Hugo's Six Questions Test

[Capitalist Pig]

kristiina should appreciate this

[Creepy-bg]

INFj again

[Kim]

ENFp all the way. I REALLY like this test.

[FDG]

I scored ENTp...

[Expat]

I scored ENTp...

Did you choose over ?

[FDG]

I scored ENTp...

Did you choose over ?

Ah, true. But possibly because I don't feel like working right now

[discourse]

Cone, your way of speaking has become more clear. I guess it comes because you have discovered your .

This test is a test of Blochin's translated into English. It's a good idea, but it's a copy, so you may find yourself in some sort of trouble when those angry Slavic Russians will discover that. Ah, Russkije Zenziny! You don't want to know what pictures they put up in Estonian internet. But Liisa is the most beautiful name in Estonia.

And I come out as INFp which I am not. I actually think that I am INTj with empathisation to it's .

[Kristiina]

kristiina should appreciate this

lol! yes. When I saw it, I laughed.


Erkki tested INTj on this test, because it was the most difficult to choose between and . It seems a bit absurd, taking into consideration that the Fe description featured traits like "bright emotionalism". He said he had a problem with "high working capacity". He thinks and daydreams and procrastinates and then does an awful lot of work in one burst. He gets things done fast and effectively, but he doesn't see himself as the "person who is effective", because he sees himself as a procrastinating person.

Maybe the description should also have a phrase, "may have very productive bursts in stead of steady productive work", or something along those lines. (I can't see IXTps saying that they are very productive).

PS! The phrase should probably be improved, because everyone can agree with it this way.

[Creepy-bg]

Cone, your way of speaking has become more clear. I guess it comes because you have discovered your .

This test is a test of Blochin's translated into English. It's a good idea, but it's a copy, so you may find yourself in some sort of trouble when those angry Slavic Russians will discover that. Ah, Russkije Zenziny! You don't want to know what pictures they put up in Estonian internet. But Liisa is the most beautiful name in Estonia.

And I come out as INFp which I am not. I actually think that I am INTj with empathisation to it's .

You are now taking test off internets, yes?

[Expat]

PS! The phrase should probably be improved, because everyone can agree with it this way.

It's not a question of agreeing, it's a question of choosing.

[Kristiina]

PS! The phrase should probably be improved, because everyone can agree with it this way.

It's not a question of agreeing, it's a question of choosing.

People with Te role might be too eager to pick > , if they can sufficiently rationalize that it fits them.

[Jonathan]

Cone: I come out INTj on this test too, Jonathan, because I find the distinction between Ni and Si the most difficult to answer. Everything else is obvious: my Ti and Te are much better than my Fi and Fe, and my Ne is better than my Se (to a lesser extent). It is much harder to conceptualize Ni and Si in terms of my own behavior.

Are you having the exact same problem I'm having?

Exactly. The Si description plays up aesthetics so much, as if anyone who has an aesthetic sense must have Si. Presumably a lot of INFps are into arts, poetry, literature....They'd probably identify with this description of Si too.

I think a lot of the thinking in Socionics really overplays Si as aesthetic sense. In my view, a more rational definition for Si would stress the concreteness, realism, and practicality more....maybe a tendency to perceive, using the senses, one definitive sense of reality, to be present in one's surroundings, to have fine motor skill, to be aware of ones body and physical needs....or something like that. Aesthetic sense maybe is part of it, but I don't think Si has a corner on aesthetic sense. Or maybe I have a lot of Si....

[Kristiina]

I think a lot of the thinking in Socionics really overplays Si as aesthetic sense. In my view, a more rational definition for Si would stress the concreteness, realism, and practicality more....maybe a tendency to perceive, using the senses, one definitive sense of reality, to be present in one's surroundings, to have fine motor skill, to be aware of ones body and physical needs....or something like that. Aesthetic sense maybe is part of it, but I don't think Si has a corner on aesthetic sense. Or maybe I have a lot of Si....

I agree with your description of Si, but I think aesthetic sense also plays a part here. I think the phrase "perfect functioning of all senses" is also a bit weird. My senses work perfectly - My eyesight is very good, I hear things most people can't hear, etc. All senses work perfectly on their own. But still I have bad motor skills, bad awareness of my body and my physical needs, (and realism in some cases). But I also have a problem with not knowing what is considered aesthetic.

I also think Si descriptions should contain "most focused on the surrounding in stead of his/her own thoughts", because is kinda the opposite of . -people are much more likely to daydream or to be too deeply in their own thoughts, and being focused on the surroundings is the opposite of daydreaming.

[FDG]

But still I have bad motor skills.

Not valid for me. I'm quite agile in most sports.

[Kristiina]

But still I have bad motor skills.

Not valid for me. I'm quite agile in most sports.

This just means that there is even more reason to define Si better.

/me looks at yet another bruise on the knee and wonders if she got when she walked into the door, the chair or the corner... All those fit the time-line.

[FDG]

But still I have bad motor skills.

Not valid for me. I'm quite agile in most sports.

This just means that there is even more reason to define Si better.

/me looks at yet another bruise on the knee and wonders if she got when she walked into the door, the chair or the corner... All those fit the time-line.

I do get bruises from time to time; however, when I play I am "concetrated" and "Hyper-aware".

[Kristiina]

FDG, if you had to choose, which one is more you:

-most focused on the surroundings in stead of his/her own thoughts.
-most focused on his/her own thoughts in stead of the surroundings.

[Joy]

Kristiina, maybe Erkki scored INTj because he is an INTj. Perhaps he's just not as good as you are at manipulating tests (and I'm not accusing you of doing it on purpose). Could you have someone who knows you really well take it for you, someone who knows nothing of socioiocs? A parent or sibling or old friend?

[Kristiina]

Kristiina, maybe Erkki scored INTj because he is an INTj. Perhaps he's just not as good as you are at manipulating tests (and I'm not accusing you of doing it on purpose). Could you have someone who knows you really well take it for you, someone who knows nothing of socioiocs? A parent or sibling or old friend?

Maybe only Anneli, but she know a little bit about it. It would have to be someone who know me very well also after I moved out of my parents home, because I have changed so much.

No, I don't think Erkki is INTj, because there is nothing to indicate INTj. As far as I can tell (and from the function descriptions I've made him read), he has Ni and Te, not Ti and Ne. His Ne seems stronger than mine, but that makes sense, even if I am intuitive subtype ENTj. INTj functions from Si hidden agenda to Fe dual seeking make no sense when I try to find signs of them in Erkki.

[Expat]

Kristiina, maybe Erkki scored INTj because he is an INTj.

That is precisely what I was thinking. Procrastinating or not, how likely is it that an INTp would consider that this

Bright emotionalism. Skill to create around yourself joyful and holiday/celebratory mood. Raising the energy of the surrounding people. Talkativeness. Tendency to avoid negative emotions. Jovial merry person

might describe him better than the Te description?

I'm not saying that the test is infallible -- just a likely possibility.

[Kristiina]

Kristiina, maybe Erkki scored INTj because he is an INTj.

That is precisely what I was thinking. Procrastinating or not, how likely is it that an INTp would consider that this

Bright emotionalism. Skill to create around yourself joyful and holiday/celebratory mood. Raising the energy of the surrounding people. Talkativeness. Tendency to avoid negative emotions. Jovial merry person

might describe him better than the Te description?

I'm not saying that the test is infallible -- just a likely possibility.

I might not have been clear enough... He was ready to take a random pick, because he doesn't feel like the productive, etc -description is correct, even though he has extremely productive bursts. In other words - neither seemed accurate. Both had enough controversial phrases to make him think, "this is not me".
Otherwise he shows the classic signs of using , including the stereotypical traits associated with .

[Joy]

An INTp would have read this and thought "ew ew ew *gag* I don't even need to read the other one... ANYTHING is better than that!!!"

Bright emotionalism. Skill to create around yourself joyful and holiday/celebratory mood. Raising the energy of the surrounding people. Talkativeness. Tendency to avoid negative emotions. Jovial merry person

<3 INTps

[Kristiina]

An INTp would have read this and thought "ew ew ew *gag* I don't even need to read the other one... ANYTHING is better than that!!!"

Bright emotionalism. Skill to create around yourself joyful and holiday/celebratory mood. Raising the energy of the surrounding people. Talkativeness. Tendency to avoid negative emotions. Jovial merry person

<3 INTps

Te description was first: he read it and saw that it wasn't him... so he read the other one, expecting that it would make more sense.

[Joy]

An INTp would have read this and thought "ew ew ew *gag* ANYTHING is better than that!!!"

Bright emotionalism. Skill to create around yourself joyful and holiday/celebratory mood. Raising the energy of the surrounding people. Talkativeness. Tendency to avoid negative emotions. Jovial merry person

<3 INTps

[Kristiina]

Joy, imagine a quiet introverted INTp, who's hidden agenda is Fi. He reads a description of an active, productive worker, who is fast and logical... He prefers a slow-paced life in general (reading books, playing computer games, playing D&D, etc). He's a geek and proud of it, but he also wants loving feelings from others.
Next he reads the description of someone who is good at communicating with others... He might not agree with it 100% (the parts about being a jovial merry person with bright emotionalism), but he doesn't completely disagree with it. I suspect the Fi-hidden agenda has something to do with it. (Differently from us, it doesn't make him think, "it's the description of and I don't have ! It's my PoLR!").

He chose but saw this as the most difficult choice.

Joy, will you shut up now?

[FDG]

I've had the same problem as Erkki. I can't see myself as a productive person (even though I've been told so), at all, and reading "rationalization, sequence, planning" makes me think about a robot, which I don't want to be

[aestrivex]

my two cents on this matter:

i don't know if erkki is INTp or INTj or any other type. the only people who can make that judgment are kristina and erkki. however, i will say that this test should not be an indication of erkki's type. the fundamental problem with this test, IMO, is that all of the descriptions describe dominant functions. this means a person is likely to identify with their dominant function, and might possibly identify with their creative function in order to avoid identifying with their polr.

another problem is that the descriptions of the functions may vary for each type. what is Te for an ESTj might be very different than Te for an INTp, not necessarily in nature, but in the manner in which it is used. thus, these descriptions should not be considered perfect.

the bottom line is that this test, like any test (and imo this not being a particularly accurate test) should not be taken as a definitive indication of type.

[Expat]

That is true, but I think that the problem is that people are looking at those descriptions too much in an item-by-item way -- the best way to do it is to get a "feel" for the descriptions. So, even an INTp who doesn't see himself as "highly productive" should have identified more with the than description, and very easily.

Perhaps the functions could be re-written to be less "extreme", but perhaps that will make the choices even more difficult.

[aestrivex]

Perhaps the functions could be re-written to be less "extreme", but perhaps that will make the choices even more difficult.

i agree, and that's why i think that this type of test is too simplistic to give a really accurate result.

[Hugo]

Vague and MaizeMedley both got INFj. They are both INFps.

I am already working on improving the current test. Stay tuned.

[Expat]

I suggest you include the "strong adherence to my own ethical principles" aspect in the description -- that should solve it.

[Kristiina]

I suggest you include the "strong adherence to my own ethical principles" aspect in the description -- that should solve it.

How can someone judge something like that?
I started dealing with socionics, and I was surprised - I have morals? oh! That's interesting!
But when I compare my Fi and my morals to other things, I had to admit that do have my personal values and they don't depend on the world-wide "normal" values.

Shortly, I don't think this phrase will change much.

[vague]

[Olga]

I think the test is good. I came out as ISFJ. I actually did not even read through all the questions. I knew that I am better in sensing that intuition in both questions of sensing and intuition I picked up sensing wqithout being bothers of introverted or extraverted. The difficulty was not the first question either because i know my strong point : people instead of logic and because it is in a rational - conscious blocks of Ego and Superego - it is no probelm. Difficulty was question B about Te and Fe because bothe fundions are in my subconsious or undeveloped to a great degree. so this is where I thought a bit longer: at the end of the day I am an introvert and you ask me about extraverted functions. This is all very much supporting Butterfly model: I still have chosen the one which is in the Life block - the strongest block, where conscious and subconscious functions are better developed compared to Afterlife block which is generally weaker. That means Ego and Id blocks should be stronger than Superego and Superid blocks for each types. Is it right for you or not?

[Hugo]

I suggest you include the "strong adherence to my own ethical principles" aspect in the description -- that should solve it.

Baby said he found the description problematic

I will consider your point Expat - thanks

[Jonathan]

Kristiina: I think the phrase "perfect functioning of all senses" is also a bit weird. My senses work perfectly - My eyesight is very good, I hear things most people can't hear, etc. ...

I also think Si descriptions should contain "most focused on the surrounding in stead of his/her own thoughts", because is kinda the opposite of . -people are much more likely to daydream or to be too deeply in their own thoughts, and being focused on the surroundings is the opposite of daydreaming.

Yes, I think you have it perfectly. This is a very good way of describing , I think, and makes much more sense than the standard definitions.

[Joy]

Joy, will you shut up now?

not likely. you may, however, ignore me.

[Kristiina]

Joy, will you shut up now?

not likely. you may, however, ignore me.

haha... ok, but 3 word for you:
gamma anything goes.

[Zeia]

http://www.people.iup.edu/rdxm/ptest_results.htm?e_i=10

Very good work Hugo.

[Ch4r]

Which question above was the most difficult to answer?

I keep trying to find the "this question" box to select.

Maybe it's because I'm a weird person, or maybe it's because I'm relatively new to Socionics, but I found myself undecided between the two available options on more than one occasion. I took it several times and got mainly ESTp, ENTp, and ENTj (I might've gotten other results once or twice, but if I did, I don't remember what they were).