Is my type INFp or INTp?

[Creepy-Cyclops]

That is almost impossible to reliably observe with any accuracy over the Internet. A proof of that impossibiltiy is all the mistypings in that respect which Expat and others are guilty of.

I agree in principle with what your saying..that it is *difficult* to observe with accuracy over the internet, but I wouldn't say impossible..or any near a definition of impossible. I think in that respect of how good it is would be dependant on how deep the interaction (conversation) were to go with an individual.

You should not even try to determine those aspects, because whatever conclusion you may draw from your observations is necessarily less reliable than Java's own self-typing.

Sure.

It's simply a very bad method of approach at every stage.

i don't know so much. For instance, supposing you were close to someone, and you wanted their advice..and they were an ethical type..what advice would you be more receptive to..an Fi creative or an Fe creative? If you were unsure of their type then you would probably be more sure after that conversation.

What I'm saying is that it isn't a bad method at every stage. Of course you may say a person would have determined if the other were Fi or Fe creative before such a thing, but if you did say that, that isn't always the case, the way I see it is that every method has it's uses, I think imo the distinction you should be making, is perhaps one has to know when to use them.

Of course I did say that I wasn't making any conclusions of Javatype this way, I simply was passing some observations at this stage which may or may not be useful here..but it could be useful 'there' (even to someone reading for their personal reasons) But you are saying it is never useful (or at least always very bad etc etc), which is incorrect, because aside from the reason(s) i've given here (which shows it can be of use and will sometimes be good) .. how can you possibly be aware of *every* situation in such a context?

[Phaedrus]

For instance, supposing you were close to someone, and you wanted their advice..and they were an ethical type..what advice would you be more receptive to..an Fi creative or an Fe creative?

Neither -- unless they could back up their advice with T arguments.

If you were unsure of their type then you would probably be more sure after that conversation.

No, certainly not. If I can't type them independently of such aspects, then I would certainly not try to type them using such an unreliable method. I would simply suspend any opinion of mine on their possible types until I had enough reliable data on which to make a correct typing.

There are always much better typing methods available than trying to determine such nuances as whether someone is Fi or Fe creative. So why not use those other, more reliable methods instead?

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Neither -- unless they could back up their advice with T arguments.

Some people I know have gave me definite Fi advice. It's one of my seeking functions and one of yours. Why would you need to T to back up their advice? That doesn't fit in with model A intertype relations.

No, certainly not. If I can't type them independently of such aspects, then I would certainly not try to type them using such an unreliable method. I would simply suspend any opinion of mine on their possible types until I had enough reliable data on which to make a correct typing.

Some people are more difficult to type, sometimes one method not reliable on own but when tied together with others pretty much make the case a given.

Interesting.. It occurs to me that my approach is Cre Te Dynamic. I feel personally it serves me well.

There are always much better typing methods available than trying to determine such nuances as whether someone is Fi or Fe creative. So why not use those other, more reliable methods instead?

You missed my point..I don't believe that you or anyone can be sure that they are aware of every situation so I do not understand how you can be sure that there are always better typing methods available in certain circumstances. Can you not accept/admit that maybe sometimes, what I said could have it's use(s)?

[Phaedrus]

You missed my point..I don't believe that you or anyone can be sure that they are aware of every situation so I do not understand how you can be sure that there are always better typing methods available in certain circumstances. Can you not accept/admit that maybe sometimes, what I said could have it's use(s)?

But how can you trust such a typing method when you are yourself weak at both Fi and Fe?

[Creepy-Cyclops]

But how can you trust such a typing method when you are yourself weak at both Fi and Fe?

Like I said I'm not saying it's a good method all the time, but i'm saying it is sometimes. My point of posting I think I explained etc.

But to further answer your question with a question: Can you not tell the difference between supervision and a more favourable intertype relation?

Being weak in both yes, but being receptive to one, surely yes also?

[Phaedrus]

But to further answer your question with a question: Can you not tell the difference between supervision and a more favourable intertype relation?

Maybe if I spend a lot of time with that person during a long period. Otherwise the possible sources of error and the possible different interpretations are simply too many. It is extremely easy to misidentify one intertype relation with another. Most people here don't realize that, but it's the truth.

It's quite easy to tell which of two very different intertype relations is there, given the assumption that you already know which of two possible types the person can be, like for example if you want to determine whether you are dealing with your Dual or your Conflictor. But if you know very little of the person in front of you, so little that he or she could be almost any type to you, then it would be ridiculous of you to try to determine what kind of intertype relation you have with that person. It would be a pure guessing game with little or no chance of success.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Maybe if I spend a lot of time with that person during a long period. Otherwise the possible sources of error and the possible different interpretations are simply too many. It is extremely easy to misidentify one intertype relation with another. Most people here don't realize that, but it's the truth.

I agree. But what I'm saying is if someone gives you a dose of Fi (and this can include IRL and internet) and you like, do you think it would be reasonable to assume it's quite likely they are Fi ego type, with a model A arrangement which is reasonably favourably compatible with your own?

(you=you and you=I in this context)

It's quite easy to tell which of two very different intertype relations is there, given the assumption that you already know which of two possible types the person can be, like for example if you want to determine whether you are dealing with your Dual or your Conflictor. But if you know very little of the person in front of you, so little that he or she could be almost any type to you, then it would be ridiculous of you to try to determine what kind of intertype relation you have with that person. It would be a pure guessing game with little or no chance of success.

I'm wondering if we should go circular or linear here.

(Basically I put down some general thoughts on accepting/producing functions, stated they were pretty much random thought-writing at this stage, and you came in and decided to critically 'analyse' it - which is fine- I appreciate what's probably your intent, but then there's nothing you've said so far that I don't think I already know, I think you were maybe too hasty to do that..but are we moving away from that initial point/discussion or are we still relating to that etc.)

Basically the conversation is ok with me as long as it can stay civilised..there's no need to insult people over a discussion, because then it becomes boring (just incase that happens) or even more boring haha.

So i'm going to go circular with you to an extent..and I think this could be interesting..if you care to answer?..how do you determine the types of people you come into contact with?

(you=you in this context)