What Type do you Think I am?

[Creepy-male]

The Subject really says it all what this topic is about, so in order to aid your judgments I'll post in how I think I am concerning the 8 traits.


I have a tendancy to be very analytical, though not at all times am I analytical. I excel really well at looking at things objectively and to understand their unchanging qualities, or qualities that are universally true. I am very confident in using , but I find it often difficult to explain to other people my analysis. Usually I can only make a good form of communication concerning the objective logical nature of something by using an analogy or an example thats easily observed. If I immediately go into explaining my line of thought it usually comes off as fragmented details that are difficult to understand or to peice together, though its no problem for other Intuitive people I've meet.


I am not usually geared towards looking at objects with outright. However when it is needed I can easily ellicit logical qualities objects have. Usually though I prefer to have things linked in a more fashion. If I were to consider things I'd likely metabolize the information into , as in making an observation concerning something logical qualities and then make it more objective and universal. However if I am required to think on the spot about something, I am likely to need rather than .


This trait is confusing for me, because at times I feel as though I am more in-tune with the physical sensations of what is going on. As in what action I am doing or as in how I feel about what is physically going on. However at other times I have a tendancy to be absent minded in the sense, too busy concentrating on internal thoughts or a particular observation or intuition in order to feel completely rooted to how I am physically experiencing reality. Something I feel a little other times I feel alot like , it varies depending on the circumstances.


This I realize is a pretty weak area, in general sometimes I lose immediate conception of what can be done to something in a social system. Sometimes I feel bored and limited in a particular social system and am more interested in what could be done once I've decided what is happening is not as interesting as what could be happening, but isn't. I feel more driven towards what could be done, rather than considering what is immediately able to be done and doing something based on that. However outside of social systems realizing what realistically could be done is no problem for me, as in what a person can mechanically or athelically being doing. However in social systems, school, work, government etc.... it feels like their are more untapped options and the current way of thinks is at best a compromise at what could be for practicality. Also I have a tendancy to procrastinate in school, work, government, or get bored at parties if I feel limited in possibility.


Well time, convergances, patterns, and the interelations of actions all can make sense to me pretty easy. However it takes me a considerable amount of withdrawn time to use such processes. Once I am able to ponder certain peices of the "puzzle" whether they be ethical or logical I can begin to understand the patterns. Also I can easily develop certain questions concerning where the future is going and where the past was at. I am extremely interested in history and such because it seems fascinating to think about people living in a seperate time. I don't mind philosophical talk geared towards Ni things, such as overall meaning and existanialism, however pondering existance is somewhat unsettling imo.


This is probably the most in tune trait I feel like I have, I feel like I am able to easily understand the potentials and possibilities of things whether they be a logical system or whether they be ethically. Actually I am able to easily deceive with to more S types because I can always make alternate possibilities, so in affect I can actually make good lies, but I seldom like to do it. However I do like to use in order to consider the potential something has, how the system could work better, to understand what is practical, or to understand where society could be. In general I feel like I could be INFj, ENFp, INTj, ENTp or any of the types which utilize .


I feel like in general I have an innate sense of ethics, but seldom don't immediately trust it. I am easily called to question ethics because I am afraid of offending a person or doing something wrong and really feeling bad because of it. However I am able to easily understand peoples different ethics, able to develop my own (but I am shy about acting on it), and don't have problems discussing or arguing things ethically if it is done reasonably and respectfully rather than jerry springer style arguments, which seem foolish and overly draining.


I think that I am able to easily determine how I feel about particular external events just so long as I am not caught away in thought. This is very much like the thing I was mentioning above, sometimes its easy, sometimes I ignore this side of things.

Personally I've typed myself as having different personalities for different situations, but in general I feel currently I am more towards INTj, INTp, or ENTp with my current circumstances, but feel more ENFp/INFp in general as a person if that can make sense lol?

[Rick]

EIJLp. No doubts.

[Creepy-male]

wtf is EIJLp ?, whatever this topic is obviously not interesting to most people

[Rocky]

The problem with this type of thread is that you're pretty much telling us what you want us to say your type is. You're not really discussing yourself from the outside looking in, but only from within the socionics system (which can impair your introspective abilities, imo). In other words, you're already giving us the functions and just asking to add them up for you (which if we did btw, it would be entp), but I don't know if we can trust your self-analysis.

[Creepy-aurora_faerie]

The problem with this type of thread is that you're pretty much telling us what you want us to say your type is. You're not really discussing yourself from the outside looking in, but only from within the socionics system (which can impair your introspective abilities, imo). In other words, you're already giving us the functions and just asking to add them up for you (which if we did btw, it would be entp), but I don't know if we can trust your self-analysis.

well put.

[eunice]

Maybe u can write in terms of anecdotes so that we can deduce from there. Sometimes how u analyze yourself might not be the same as how people see u i.e. how they react and the comments they have said about u.

[Creepy-male]

Well I am not the kind of person that lies to myself, I'll lie to other people, but rarely to myself, so introspectively speaking, I am pretty dependable.

I figured it was a nice idea to use the functions so that people could utilize their knowledge of socionics, since this is what is confusing me. Regardless I understand that this is probably not the way people would like to type people on this forum.

Honestly though its kind of hard if a person knows socionics not to make a self-observation without already knowing a little bit in the back of their mind how it relates to the theory.

For example I could make a statement about myself like.....

I am always open to new things and love to try to do what hasn't been done. I get very excited with new oppurtunities and am very creative. I also feel sad when I feel limited in possibility and supressed from doing orginal things.

But when I'd say that I'd be automatically thinking , so I'd be kind of pointless to have other people put the dots together.....

in general the only questions would be over the more nebulous aspects of a personality, that weren't immediately obvious

[Rick]

I am always open to new things and love to try to do what hasn't been done. I get very excited with new oppurtunities and am very creative. I also feel sad when I feel limited in possibility and supressed from doing orginal things.

So, for example, if your friends tell you about a new night club, you are always excited about going and trying it out. You like dancing in unusual and creative ways and trying to hit on the opposite sex in ways that you haven't tried before. Correct?

[FDG]

I am always open to new things and love to try to do what hasn't been done. I get very excited with new oppurtunities and am very creative. I also feel sad when I feel limited in possibility and supressed from doing orginal things.

So, for example, if your friends tell you about a new night club, you are always excited about going and trying it out. You like dancing in unusual and creative ways and trying to hit on the opposite sex in ways that you haven't tried before. Correct?

Now don't tell me that everybody does this stuff because IT'S NOT true.

[Creepy-male]

However I'll try a different approach here......

First Question:
-------------------------------------------------
I am thinking I am generally dominant , since I am driven by doing new things, I am creative, I have an easy time of dealing with potentials of people and possibilities in actions or in various systems. However my question would be.... whats the difference between a base function and a creative function ?

The reason why is because I can easily see myself as -- ENTp, INTj, INFj, or ENFp

This is one of my confusing questions

The other thing is.... I also sometimes feel like I can be types with and utilize those traits.... but in general I feel more geared.... this would make sense right, because a person would only truely have a dominant preference and not be completely specific to one type?

with that said I am pretty sure I am , I can give thousands of anecedonts concerning me being , but its fairly obvious to me....

I just don't know if its creative or base.....

my friends would type me as probably creative function , but more so because they'd say I was an Introvert, instead of an Extrovert, since I can be shy, reserved, or aloof at times and keep a small group of close friends. However is this a good approach to using socionics?

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Second Question:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I am extremely analytical, but also extremely based in ethics and feeling. So I really am unsure if I am a or . I can play music extremely well, I played jazz trumpet and almost got to all-state jazz. I've screwed around with composition programs like finale and messed around with background/beat makers like fruity loops to make some cool sounding music. I listen to music alot. I can appreciate art. Alternatively I am not a music major but an engineering major, I can analyze solutions very easily. Good with theory, very practical, but also can devleop creative solutions and approaches to problems unlike an ST which is more rooted in practical utility. I am a pilot (just a private pilot certificate) and can fly airplanes and enjoy the ISTp kind of activities, at jobs (like summer jobs, not careers) I prefer to do things more ISTp based. Um, I can philosophize and be very intuitive, and even withdraw into thinking. I can develop ideas concerning utility in politics and how the system could work better. However at the same time I am driven by values and beliefs in politics. I can easily empathize and have a great sense of people. Easily put, I have two examples concerning when I was in elementary school that can show my both T and F sides. On the thinking side, I remember we had to do this puzzle/game thing for extra credit where we had to order cards in some pattern, at first I blew it off cause it wasn't required, but later the teacher made me do it, so I approached it by writting the order out on a sheet of paper and then giving each card a unique letter, and using variables to analyze the pattern lol, I was able to do it very quickly rather than having to play with the cards repeatedly like most of the class, and was inspired to do it that way since I remember asking someone why people use a's and b's in algebra instead of numbers and they told me about the general idea of a variable. Anyways that sounds very to me, but its definitally a thinking thing. Another thing though in elementary school I remember was, when I knew a question and wanted to get called on, instead of raising my hand, I'd purposefully pretend to be uninterested and bored, so the teacher would call on me and I'd respond with the answer to surprise them. This seems more like an NF type thing to me since it requires the person to act a particular way and emote an impression. It worked really well I remember lol.

Anyways I am completely confused since I feel I can function with art like an ISFp, approach pyschological and ethical issues like an NF, and at the same time do crafter like things like an ISTp and approach thinking based work like an NT.

also if it means anything I am 8w9 in enneagram......

hmmm also, when I get angry at things its usually based on being unnesicarrily limited or judged. I have a tendancy to try to avoid conflict but when its enevitable I can be quite unpleasant, but I rarely act physical out of hate (simply cause its against my ethics).
---------------------------------------------------

Anyways to wrap it up, I am just confused about which slot my goes in..... and if I am a T or F.......

If this approach is still confusing tell me if your interested, if your not interested, then thats cool also just don't make stupid comments like Rick.

[Rick]

Well, is of course the most credible version for a number of reasons, but I would not commit to it by any means because your self-description is already so heavily interpreted. I suppose the way you approach your typing is somewhat characteristic of ILEs (but also of extraverts in general) because of this way of thinking out loud and asking for other people's "additional insight" into yourself, and also the dislike of providing factual information not tied to any preconceived notion (more ILE-specific). It comes across as a sort of mental exercise or game, not as a deep inner need to know your type. Indeed, this reminds me of other ILEs, but I really can't comment on the content of your self-description itself.