Originally Posted by
Mimosa Pudica
I typed myself IEE almost immediately after entering this site, based on tests and my understanding of the descriptions.
However, I'm getting more and more confused.
(I have a feeling that is not uncommon in here)
I'm pretty certain I'm NF, probably irrational, but I can't completely exclude NT.
How should I proceed to figure out my type for certain?
The way you approach this has me interested.....
the very, very, very first thing that you need is a rough thesis before you actually look for every bit of information to support it. This rough thesis is what i call "za feel".(a rough but ready responsive feel about things). Upon consideration of all the circumstantial things that led you to the world of psychological functions...you should have this "za feel" (for lack of a better word)accept it!
Once you have this rough thesis (Za Feel)then you can actually go out looking for the real evidence for it. (this is where a lot of people begin to doubt themselves--at this stage). Once you have collected a lot of information...you will be able to go back and write the real thesis. This is where you wanna be----to know who you are and the supporting evidence to back you up. I'll warm you though that even once you write the real thing, you still will have doubts (unless you suffer from parochialism...like a few people on this forum)....but anyways...
1."Za Feel" works to label with most accuracy the vertical columns of my holography grid...that is.....ST,SF,NF, and NT. This should be the most obvious choice you have and in essence is the very beginning of "Za Feel". At no other point in time have you isolated the 2 base elements that form functions and identity themselves regardless of the potentiality of the configuration.
Do not pay any attention to E and I as they are information exchange pathways and highly reliant and repetitive, on and with, one another only to add to the confusion. As for J and P ,even more so,...they are a derivative and a superficial dichotomy (depending on your school of thought)and as such irrelevant in the beginning. With there being differences in MBTI and Socionics, and nevertheless attempting to preserve the integrity of 16 types (pardon the subtypes), lets leave p and J out of it.
If you listen to what i said and you can think it thru at its propper communication value, you will have started the understanding.
2. The very next thing you need to do is ask yourself am i a cold person or a warm person overall. You need to have an answer to this. Cold refers to "a final transferable and impersonal state" whereas "warm to a final transferable and personal state"
3. Having decided at #2...you must answer....If a situation comes up that must be dealt with:
a) if you answered above you are a warm person....
>am i cold to begin with but do i get warmer?
>am i warm to begin with but do i get colder?
>am i always warm (except for those little islands of coldness that come to me every blue moon when say the world offers me something to confide in and hide behind in )
a) if you answered above you are a cold person....
>am i cold to begin with but do i get warmer?
>am i warm to begin with but do i get colder
>am i always cold (except for those little islands of warmth that come to me every blue moon when say someone cheers me up)
This will not tell me everything to determine your type. This will tell me your "Swing-Type". Swing Type is independant of an actual temperamental preference (eg. Ip, Ep, Ej etc.). It too however will tell me your subtype preference which is a highly under-rated component (people of the same type can be radically different and not related to upbringing).
So as soon as you know the answers let me know, M.P., imo.
"I, for one, have always seen myself as an NF who is cold to begin with but gets warmer time and time agsin"....hence my subtype choice proportional to an NT reality. That is my "Za Feel". That is my rough Thesis. Those who know me IRL will agree quite comfortably. I may have tried looking at it other ways from time to time but.... this is the surest thing i have always known about myself. It forms my a priori position (at least to myself from the point of view of the phenomenology of type itself...for lack of a better designation)