Identity crisis

[FDG]

i am actually leaning towards ESFp for kristiina's type over ISFj.


i think the ganin descriptions really fuck this stuff up sometimes.

I analysed it, and Se might be my primary function. The description of ESFp was quite accurate, but I can't really identify with Ti in PoLR.

Honestly, might it be possible, that I have Ti PoLR and Te as Hidden Agenda?

!!!

Unrelated: you read the ESFp ethical sub description?

[CuriousSoul]

@Kristiina
I do not know what your type is, but I think there were a few misconceptions in this thread that I thought should be pointed out.

Wasn't there also a comment from Diana? Well, I don't think I am ISTj. I have analyzed it and I do have many of the ISTj qualities, but that's just one aspect of my personality. I get these ISTj moments, but this is not what I usually am. I know a couple of ISTjs and they are very similar. They even look similar in a way. Both wear rather gray not-outstanding clothes, glasses, no make-up, are cum laude students, short, friendly and most importantly - both are selectively opinionated. They are not very original in their thoughts, but they are intelligent in a logical way (rather analytical, not sharp and witty). This is all very nice, but in general, I don't think or act the same way. We get along well, but mostly talk when we have a reason to do so.

People are far too fixated on a certain image of each socionics type. The point is that the type descriptions fit some people with that type quite remarkably well, others to some extent , but in many cases they are almost useless. Paying too much attention to type descriptions is not likely to bring any conclusion. They are not the type. The functions, intertype relations, and the decision making process are. (Have you read the mathematico-mechanical socionics thread by Smilineyes. It did help me to confirm my own type, among other things...)

There are also many more outgoing and self-confident ISTJs that you would not abe able to recognize based on your conception of this type. Because the MBTI and even socionics tests measure the type indirectly they might often also test as some completely different type.

XoX, I agree that stagnation sucks. :wink: I like your analysis, but ESTp ( ) seems kinda wrong. I don't think I have any Se.

Are you taciturn or narrator?
Is your perceiving of time flow static or dynamic?
Are you an aggressor, victim, infantile or careful?

Taciturn, I think. I like the kind of dynamic conversation. And I get aggravated when a narrator drifts away from the main subject and starts with meaningless talk that goes on and on and on....

I think I perceive time flow as static, but I'm not sure at all. I really don't know.

I'm most like a victim. The aggressors would also be credible, because I can act like that, depending on the circumstances. The other two are really wrong. :wink: If anyone tried to baby-talk me into having sex, I'd kick his ass. Could anyone think of a better turn-off?...

I think here you are actually thinking in terms of what you expect form other people, but your dual has actually the opposite preference from you. In my opinion your writing style sounds more like narrator style. Of course, based on just message board texts it is inevitably a bit hard to say...

In some ways, I think these erotic styles are somewhat misleading since men tend to play the more active role already for biological reasons.... What could point towards aggressor rather than victim is that you seem fairly intolerant of negative criticism. Victim types kind of subconsciously expect to be mistreated, called names etc. It sounds strange, but... Aggressors can be demanding and selfish. This is all controversial and largely anecdotal...

7 Things must make sense. "For the ENTj it is very important precisely the authenticity of information sources." yes. "He possesses excellent memory, he easily memorizes new information, trying to immediately systematize it." no! I only remember the things that fit into my personal system. Total inability to memorise facts. I can remember complex logic when I understand it thoroughly, but I'll still forget the facts behind it. "However relaxed he was, it would seem, any logical contradiction immediately pricks up his ears. ENTj - fundamental enemy of manipulation with facts, even if this does not change the essence of concept. " very true.

This actually sounds like the approach Ti dominant people take when it comes to learning. Facts need to be converted into a coherent system, thus introverted thinking is "My Logic", and in the posts of Smilingeyes was represented as "Certain Capability". In other words Ti dominant people tend to think of things in terms of, I have learned this and therefore I can (and am allowed) to do this. Te dominant types more often do things first just acting on the presumption that of course I can do anything I need to do.

Eidos wrote:
IMHO: ISTJ


I considered that for quite a while.

+ yeah, I get overly obsessive about details, when I have the chance.
+ yeah, I plan a lot. I even make a small silent plan to plan. Most things that I do have been decided long before. Right now I'm living a general plan that I made 3 moths ago (if I do things in that order, I will have the highest chance of avoiding a nervous breakdown and finishing all in time.) I have planned my studies over and over again.

- I'm waaay too expressive and interactive to be an ISTj. I know 3 ISTjs and I think I'm pretty damn expressive compared to them. When I talk with an ISTj and we're not arguing about something, then it's like: me, " blablabla blalbla blabla " and they say, "yeah " It this goes on through the whole conversation. We even laugh totally differently. And I have tons of facial expressions and I'm not afraid of showing them. They are like, ummm, REALLY shy!

But if you can explain it in any adequate way, I'll look into it again.

But again, there are tons of ISTJs who are quite expressive and not really shy at all, on average far less shy than INTJs in any case. The one thing that makes me think you could be an ISTJ is the way you are able to set fixed long term goals and then work steadily to achieve them no matter what. This way of approaching life is most characteristic of exactly ISTJ type - but of course does not necessarily exclude any other types either...

Another confusion that seems to plague this messageboard is misunderstanding the hidden agenda. It is a subconscious function of authority, not a function of active will. It is not something that constantly motivates you at the back of your mind, but rather something that comes to disturb your best laid plans from time to time. How it manifests for every person varies greatly and it may not be that well suitable for typing yourself at least.

You are clearly a resolute person, thus from Beta or Gamma. To me you sound like a logical type, but if someone really thinks you are an ESFP, well I would like to hear more.

[Kristiina]

I'm still at my parents house, that's why I haven't posted much. And this post can't be too long because the space-key barely works and it is just sooo annoying.

Well... I'm still not ISTj or ISFj and I have reasons to think so.

I'm very confused and I feel rather unsure about myself and my type. I can't even see if I'm thinking or feeling, sensing or intuitive. I don't knowanything anymore.

And still! Do you really think that I've got Ti-PoLR and Te-hidden agenda?! I'm actually taking offence. I'm not that pathetic with my thinking! Read my earlier post as well or something. I've been somewhat stressed for the past month or so. And Kim, don't start with the whole "but even if you are feeling, you could be logical." The problem is that I'm not feeling.

I might be mixing up and , and I think I might have Se as my first function. But I still feel that my thinking is way more important factor in my life compared to my feeling. In conversations I'm not "ethical", I'm "logical". But I do need to win over anything else, so I might be some Se-primary type. Could I maybe be ESTp? It would also explain my relations with the INTp (semi-duality), my weak Fi/Fe and my desire to win and get what I want. And I do agree that I'm a resolute person.

Problems:
When I did the socionics type assertment test (the one with all the words), I was very strongly judging. There were the conscious and unconscious, in both normal mode and the reversed mode. They all gave the same result: "j". 6 J-s in a row. It must mean something. I have always agreed with the j-descriotions way more than with p-descriptions. I see a fundamental difference between myself and p-types.

I'm supposed to have Hidden agenda, but I get annoyed around people who are too expressive. I can't stand them. I like Fi, but Fe is irritating. (except when they are using their to boost my ego by giving me very expressive compliments: "You are soooo beautiful.")

If my mental scenes about future and past are not then what are they?!

Can a Se-type really be so oblivious to her surroundings and so clumsy?! Doesn't mean that I can sense my surroundings?

How can I objectively see the difference between - and - dominant. I'm totally inbetween.

[anndelise]

I'm still at my parents house, that's why I haven't posted much. And this post can't be too long because the space-key barely works and it is just sooo annoying.

Well... I'm still not ISTj or ISFj and I have reasons to think so.

I'm very confused and I feel rather unsure about myself and my type. I can't even see if I'm thinking or feeling, sensing or intuitive. I don't knowanything anymore.

And still! Do you really think that I've got Ti-PoLR and Te-hidden agenda?! I'm actually taking offence. I'm not that pathetic with my thinking! Read my earlier post as well or something. I've been somewhat stressed for the past month or so. And Kim, don't start with the whole "but even if you are feeling, you could be logical." The problem is that I'm not feeling.

I might be mixing up and , and I think I might have Se as my first function. But I still feel that my thinking is way more important factor in my life compared to my feeling. In conversations I'm not "ethical", I'm "logical". But I do need to win over anything else, so I might be some Se-primary type. Could I maybe be ESTp? It would also explain my relations with the INTp (semi-duality), my weak Fi/Fe and my desire to win and get what I want. And I do agree that I'm a resolute person.

Problems:
When I did the socionics type assertment test (the one with all the words), I was very strongly judging. There were the conscious and unconscious, in both normal mode and the reversed mode. They all gave the same result: "j". 6 J-s in a row. It must mean something. I have always agreed with the j-descriotions way more than with p-descriptions. I see a fundamental difference between myself and p-types.

I'm supposed to have Hidden agenda, but I get annoyed around people who are too expressive. I can't stand them. I like Fi, but Fe is irritating. (except when they are using their to boost my ego by giving me very expressive compliments: "You are soooo beautiful.")

If my mental scenes about future and past are not then what are they?!

Can a Se-type really be so oblivious to her surroundings and so clumsy?! Doesn't mean that I can sense my surroundings?

How can I objectively see the difference between - and - dominant. I'm totally inbetween.

Just some thoughts, based on observing your chat interaction, interacting with you in chat, and what little I have so far read of your posts.

When I read you talk about how much of a thinking type you are, or how logical you are, or how little you identify with feeling types.....it honestly feels like you are in "role" mode. As if...you're distancing yourself from aspects of yourself in order to be more objective. I certainly can't say that this is what you are doing...only that this is the same feeling which I get when I write, read my own writing, read certain types of posts from other people, etc.

This would fit in with identifying with j-descriptions over p-descriptions. I have not yet noticed any indications of you're being a p type. I feel as if you have some kind of..judgement that is already there, and then you are trying to mold your own perceptions or the perceptions of others towards fitting it.

I'd like to point out that Fe and Fi in the first functions has a different feel than they do in the second function. Probably the whole accepting/producing thing.

I cannot say whether you are Se or not....but as for can Se's be oblivious to their surroundings or clumsy, all I can say is YES, they can. I notice this regularly in a number of ESFps I've known, (not all of them though).

Also...and this is a personal thing with me, so I do hope that I don't offend anyone with this....but when I read someone talking about how logical they are, how much they use logic, etc etc...it feels as if they are trying to convince whoever they are talking to..as well as themselves...that they do use logic. It just seems to me that...it's kind of illogical to talk about how logical a person is. But then, I have Ti PoLR...so what do I know.

Edited

[MysticSonic]

"i think the ganin descriptions really fuck this stuff up sometimes."

They're Gulenko's.

[Joy]

The socionics.com descritpions are the best. They are direct translations from the russian.

[Creepy-]

The socionics.com descritpions are the best. They are direct translations from the russian.

Aren't they Ganin's *adaptations* of Gulenko?

I prefer socioniko.net or socionics.org, myself.

[Kristiina]

So far, the main opinion is ESFp/ESTp/ESTj/ ENTj (my opinion)
If the j means anything at all, then it determines pretty much.

ESFp is not my opinion and I don't believe it. Less dumb than ISFj, but not good either.

ESTp is the logical derivation from ESFp, but the type in general was supposed to be really annoying, obnoxious and loud. I still want to be liked, so I only act like this with pointless people, the ones that are good for nothing.

ESTj is also pretty logical when you look at the A model, but it doesn't make sense! I don't feel like Erkki is trying to supervise me. That makes no sense. We are equals.

ENTj is still an option, because I realised that most of the loudest people are just trying to confuse me and they are just guessing. They don't pay attention to things I say about myself or my habits/preferences.

[FDG]

ENTj is still an option, because I realised that most of the loudest people are just trying to confuse me and they are just guessing. They don't pay attention to things I say about myself or my habits/preferences.

[Kristiina]

ENTj is still an option, because I realised that most of the loudest people are just trying to confuse me and they are just guessing. They don't pay attention to things I say about myself or my habits/preferences.

And what a wonder... I didn't even mean you.

But there are still people who shout ISFj!!!

[Eidos]

ENTj is still an option, because I realised that most of the loudest people are just trying to confuse me and they are just guessing. They don't pay attention to things I say about myself or my habits/preferences.

[sarcasm]That's right, we're out there to get you, it's all a conspiracy to confuse you... [/sarcasm]

[Kristiina]

ENTj is still an option, because I realised that most of the loudest people are just trying to confuse me and they are just guessing. They don't pay attention to things I say about myself or my habits/preferences.

[sarcasm]That's right, we're out there to get you, it's all a conspiracy to confuse you... [/sarcasm]

hahaha... Well.. you know what I meant ...

[Expat]

ENTj is still an option, because I realised that most of the loudest people are just trying to confuse me and they are just guessing. They don't pay attention to things I say about myself or my habits/preferences.

Kristiina, that is a very non-ENTj remark.

That is the problem -- I have read this thread all over, from start to finish, and even though your arguments sometimes do make a case for ENTj, then you say something that is clearly non-ENTj.

You clearly have a perception of being a logical type, because you make some associations:

I'm actually taking offence. I'm not that pathetic with my thinking!

In my opinion that even invalidates the test results, because if you have the intention of being a logical type, I think you will answer those questions as if you were a logical type.

Also, in the chat, when you say things like "I'm soooooo tired of the ISFj thing" etc. These are or arguments. And it's just an example.

I do not think you are a Thinking type; not in Socionics.

I think CuriousSoul is right, you are Beta or Gamma, which coincides with being Aggressor or Victim. And you're not ENTj.

That leaves INFp, ISFj, ESFp, ENFj.

I do find significant what you said about clumsiness and your description of PoLR, which - interestingly - was like the ENFj one, not ENTj.

So why not ENFj? That would explain a few things. It's a possibility.

I'll post the Stratieskaya ENFj description.

[Kim]

ENTj is still an option, because I realised that most of the loudest people are just trying to confuse me and they are just guessing. They don't pay attention to things I say about myself or my habits/preferences.

Kristiina, that is a very non-ENTj remark.

That is the problem -- I have read this thread all over, from start to finish, and even though your arguments sometimes do make a case for ENTj, then you say something that is clearly non-ENTj.

You clearly have a perception of being a logical type, because you make some associations:

I'm actually taking offence. I'm not that pathetic with my thinking!

In my opinion that even invalidates the test results, because if you have the intention of being a logical type, I think you will answer those questions as if you were a logical type.

My point all along. The way things are communicated here seem more indicative of type than the actual content, especially when someone apparently is so insistent on being a thinker AND has such a skewed perception of feelers and their ability to be logical.

Kristiina, as long as you have a perception of types like the following, you will never be able to type yourself correctly because you are too limited in considering possibilities:

ESFp is not my opinion and I don't believe it. Less dumb than ISFj, but not good either.

I still shout ISFj, also because I most definitely supervise you and you most definitely hate me for it.

PS: Whatever type you are, you are neither nor dominant.

[XoX]

My last post before the break Kristiina I still don't have clear idea of what type you are but I keep my vote with ESTp. Your writing style and way you talk about your dreams and ambitions remind me a lot from my sister-in-law. She is not a loud type of ESTp either and not a sports maniac. I haven't chatted with ESFps through the Internet much so I don't know how they differ here. Maybe you could be ESFp too who knows. Anyways, I'm pretty sure you are extrovert that much I can say because no introvert would live with an INTp (hehe). Ok I'm taking a spring break now Sun is starting to shine and I don't want to miss it this year I come back when I get bored at the sun looking the same every day Right now it seems so..new..after not seeing it for months

[Kristiina]

ENTj is still an option, because I realised that most of the loudest people are just trying to confuse me and they are just guessing. They don't pay attention to things I say about myself or my habits/preferences.

Kristiina, that is a very non-ENTj remark.

That is the problem -- I have read this thread all over, from start to finish, and even though your arguments sometimes do make a case for ENTj, then you say something that is clearly non-ENTj.

You clearly have a perception of being a logical type, because you make some associations:

I'm actually taking offence. I'm not that pathetic with my thinking!

In my opinion that even invalidates the test results, because if you have the intention of being a logical type, I think you will answer those questions as if you were a logical type.

My point all along. The way things are communicated here seem more indicative of type than the actual content, especially when someone apparently is so insistent on being a thinker AND has such a skewed perception of feelers and their ability to be logical.

Kristiina, as long as you have a perception of types like the following, you will never be able to type yourself correctly because you are too limited in considering possibilities:

ESFp is not my opinion and I don't believe it. Less dumb than ISFj, but not good either.

I still shout ISFj, also because I most definitely supervise you and you most definitely hate me for it.

PS: Whatever type you are, you are neither nor dominant.

Well... It's interesting that you think that you supervise me. Lol, I do dislike you, but it's not because you supervise me. You just irritate me. And I get pleasure from fighting with you. It gives me weird sick pleasure. I used to get really angry at it, but now I just embrace the joy of arguing, even though I know I can't use my with you.

And how do you know I'm not -dominant? And I should trust that opinion, because you're the expert on , right?

I agree that I'm not -dominant. You got something right!

[FDG]

Kristiina, I think she does, and that's why you react this way.

[Kim]

I know I can't use my with you.

And how do you know I'm not -dominant? And I should trust that opinion, because you're the expert on , right?

I agree that I'm not -dominant. You got something right!

Another defensive reply. I use on you when I ask you to back up a claim you make with facts. It has happened on several occasions that you threw some claim out there ("feelers need to prove their logic" "feelers discriminate against NTs") and I asked you to please elaborate and show where you are coming from. Evidence and facts. You never followed up and always went on your "I hate you, you irritate me" rant. -dominant types do not do that. They grab the opportunity to use and run off with it. That's why I enjoy debating with them.

I have seen in you, but not

[Kristiina]

My last post before the break Kristiina I still don't have clear idea of what type you are but I keep my vote with ESTp. Your writing style and way you talk about your dreams and ambitions remind me a lot from my sister-in-law. She is not a loud type of ESTp either and not a sports maniac. I haven't chatted with ESFps through the Internet much so I don't know how they differ here. Maybe you could be ESFp too who knows. Anyways, I'm pretty sure you are extrovert that much I can say because no introvert would live with an INTp (hehe). Ok I'm taking a spring break now Sun is starting to shine and I don't want to miss it this year I come back when I get bored at the sun looking the same every day Right now it seems so..new..after not seeing it for months

I feel so priviledged. I'm most probably extroverted, I agree. And I don't think I can determine my type before I understand more about socionics.

Have a nice spring break!
PS! I envy you, I want some sun too! It's still pretty gloomy here.

[Eidos]

Well... It's interesting that you think that you supervise me. Lol, I do dislike you, but it's not because you supervise me. You just irritate me. And I get pleasure from fighting with you. It gives me weird sick pleasure. I used to get really angry at it, but now I just embrace the joy of arguing, even though I know I can't use my with you.

And how do you know I'm not -dominant? And I should trust that opinion, because you're the expert on , right?

I agree that I'm not -dominant. You got something right!

Kristiina, do you realize that no one is trying to annoy or irritate you but we are just answering the question you set up yourself at the start of this thread. You ask us for advice, and when we give it to you, you give us advice on how to give advice. If you are so convinced about your type, why did you ask for opinions in the first place?

I think your reaction to Kim's post is over the top. I think she must have hit a sensitive spot. I do not see your post as having any valid counter-argument to what she said. You are just taking this personally and attacking Kim as a result.

[Kristiina]

I know I can't use my with you.

And how do you know I'm not -dominant? And I should trust that opinion, because you're the expert on , right?

I agree that I'm not -dominant. You got something right!

Another defensive reply. I use on you when I ask you to back up a claim you make with facts. It has happened on several occasions that you threw some claim out there ("feelers need to prove their logic" "feelers discriminate against NTs") and I asked you to please elaborate and show where you are coming from. Evidence and facts. You never followed up and always went on your "I hate you, you irritate me" rant. -dominant types do not do that. They grab the opportunity to use and run off with it. That's why I enjoy debating with them.

I have seen in you, but not

LOL! hahahhahaaa.. Well... All I can say is that you got awfully defensive when I told you to stop the "feelers use logic" thing. And you are very selective about your facts. I really dislike it and I've had enough experience to know not to fight with that kind of people. I could name you different people from IRL who do the same thing, but I see no point. Not like you know them anyway!
And it has happened once: it was maybe my 5th time in the chat and then we started arguing and I stated something and you asked for me to back it up with facts. (which I couldn't, because it was based on my observations and I would have needed to search for forum quotes...) and then you started bombing me with accusations and questions and well... I was in a unfamiliar atmosphere there. Yeah, I admit, I lost my temper, but it definitely does not make me a feeler. Don't mix up your facts and your observations which are based on very random and rare occurrences. That makes you non- dominant, and it shows.

[Kristiina]

Well... It's interesting that you think that you supervise me. Lol, I do dislike you, but it's not because you supervise me. You just irritate me. And I get pleasure from fighting with you. It gives me weird sick pleasure. I used to get really angry at it, but now I just embrace the joy of arguing, even though I know I can't use my with you.

And how do you know I'm not -dominant? And I should trust that opinion, because you're the expert on , right?

I agree that I'm not -dominant. You got something right!

Kristiina, do you realize that no one is trying to annoy or irritate you but we are just answering the question you set up yourself at the start of this thread. You ask us for advice, and when we give it to you, you give us advice on how to give advice. If you are so convinced about your type, why did you ask for opinions in the first place?

I think your reaction to Kim's post is over the top. I think she must have hit a sensitive spot. I do not see your post as having any valid counter-argument to what she said. You are just taking this personally and attacking Kim as a result.

I'm sorry, if I gave the wrong impression.
I have an issue with Kim. It's personal and it has nothing to do with anyone else.

And I do appreciate the advice. I've been thinking of my type for over a week, practically non-stop. And I learn new things all the time.

Thank you people for helping me

[Kim]

And it has happened once: it was maybe my 5th time in the chat and then we started arguing and I stated something and you asked for me to back it up with facts. (which I couldn't, because it was based on my observations and I would have needed to search for forum quotes...) and then you started bombing me with accusations and questions and well... I was in a unfamiliar atmosphere there. Yeah, I admit, I lost my temper, but it definitely does not make me a feeler. Don't mix up your facts and your observations which are based on very random and rare occurrences. That makes you non- dominant, and it shows.

Getting emotional, shying away from using to counter attacks and using ad hominem arguments based on my type ( over ) is not the behavior of a -dominant type.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Kristiina]

That leaves INFp, ISFj, ESFp, ENFj.
.....
I'll post the Stratieskaya ENFj description.

From my personal history and the way I "feel" about things, I think it's pretty playsible that I might be -dominant. Don't assume I'm a feeler just yet. My "feeling"-vibe might just be Se-bossyness and stubbournness. If Kim isn't behaving like I want her to, I get stubborn and irritated... Might not be feeling.

Besides being irritated by some kind of events, what have I ever done or said that would indicate that I'm "feeling"?

Don't exclude thinking types just yet.
I did agree with INTj description for a very long time.

PS! I forgot to add before. Kim can't be my supervisor. If she is, then so would Anndelise and Schroedingers Cat. I don't feel it with them. I've talked with Anndelise and she gave me such a good impression. My issues with Kim are plain and personal. Apparently it has nothing to do with type.

[FDG]

If Kim isn't behaving like I want her to, I get stubborn and irritated...

GOD THIS IS THE MOST ISFJ STATEMENT OF THE WORLD!!!

[Kristiina]

If Kim isn't behaving like I want her to, I get stubborn and irritated...

GOD THIS IS THE MOST ISFJ STATEMENT OF THE WORLD!!!

you are considering things in a very bias way.
Let me ask you: what types get irritated when things don't go their way?

[Expat]

If Kim isn't behaving like I want her to, I get stubborn and irritated...

GOD THIS IS THE MOST ISFJ STATEMENT OF THE WORLD!!!

you are considering things in a very bias way.
Let me ask you: what types get irritated when things don't go their way?

Kristiina,

Bias is the whole problem of this thread.

I have read very carefully all your arguments, but that is the point -- you clearly have a bias in that you want to be a type - ENTj - and clearly don't want to be at least one type, ISFj.

Besides, you clearly don't want to be a feeler:

Besides being irritated by some kind of events, what have I ever done or said that would indicate that I'm "feeling"?

Lots of things, but above all, calling Kim a "horrible person", and repeating it in the chat, besides things like:

because I realised that most of the loudest people are just trying to confuse me and they are just guessing.

This division of people between "good" and "bad", or at least in "friends and enemies", attributing emotional motivations to them in order to explain their disagreements with you, is a Feeler thing, most specifically .

The problem is that you associate being a Feeler with "not being able to think", as well as being an ISFj with "lacking ambition", both of which are rubbish.

We see the Feeler in you because that's the area of argumentation you feel most comfortable in, to which you keep returning.

You are able to use and , of course, but when the discussion really gets to you, your natural inclination is to use and , because these are the functions you seem to use most comfortably.

That's what makes you a Feeler, not any "pathetic thinking" as you said.

And personally I have to give more weight to such things than to your arguments, because, again, you are not approaching this neutrally.

If I had some need to want to be, say, an ESTp, I could also find examples that I have as a stronger function, especially if I thought that people with weaker are necessarily wimps - "no I can't have weak , I'm not a weakling!"

Others have also been confused about their types - take XoX for instance - but in their case, it was easier to discuss it because they did not seem to care about whether they were one particular type or not.

And that is the problem -- you very clearly, from reading your posts, have a bias towards wanting to be a particular type and not wanting to be other types.

That only confuses your typing, because then even your supposed arguments for being ENTj or not being a Feeler are not anymore - they become , which is why we are giving them less weight than our own observations.

[Kristiina]

This is indeed an identity crisis. How could I have seen myself in a wrong way all my life. If I have been so near-sighted about myself, how could I have ever been objective about anything in my whole life. I don't really like the idea, and I guess you understand why.

Nevertheless I am willing to give this a chance. Really.
For some reason the babelfish didn't translate the descriptions in my computer/browser. Could someone copy and post the ESFp description by function? I'll read it thoroughly, especially the part.

I'm sure of nothing anymore. And I don't like it much.

PS! I can't be ISFj, because it doesn't make sense by function. Mainly the in second position. It wasn't because I was biased, that was because it just doesn't fit me. And Erkki agreed. So did my sister, and her BF.

[Eidos]

This division of people between "good" and "bad", or at least in "friends and enemies", attributing emotional motivations to them in order to explain their disagreements with you, is a Feeler thing, most specifically .

I wonder if this is not more indicative of weak feeling functions. I would have thought that a strong feeling function would have been able to accurately attribute emotional motivations to others. Clearly, Kriistina has made mistakes in the emotional attributions she has made of others, and this has been pinpointed out throughout this thread. This sounds to me rather typical of types who make poor use of that function. In my experience, ISFj's are very good at pinpointing what motivates others and they generally take people at face value, even being rather on the naïve side and being reluctant to attribute negative intentions to others unless the facts clearly point so. ISFj's wouldn't react the way she did towards Kim because they would consider that wrong and impolite. ISFj's vent their frustrations on close ones but they would never dare doing such things in public.

I think Kriistina is under alot stress at the moment, and this explains her identity crisis and use of feeling functions in a negative way. I believe she is a stressed out ISTj or even INTj.

[FDG]

In my experience, ISFj's are very good at pinpointing what motivates others and they generally take people at face value, even being rather on the naïve side and being reluctant to attribute negative intentions to others unless the facts clearly point so.

From my experience with close contact with two ISFjs, there is a swing back and forth between the two extremes, either people = shit or humanity is wonderful.

[Eidos]

In my experience, ISFj's are very good at pinpointing what motivates others and they generally take people at face value, even being rather on the naïve side and being reluctant to attribute negative intentions to others unless the facts clearly point so.

From my experience with close contact with two ISFjs, there is a swing back and forth between the two extremes, either people = shit or humanity is wonderful.

To me, this sounds like a weak feeling function. A strong feeling function would not deal in such absolutes.

From this site, let's look at how Socionics describes an ISFj.

He easily earns other people’s trust. He is polite, tactful, has fine esthetical taste and knows how to apply it. He knows for sure who loves whom, who hates whom, who wants (either what or whom), who influences whom and why. A moralist, often is distinguished by the sharpness of his comments. He perfectly remembers both good and evil, and considers it necessary to “repay” for them. He values friendship very much and does not forgive treason. However, he is not constant in love before marriage, because considers impossible to keep on relations that are exhausted. He does not like those who are incapable of loving. He regulates relations not as much by words but by voice tone and expressive look. He does not reveal emotions much, and so appears cold-blooded. Often he does not look directly into his interlocutor’s eyes, as though in order not burn him down. A complicated ethical situation inspires him

Enemy must envy. He never reveals his wrath and fury, but remains emphatically polite and self-satisfied. Only a good friend can see him bedraggled and not sufficiently careful. He is always "totally buttoned up", internally mobilized, extremely intolerant to untidiness and disorder

It is entirely clear the ISFj's strongest suit is in evaluating correctly people's intentions. An ISFj is also a moralist and concerned about the greater good, this means holding himself/herself to impossible standards of politness and correctness. Kriistina, on the other hand, did not evaluate people correctly, exploded publically, was paranoid about people's intentions, and thought that people who disagreed with her were against her... She was rude and untactful. This is, simply to put, indicative of a weak feeling function taking control of someone's personality.

[Expat]

For some reason the babelfish didn't translate the descriptions in my computer/browser. Could someone copy and post the ESFp description by function? I'll read it thoroughly, especially the part.

Babelfish doesn't work anymore with socionics.org since they changed the background or something, but this still works:

http://webtranslation.imtranslator.net

But I'll post it anyway.

I'm sure of nothing anymore. And I don't like it much.

You see, that is the clear sign of weak , this need to be "sure"; just like you asked "is there a way of being 100% sure"?

I'm not "100% sure" I'm ENTj. It's simply the possibility that makes the most sense to me, based on all the information I have available. I don't know what my subtype is, since the information seems inconclusive. No big deal.

A sign of strong or at least strongish is precisely the ability to go like this:

"the available evidence points towards this conclusion, around 80%. So there is a 20% chance that it's wrong, but I'll work with base on it until I get more evidence. Aha, now the new evidence suggests the opposite, my original conclusion is probably 60% wrong. Ok. No problem.".

PS! I can't be ISFj, because it doesn't make sense by function. Mainly the in second position. It wasn't because I was biased, that was because it just doesn't fit me. And Erkki agreed. So did my sister, and her BF.

Well, I do find significant what you said about your perception of weak and , which is why I suggested ENFj -- not because I pick up any particular ENFj vibe from you, I don't; I'm trying to look into "unexplored" areas.

As a personal observation, I suggest that you should not associate so much of your identity to the socionics type, especially because (1) it won't be 100% certain anyway and (2) you are giving too much importance to the type when defining what is it that you can achieve or not - at least that is my impression.

[Expat]

He knows for sure who loves whom, who hates whom, who wants (either what or whom), who influences whom and why. .

That's precisely it.

Kristiina "knows for sure" that the people who are "shouting ISFj" are just out to confuse her. I think she says that because she's naturally confident in the use of her .

But to be "confident" is not the same as "being always right". To use an extreme example, Einstein was also confident in using his to say that Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, and other aspects of quantum theory, were rubbish. He was wrong, but that doesn't mean wasn't a very strong function of his.

Kriistina, on the other hand, did not evaluate people correctly, exploded publically, was paranoid about people's intentions, and thought that people who disagreed with her were against her... She was rude and untactful. This is, simply to put, indicative of a weak feeling function taking control of someone's personality

On the whole, she was mainly polite, except when her deep-felt beliefs that she had to be a certain type and/or could not be some types were continously challenged. I think that would be enough to make a Feeler conclude, even for a moment, that the problem was the motivations of the people arguing with her. Like FDG, I have had such experiences with ISFjs.

I think Kriistina is under alot stress at the moment, and this explains her identity crisis and use of feeling functions in a negative way. I believe she is a stressed out ISTj or even INTj.

That's certainly possible, I agree.

[Eidos]

I would like to add for my definite case of a weak feeling function the following information about :

subjective emotional relationships between objects - attraction vs. repulsion, like vs. dislike, need of each other, love, friendship, antipathy, ethical norms, morals, qualitative properties, subjective judgments
Positive(short range):
Good relations — love, friendship, sympathy, an attraction, heat of attitudes, the sociability, a close psychological distance, kindly, pity;
Negative (long range):
Bad attitudes — hatred, enmity, antipathy, pushing away, estrangement, the unsociability, a far psychological distance, angrily, ruthlessness.

Kriistina really comes off as being in a "role" and the highlighted attitudes seem unnatural of her.

This is how she is, considering all of her earlier posts in this forum:

objective, outwardly measurable relationships between objects - laws, regulations, rules, categories, quantifiable properties, logic, analysis, belonging, authorship, hierarchy, subordination, objective judgments
Positive(short range):
Reality, detail, detailed study, carefulness, severity, place in hierarchies, laws, decisions, instructions, a choice of the best variant, logic of the organization,
Negative (long range):
abstraction, generality, universality, system, classification, typology, the general laws, objectivity, true, validity, the analysis, logic of a science, criteria

She talked about planning in details, being extremely careful with things, studying things in details, etc. Just dig out her first posts.

For me, she is a dominant under stress and the negative sides of role function are showing.

[Eidos]

Kristiina "knows for sure" that the people who are "shouting ISFj" are just out to confuse her. I think she says that because she's naturally confident in the use of her .

No, because this is a serious error and shows the negative not positive side of Fi. An ISFj would not have made such a mistake, because it is a very bad attribution of behavior.

But to be "confident" is not the same as "being always right". To use an extreme example, Einstein was also confident in using his to say that Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, and other aspects of quantum theory, were rubbish. He was wrong, but that doesn't mean wasn't a very strong function of his.

Sure, but we may forgive this error and consider than in 98% of cases he WAS right :wink: I see your point, though, but the error made was so big by Kriistina that it cannot seem to come from a properly developed Fi.

On the whole, she was mainly polite, except when her deep-felt beliefs that she had to be a certain type and/or could not be some types were continously challenged. I think that would be enough to make a Feeler conclude, even for a moment, that the problem was the motivations of the people arguing with her. Like FDG, I have had such experiences with ISFjs.

I think her answers to Kim were very rude and I cannot imagine an ISFj letting herself down to such impoliteness. I believe that us ENTj's are not in a good position to understand Fi correctly due to our own perception of this function. Consider that the arguments you are holding seem valid for a negative use of that function but not positive.

Edit: I'd like to add that I've been in an intimate relationship with an ISFj for 7 years and know 6 others personally. Logically, no facts enable me to conclude Kriistina is ISFj. Intuitively, my perceptions of her personality do not match those I have encountered with the other ISFj's. I think I can understand ISFj's very well and also that I immediately feel attracted to them and appreciate them. Finally, even Kriistina's own test results show a very strong Thinking component, at 5 different intervals and test passations. All in all, everything points against the hypothesis of an ISFj, no matter from which angle I look at the problem. I think people are confusing emotional instability and feeling. These are NOT the same. Thinking types can be highly emotionally unstable and volatile too, especially when their weak functions take control under stress.

[Expat]

All in all, everything points against the hypothesis of an ISFj, no matter from which angle I look at the problem. I think people are confusing emotional instability and feeling. These are NOT the same. Thinking types can be highly emotionally unstable and volatile too, especially when their weak functions take control under stress.

I certainly agree with the last sentence, it's definitely possible.

Regarding personal experiences with ISFjs, there are certainly ISFjs who, in times of confusion, become less healthy and tend to focus on negative aspects of people, which I also see as a consequence of weak .

Kristiina wrote:

PS! I can't be ISFj, because it doesn't make sense by function. Mainly the in second position. It wasn't because I was biased, that was because it just doesn't fit me. And Erkki agreed. So did my sister, and her BF.

Ok, but my impression is that you don't have in the ego either, so that would leave and as possibilities. It's difficult to reach a definite conclusion taking all our observations, and yours, in consideration.

[implied]

[Kristiina]

I would never have believed it, but I am really glad that Eidos called me unstable, rude, with weak feeling out of control, etc. I can relate to that. If that means I have weak , even better. I haven't gotten my hopes up yet, but I like the fact that Eidos pointed it out.

From this site, let's look at how Socionics describes an ISFj.

He easily earns other people’s trust. He is polite, tactful, has fine esthetical taste and knows how to apply it. He knows for sure who loves whom, who hates whom, who wants (either what or whom), who influences whom and why. A moralist, often is distinguished by the sharpness of his comments. He perfectly remembers both good and evil, and considers it necessary to “repay” for them. He values friendship very much and does not forgive treason. However, he is not constant in love before marriage, because considers impossible to keep on relations that are exhausted. He does not like those who are incapable of loving. He regulates relations not as much by words but by voice tone and expressive look. He does not reveal emotions much, and so appears cold-blooded. Often he does not look directly into his interlocutor’s eyes, as though in order not burn him down. A complicated ethical situation inspires him

Enemy must envy. ( )He never reveals his wrath and fury, but remains emphatically polite and self-satisfied. Only a good friend can see him bedraggled and not sufficiently careful. He is always "totally buttoned up", internally mobilized, extremely intolerant to untidiness and disorder

I color-coded this quote just to demonstrate a little bit why the ISFj has already started to annoy. PS! I was in a good and agreeable mood while I color-coded it.
Green - I agree
Indigo - can't say that I agree of disagree. Depends!
Red - I don't agree. (PS! I really thought of adding a fourth color, because some things were VERY hard to agree with, mainly the parts Eidos pointed out.)

[Expat]

I don't have any clear solution. Your last post suggests that Eidos is right, is your slightly out-of-control role function when your are stressed, and that would point towards ISTj, which fits Aggressor, weak and , and other things. What it doesn't fit is your own perception of weak and as not having in your ego.

I'm going to take a "cowardly" way out and suggest that you are an ISTj logical subtype, which would fit your earlier perception of being INTj, your suspicion that your is not that strong (even though it's clear to me that it's not that weak either), and even perhaps explain why your , being your 8th function, might cause you some discomfort *shrugs*.

Take a look at the whole ISTj functional description, I posted in Beta some time ago.

It would make Kim your conflictor, but Erkki your beneficiary if he's INTp.