Type Me

cvp12gh5

What a lovely way to burn...
MBTI
Intui
Enneagram
Thinking
Go ahead. Don't be shy!

All opinions welcomed.
 
Going to stalk your old posts .... back later.

You are very much like my best friend. INTJ.
 
Last edited:
INFJ seems to fit
 
INFJ seems to fit

Can you explain why INFJ seems to fit? I am either INFJ or INTJ. Undecided. So any insight would be beneficial. (:
 
I would agree on either INTJ or INFJ, but I don't get that feeling of rigidity from you like I do with other INTJ's I've known. I get the "essence" of INFJ from you without the soft, flowery stuff one might usually see from the INFJ type. To me, you come across as fairly confident and self-actualized whereas a lot of INFJ's I've known have had a lot of inner chaos going on and most have gone through some sort of deep depression or trauma that kind of brings all the Fe out all over the place but I don't pick up on any of that from you.

I can't even type myself let alone type other people so take what I say with a grain of salt.
 
Can you explain why INFJ seems to fit? I am either INFJ or INTJ. Undecided. So any insight would be beneficial. (:

Not sure if I can explain it. However, You don't have an INTJ vibe. You seem fairly open and the topics you post about seem to connect with what most INFJs post about. You seem fairly self contained and have a certain protectiveness about yourself typical of INFJs. INFJs are guarded and they are selective about who they interact with. You seem to pick and choose carefully who or what you engage in. That's likely because of Ni. That's pretty much what I got. Hope this helps.
 
[MENTION=12327]Anywhere But Here[/MENTION] - why do you think INFJ or INTJ seems to fit more than the other types? Or put differently, what do you find INFJ and INTJ in yourself?

What points on F/T are relevant to characterizing you, and in what sense do you think they put you on the fence? It is worth noting that the MBTI dimensions are correlated with the five factor model dimensions, and it's generally known that those tend to be more normally distributed than bimodally, and thus, there's no real such thing as a clear "dichotomy" where most people fall in one bucket or another out of two - it's more like degrees of preference all-round.

From a Jungian functions perspective, F/T is different from what was called thinking/feeling types, so if you'd like input on that as well (i.e., how much of a thinking vs how much of a feeling type you are), we can discuss that too.

The general distinction is that F is a lot more slanted towards compassionate humane orientation and sentiments that encourage caring about humanity, whereas the feeling function is more general, consisting of an apprehension of human value as informed by feelings, of which compassionate sentiments are just one subcategory.
You could say F includes the feeling function idea loosely, but themes it significantly more in the direction of a particular type of sentiment.

Whereas the feeling function is closer to depth of sentiment overall. It's possible to be a feeling function dominated type with a lower F score -- for instance some such types are dark and so forth, rather than tender. Tortured artists, etc can be of that variety.

It's also possible to be more of an irrational type (in the sense of irrational functioning) and not have too much preference between thinking and feeling.

And last, but not least, all this is just heuristic - in practice you do meet people with more or less closer to equally developed functions. It's often possible, though, to differentiate the types based on overall perspective, even if the raw functional development looks pretty good on both ends.
I think though that insisting on differentiating is often a bad idea when it becomes forced. Sometimes both in functions-land and the usual MBTI test land, the right answer is more or less that you're in-the-middle, and that any answer you give is going to be more opinion than detached truth, where it is safe to say reasonable people could disagree, rather than reasonable people being forced to converge.

We can also discuss extraverted v introverted feeling and thinking if you offer how you relate to those, but know that I don't believe in sticking to the models employed. I prefer just assessing that individually in people. The reason is the common model, aka INFJ is NiFeTiSe, has just sort of stuck, and is unnecessarily prescriptive.
It turns out neither Jung nor Myers first coined this model, and it's become the default in a way that seems to border blind faith and going with the crowd without trying to see if it is reasonable, which I am always against.
 
Last edited:
Surely NT, leaning towards INTx.
You demand a lot of information and you're fairly direct at asking for it just look above at some of your posts on this thread, but anyway, that seems to be the case as your written expression comes across. Also there's an air of sophistication and distance to you, steely maybe, but i'm not sure about that, i don't know you enough and it's just a gut impression. However, this makes me think more of somesort of an NTJ individual.
You also seem fairly casual sometimes, with a quick wit and sense of humour, which resembles more INTP individuals.
I think INTJ fits more, overall. You don't strike me as supressing Fe, and not there's not enough there to suggest INFJ, imo.
 
Last edited:
[MENTION=12327]Anywhere But Here[/MENTION] : the truth is the notion that INFJ have Fe, and INTJ have Fi is mostly a speculation and not agreed upon at all. It's very common on internet communities and among type practitioners because, hey, they have to go with something for consistency.

But the truth is neither Isabel Myers nor CG Jung quite went with this. Myers originally went with INFJ have NiFeTeSe, and INTJ have NiTeFeSe.

The only way to be sure what function-attitudes you relate to is by direct verification and understanding the definitions, understanding they can occur in many orders. CG Jung was quite clear that his typology is a rule of thumb, not meant to be put into a rigid set of rules, and he went back and forth on people's types as and when new data came in.

In terms of the Five Factor Model's input here, the problem is the MBTI seems not to have the wiggle room to capture everyone, because it relies on 4 scales. Various models like the NEO-PI seem to allow more subscales.

The classic NT is not as feelings-oriented or as agreeable/tender as the classic NF. The classic NT is also higher in Intellectualism than the classic NF. But, that is just as far as MBTI goes. In the FFM you can be high OR low in any of feelings, intellect, or tenderness. Any combination possible.
 
Your Results for The Big Five Personality Test

You Are Highly Open to Experience

Your score for openness was high, at 82.5%.

Openness describes a person’s tendency to think in abstract, complex ways. High scorers are prone to associative thinking, meaning that they readily see relationships between things. People high in Openness are more able to connect seemingly unrelated concepts, making them more likely to appreciate art and unusual ideas.

People who are high in openness are typically:

Creative
Imaginative
Adventurous
Intellectual
Unconventional
Artistically Inclined

High Openness scorers are more likely to be politically liberal and to participate in artistic and cultural activities in their leisure time. They tend to be drawn to artistic and scientific careers. High Openness scorers are also more likely to have a high IQ.


You Are Moderately Conscientious

Your score for conscientiousness was 57.5%, which is in the moderate range.

Conscientiousness describes a person’s ability to exercise self-discipline and control in order to pursue their goals. High scorers are organized and determined, and are able to forego immediate gratification for the sake of long-term achievement. Low scorers are impulsive and easily sidetracked.

The concept of Conscientiousness focuses on a dilemma we all face: shall I do what feels good now, or instead do what is less fun but will pay off in the future? Some people are more likely to choose fun in the moment, and thus are low in Conscientiousness. Others are more likely to work doggedly toward their goals, and thus are high in this trait.

Your score for Conscientious is in the moderate range, indicating that you are fairly average in your tendency to respond to impulses. You probably have some long-term goals and are fairly successful in pursuing them, but can be sidetracked sometimes when a particularly attractive diversion presents itself.


You Are Moderately Extraverted

Your score for Extraversion was moderate, at 52.5%.

Extraversion describes a person’s inclination to seek stimulation from the outside world, especially in the form of attention from other people. Extraverts engage actively with others to earn friendship, admiration, power, status, excitement, and romance. Introverts, on the other hand, conserve their energy, and do not work as hard to earn these social rewards.

Extraversion seems to be related to the emotional payoff that a person gets from achieving a goal. While everyone experiences victories in life, it seems that extroverts are especially thrilled by these victories, especially when they earn the attention of others. Getting a promotion, finding a new romance, or winning an award are all likely to bring an extrovert great joy.

In contrast, introverts do not experience as much of a “high” from social achievements. Thus, they don’t make as much effort to seek them out. Introverts tend to be more content with simple, quiet lives, and rarely seek attention from others.

Your mid-range score on this dimension indicates that you are fairly average in your motivation to seek out social rewards. You probably have some desire for admiration, influence, and prestige, but you can also be content when you’re not winning recognition from others.


You Are Moderate in Agreeableness

Your score for Agreeableness was moderate, at 65%.

Agreeableness describes a person’s tendency to put others’ needs ahead of their own, and to cooperate rather than compete with others. People who are high in Agreeableness experience a great deal of empathy and tend to get pleasure out of serving and taking care of others. They are usually trusting and forgiving.

People who are low in Agreeableness tend to experience less empathy and put their own concerns ahead of others. Low scorers are often described as hostile, competitive, and antagonistic. They tend to have more conflictual relationships and often fall out with people.

Your moderate score in Agreeableness indicates that you are fairly typical in the degree to which you balance your own interests with the interests of others. You are probably willing to sacrifice yourself for others some of the time, but you also watch out for yourself quite a bit.


You are Moderate in Neuroticism

Your score for Neuroticism was moderate, at 50%.

Neuroticism describes a person’s tendency to experience negative emotions, including fear, sadness, anxiety, guilt, and shame. While everyone experiences these emotions from time to time, some people are more prone to them than others.

This trait can be thought of as an alarm system. People experience negative emotions as a sign that something is wrong in the world. You may be in danger, so you feel fear. Or you may have done something morally wrong, so you feel guilty. However, not everyone has the same reaction to a given situation. High Neuroticism scorers are more likely to react to a situation with fear, anger, sadness, and the like. Low Neuroticism scorers are more likely to brush off their misfortune and move on.

Your score indicates that you are fairly typical in your tendency to experience negative emotions. You probably feel sadness, worry, anger, and guilt about as much as the average person. You are neither overly reactive, nor especially resistant to the stresses of life.
 
Yep, you are in-the-middle on a lot of stuff. That's actually normal and expected for the Big 5. I think this is the main thing people miss about the Jungian models - when Jungian orthodox theorists say an introvert has top two functions in the same attitude (contrary to forumite MBTI expectation), they're actually talking about the people with more pronounced introversion. And it makes sense, right? If you're pronounced introvert, then you're going to consciously function one way in your superior moments, and function the other way in your more laid back and compensatory moments.

Whereas someone who is more ambiverted needs to figure out which function seems to operate in which attitude characteristically (occasionally the answer is more or less undifferentiated preference).
Type is also a dynamic thing, in that you grow into and explore different aspects of yourself as time goes on.

Anyway, if you're more or less settled on your type, great. If not, and/or if you'd like to discuss any technical points, I have fun doing that, so I'd probably be happy to.
 
Extroversion |||||||||||| 46%
Orderliness |||||||||||||| 58%
Emotional Stability |||||| 26%
Accommodation |||||||||||||| 52%
Inquisitiveness |||||||||||||||| 66%


Extroversion results were medium which suggests you average somewhere in between being assertive and social and being withdrawn and solitary.

Orderliness results were moderately high which suggests you are, at times, overly organized, neat, structured and restrained at the expense too often of flexibility, variety, spontaneity, and fun.

Emotional Stability results were low which suggests you are very worrying, insecure, emotional, and anxious.

Accommodation results were medium which suggests you are moderately kind natured, trusting, and helpful while still maintaining your own interests.

Inquisitiveness results were moderately high which suggests you are intellectual, curious, imaginative but possibly not very practical.

Your Global5/SLOAN type is RLOAI
Your Primary type is Limbic
 
Yeah you're kind of moderate on Agreeableness. Also not a super strong introvert if the test is right. In general the tendency to experience positive emotions and seek them out is an extraversion thing. So things like being friendly are more extraversion than Agreeableness, albeit some of the friendly/warm stuff also contributes to Agreeableness more mildly.

I think that's part of the thing - if you meet the average person in the street, you don't tend to run into the cold, unfriendly kind quite as much as if you go to some ITJ-ridden lands.
That's because, as far as I can get it, lots of places are somewhat extraverted on average.

I'd conjecture the extraverted+moderately not-Agreeable combination is your typical person who has a warm, caring and friendly side, but is willing to be more critical and tough on people.
 
I think INTJ, too.
 
Back
Top