Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Sup and Query: Are people here certain about their type?

  1. #1
    Alomoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    TIM
    INTp ILI
    Posts
    372
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Sup and Query: Are people here certain about their type?

    I'll be brief. I am an INTp, probably 6w5, but I am still debating that. I came here about a year ago, but then I left. Now I am back. I have matured a great deal in the time I was away.

    Query: from someone who has to retest his type once every month, I want to ask whether people are certain about their type. There appears to be a disproportionate amount of INTp and ESFj type people in the self report. As such, I would like to get a census of whether that is true. Are people here certain about their type?

  2. #2
    Haikus Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    22,740
    Mentioned
    531 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    Welcome to the forum

  3. #3
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    2,540
    Mentioned
    375 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alomoes View Post
    Are people here certain about their type?
    Some are sure about their type, some aren't. Some are right about their type, some are wrong. The groups are not orthogonal nor are they fixed.

    The whole idea of people being one type or another is debatable. There do not seem to be any physical structures in the brain which can be identified with a particular type. There is some research which indicates that, for duals performing identical tasks, alternate regions of their brains are active, but that seems to be about as far as things have gone toward unequivocally identifying a "type".

    As things stand, there are various tests which a person can take which will identify them as some particular type. If you believe in the test, you can be as certain of your type as you want to be. These tests are based on the assumption that the pattern of answers to the questions asked strongly correlates to a psychological type. The tests have what are called instrumental errors, in the sense that each test (instrument) will give different results (or errors). Thus, you can be an INTp by one test, and an INTj by another, depending on how you answer the questions and how the tester assumes your answers determine type.

    The fact that there is no standard for what a "type" is, or how to identify it with certainty, can be seen in the daily record of the posts on this site. People will get together and debate what type they or another person might be. They don't always agree. You can pay people to tell you, and they don't always agree. On the other hand, there is little debate over how tall people are, or what they weigh. Incidentally, telling a person what type you think they are, if they haven't asked you for your opinion, is considered to be rude. I, personally have done this, but then, I am sometimes rude. I try to refrain from this activity. Usually.

    This sounds like a pretty grim situation, and it is, except for the fact that a large number of people have formed a loose consensus, not very well defined but not impossibly vague, about how each type processes information. There are also general fables about how the types behave in real life and how they interact. Surprisingly, these fables correlate strongly (maybe 60-80%) with real world behavior. So, the theory of types can be very useful, if it's limitations are understood.

    I would say that the present state of the theory is similar to that of information in the Bible. For example, the Bible states that a week should be seven days long. (Seven days was good enough for God, it is good enough for you. When this was being written, different groups had different length weeks.) It is a bad idea to kill your neighbor. Usually. Treat your slaves well. Etc, etc. Basically, it is a large collection of useful anecdotes which are intended to increase the odds of tribal survival under certain circumstances. But it was better than nothing, and probably prevented the worst kinds of unrestrained behavior which come about from complete ignorance of how people should behave. Socionics does this, too.

    Welcome back.

  4. #4
    Alomoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    TIM
    INTp ILI
    Posts
    372
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ok. Well, I've considered this for a while, and thus come to the conclusion of typing people based on their relation to myself. For example, you'd be either a mirror or an identical. If identical, then you'd have the same qualms I do. If mirror, then you'd answer the question in a way that makes sense to me, but also is quite different from how I answered. For INTp vs ENTj, this would be the use of educated guesses vs the use of facts. This is correct, right? But yeah, I just use the descriptions data given by the site, and apply it to my incredibly slim idea of how social gatherings would work ideally.


    Edit: I am not sure as to whether mirror or identical.
    Last edited by Alomoes; 04-30-2016 at 04:59 AM.

  5. #5
    silke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    TIM
    Ni-IEI sx/sp
    Posts
    3,805
    Mentioned
    317 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alomoes View Post
    There appears to be a disproportionate amount of INTp and ESFj type people in the self report.
    There are next to none self-reported ESFjs on here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...do=showresults but there's usually a high percentage of IN-types of the typology forums.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alomoes View Post
    As such, I would like to get a census of whether that is true. Are people here certain about their type?
    Look like most here are 80+% over confident in their typing: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...u-of-your-self.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,112
    Mentioned
    386 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alomoes View Post
    Query: from someone who has to retest his type once every month, I want to ask whether people are certain about their type.
    I was not certain in own type only in the 1st year after I've begun to find it. After reading theory in books, typing people, thinking how this links to intertype relations (IR) I've find good matches of theory with LSE and then never had doubts in it.
    I'm sure the step with own typing of people near and checking how this links to IR is very important to understand own type. To don't use doubtful heresy like Reinin's dichotomies and other non-classical bs is also good, when you do typing.

    Are people here certain about their type?
    Some. And it does not mean they don't mistake or will not change the opinion.
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  7. #7
    Pookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    TIM
    IEI-Ni 6w5-9-2 So/Sx
    Posts
    2,131
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Im pretty sure it would be a stretch for me to fit into anything different than what I self type.
    I would say that ethically you are still supposed to act as if you have unilateral responsibility; but simultaneously you have to be able to see the other as a fully autonomous, free, aware person.

    Medicalizing social problems has the additional benefit of rendering society not responsible for those social ills. If it’s a disease, it’s nobody’s fault. Yay empiricism.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •