5/5 - Ethical Hacker, Cryptographer, Nuclear Engineer, Data Analyst, Security Software Developer, Business Analyst, Security Architect, Security Engineer, Systems Architect, Front-End Developer, Technical Product Manager, Financial Quantitative analyst, pathology, neurologist, database administrator, particle physicist, computer systems administrator, computer network architect, computer and information research scientist, medical and clinical laboratory technologist, medical and clinical laboratory technician, cytogenetic technologist, cytotechnologist, neurodiagnostic technologist, intelligence analyst, robotics engineer, mechatronics engineer, nanotechnology engineer, physicist, doctor. I'd add mathematician since I saw it up there before but it's not in the final results.
literally no 4.5 or 4s.
This really narrows it down... but I guess it does show that I have no experience in jobs and careers lol.
EDIT: took the personality test. Here are the results. Overall, I think they make sense. Don't know how accurate the numbers themselves are, though I did answer the questionnaire honestly. I remember answering most of the discipline related questions as neutral since it tends to fluctuate (this seems paradoxical). But the test says I am regardless. It's a shame that the artistic side isn't well reflected. I see myself as a very "right-brained" person despite my logical demeanour. My thoughts are rarely structured, but to have others understand me, I need to make them structured. This is part of the reason why I'm skeptical I'm necessarily Ti valuing. I'll add that I don't like the usage of nice labels to keep you hooked with the theory. I don't like this about socionics either, but at least the labels are somewhat accurate and aren't such massive ego inflators. Like "the scholar" isn't a measurement of personality. I'm sure many people who obtain these results aren't scholars at all since they don't take initiative. I know I don't as much as I could. While I do enjoy thinking about ideas, solving problems, working through the details and the big picture, the word "intellectual" or "scholar" are too loosely defined for me to take them seriously as a measurement of personality. I wouldn't consider myself either of those at the moment.
You are a Scholar
Your strongest trait is Investigative, and your second strongest is Conventional, which makes you a Scholar.
Scholars are intellectuals that pay attention to fine details. They spend a lot of time in their mind investigating and exploring new ideas. They usually like to pair their findings with data that can back it up. Scholars are very orderly in their thought processes. They usually prefer structure in their ideas and thoughts over ambiguity.
Skills You Can Focus On
Scholars tend to be precise and detail-oriented which makes them very good at completing tasks independently, rarely relying on guidance from others to see it through to completion. Scholars are ideal for roles like a technician, as they have tendencies to be analytical, curious, scientific, and at the same time, being disciplined in their work as they prefer environments that are well-ordered and encourage accuracy. Scholars usually like getting wrapped up in their work and they enjoy challenging their minds. They also tend to be persistent which means they are extremely likely to see difficult tasks through to completion. Tendencies To Be Careful Of
Because the Scholar typically prefers independent work where they can think abstractly or perform complex calculations, this can hurt them when it comes to working within a team. They tend to be quite confident in their abilities and will sometimes move forward with their own ideas rather than suggestions of others. They identify with power and like having a structured plan that they can follow at their own pace, though they tend to shy away from a leadership role themselves.