraoch is that at some point reality and projection are going to come into conflict and cause problems.

Just something to think about~

It is always good to think, especially about these sorts of things.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

Being conscious of my MBTI probably limits my type development.

I am often conscious, since studying the MBTI not to push myself outside my best suited operating parameters now.

 

[Trifoilum]

hmm, I kinda think it's kinda a chicken and egg question; does one show a certain MBTI capabilities before being judged as a type, then conforms themselves, or does one gets judged first, then developing traits of that type?

It...can go wrong, yes. in a sense of restraining what's actually yours and trying to be something you're not. The same would still happen even if you, say, 'try to understand its bad' before, because it would still happen, in a way a coin has two sides.

But what about if you're actually willing to change? :| would that make it a bad thing? A good thing?
/confused

Sorry, a personal pondering of mine.

Perhaps; perhaps, we should think less of becoming a MBTI type, and focusing to be what we thought were best and let people judge our own type ?
Or shouldn't we?

......

 

[Quinlan]

I don't feel like understanding my type is constraining, if anything it is freeing as it points out the value in my natural preferences so I'm less inclined to try and conform to some "ESTJ" ideal. Basically if I'm gunna conform to something it better be based on my own preferences rather than what others would prefer me to be.

I don't think I'm any different now than when I thought I was INFJ.

I'm pretty contrarian by nature so I'm probably inclined to want to defy stereotypes rather than conform to them.

 

[sassafras]

If anything, being able to recognize traits in myself that conform to a specific type (especially the ones I feel are negative) has made me want to push past them and try to approach things from a different perspective. MBTI has made me a lot more experimental and much more open with my personality, but made me much more rigid when it comes to typing other people in turn. After all, I know that I am not static; I know I'm capable of change as my experiences rack on up and that I might not be quite the same INFJ/ENFJ forever--because I'm in the driver's seat and I am the master of my own destiny and I am responsible for my personality and all the factors that affect it. With other people, however, it's easier to to overlook the fact that their traits are fluid and subject to environmental stimulus just as much as mine are, but not being in their shoes and experience them as individuals, it makes it that much easier to fall back on stereotypes.

So to me, MBTI is not a danger to me to compartmentalize myself and my experience as much as it is a slippery slope when it comes to me assessing other people based on these theories.

 

[Escrue]

The first time I read a type description for an INFJ, I was amazed by how accurately it described me. No joke.

 

[MindYourHead]

My type conforms to me.

The first time I read a type description for an INFJ, I was amazed by how accurately it described me. No joke.

Same here.

 

[whytiger]

For example, someone might be an INTP who thinks they are an INFJ due to test results. The INTP mind would make decisions and process information based on how it understands things to work (Ti) and the possibilities it sees (Ne)... which could then make decisions based on the possibilities of how it understands the INFJ personality to work and seek to conform to those parameters. This would be made easier if the INTP had a well developed Fe and Si, as the INTP could 'lean on' their Fe... consciously tapping it to support their Ti, and use their Si and Ne in tandem to approximate Ni to support how their Ti understands Ni to work. They'd be consciously making choices with their inherent cognitive functions to simulate something that they are not.

Wow, I totally conform to this!

 

[invisible]

before i took an mbti test i experienced very powerful convictions about what was right and wrong, particularly in terms of my personal decisions and what directions my life should take. at times it seemed to make moving forward with my life very simple as if i had doubts, all i had to do was remember the emotional clarity with which i came to decisions. i wasn't aware that i made decisions in this way until i took an mbti test. i have never felt that any of the decisions i made was truly wrong for me, but since i tested and identified with infj type i have spent more time wondering, and felt more confused about how "right" i could be. i feel that aspect of my personality has been compromised, which i think is generally a good thing and has made me more balanced, but sometimes i miss the sense of pure drive that came with unreservedly "knowing".

 

[NeverAmI]

I am a master of deceiving myself.

I find all the time that I am thinking 'what cognitive function is that adjective?' That sets up significant potential for bias which could definitely affect me on whatever type I consider myself to be and my already existing opinion of that type, such as whether I want to be or don't want to be that type.

Overall though, I still think learning MBTI and the cognitive functions has benefits that far outweigh the negatives.

That being said, I don't make conscious decisions to try to fit into any type. I make conscious decisions about what is best for my health in all aspects which is irrelevent to MBTI. However, MBTI provides a potential framework for determining what a good goal or area of focus should be, but that is just one tool among many.

 

[rbecca23]

Funny that you should post this. I've been wondering the exact same thing and am having to step out of myself to re-figure out who I really am and want to be. Sure, I'm an INFJ, today. But what about tomorrow?

In terms of who a person is, I think we are all blank canvases that have been influenced by everything around us - by the time we can objectively look at ourselves in a mirror, we have to have the strength to say, "yeah, this corner is chipped, and this smudge is not something I'm proud of - but it's all a part of me." But we can't just hide behind a MBTI test, or a repeated assessment about our behavior. I think the point is to succeed in seeing ourselves as we are without any facades, or shields that block truth.

It's up to us to see us for who we are, and not expect someone/thing to figure it out for us.

 

[Reon]

My type conforms to me.



Same here.

Weird, I did the opposite, I called bullshit on the MBTI. I ignored my result (INTJ) for a whole year and only after I received the same results over a span of a year, I decided to look into it.

As for my type. It describes me and some of my tendencies (I have contingency plans for everything) but it also misses the mark on a few things. I'm rather good with people and I'm not arrogant and such. I'm actually quite emotional in real life as well. I care about people, I like the idea of designing things for people.

 

[Gaze]

Weird, I did the opposite, I called bullshit on the MBTI. I ignored my result (INTJ) for a whole year and only after I received the same results over a span of a year, I decided to look into it.

As for my type. It describes me and some of my tendencies (I have contingency plans for everything) but it also misses the mark on a few things. I'm rather good with people and I'm not arrogant and such. I'm actually quite emotional in real life as well. I care about people, I like the idea of designing things for people.

I think this is the issue. It's not MBTI, but how it's used. It's very tempting to use it to stereotype everyone. Becomes too easy to say, for example, that because someone is an INTJ, they are not emotional or sensitive, etc. That's why specific type based "typology" forums, although great for interacting with those who are very similar, are sometimes restrictive. Many on these sites, apart from exercising their preferred cognitive functions, seem to spend most of the time conforming to the stereotype of their types since they are interacting with others who seem to feel the type fits them as just as much as it fits them, so it becomes a mutually reinforcing stereotypical environment. So, they develop their "naturally" occurring functions to the exclusion of developing other important functions as well.

 

[NeverAmI]

I think this is the issue. It's not MBTI, but how it's used. It's very tempting to use it to stereotype everyone. Becomes too easy to say, for example, that because someone is an INTJ, they are not emotional or sensitive, etc. That's why specific type based "typology" forums, although great for interacting with those who are very similar, are sometimes restrictive. Many on these sites, apart from exercising their preferred cognitive functions, seem to spend most of the time conforming to the stereotype of their types since they are interacting with others who seem to feel the type fits them as just as much as it fits them, so it becomes a mutually reinforcing stereotypical environment. So, they develop their "naturally" occurring functions to the exclusion of developing other important functions as well.

This is an excellent post. I really don't like the pigeonholing that happens sometimes on MBTI forums, and sometimes I wish I wasn't so attached to a forum based on one branch of a psychological profiling system, but the community here is why I stay. I really don't think about MBTI too much on a day-to-day basis, I find it too limiting on me, but the diversity and the quality of the community here keeps me glued.

 

[whytiger]

I am a master of deceiving myself.

Me too. Perhaps we should invent a type for that .

I think that Jung was more or less on the right track in insisting that the interplay of cognitive functions is complex. It doesn't necessarily conform to specific types. Indeed, when we use a particular cognitive function (or pair), we may feel that we are the type that that function(s) represents. When I'm using Ti, I feel INTP. When using Ne, I feel ENTP, when using Fe I may feel INFJ or something along those lines.

Last night, for example, I had a powerful Si impulse and spent the entire evening after the kids had gone to bed (which is my only free time) straigtening and folding clothes and trying NOT TO THINK. How can I be the thinker of thinkers if I don't want to think all the time? But it seems pathological if I do not want to shut it off sometimes.

 

[88chaz88]

Last night, for example, I had a powerful Si impulse and spent the entire evening after the kids had gone to bed (which is my only free time) straigtening and folding clothes and trying NOT TO THINK. How can I be the thinker of thinkers if I don't want to think all the time? But it seems pathological if I do not want to shut it off sometimes.

Your functions don't correlate to what you want to do, just what comes easily. If you don't want to think yet go mad with finding yourself doing so, this shows T dominance.

I believe anyway.

 

[whytiger]

Your functions don't correlate to what you want to do, just what comes easily. If you don't want to think yet go mad with finding yourself doing so, this shows T dominance.

I believe anyway.

Probably. I wasn't saying I'm Si dominant. I'm a sloppy, "let's not sweat the details" type of person. It's just that if you think of yourself as being Ti dominant, you can get into the habit of saying to yourself, "oh I need to think all the time because Ti is what my mind likes to do best", but I think that there are definitely times when we have to take a break and do things that are out of character.