XoX's type - Evidence and Discussion

[XoX]

I decided to put up a typing thread. The point is more or less to collect evidence for and against different types.
This is especially a database for my own notes but anybody is free to contribute. I hope this can restrain me from talking about my type in thread I contribute to. I'm pretty much starting this from zero meaning I discard much of the evidence and conclusions collected and reached so far by labeling them "not reliable". I only include the most recent stuff here. Every piece of evidence not included here is not considered.

So...where we stand now...

Relationships:
My relationships and circle of friends:
- Te seems to be the most common function
- Sensors are more numerous than intuitors
- NF types are nearly non existent (Beta NFs are completely non existent. Delta NFs are nearly non existent.)
- My wife seems to be ESTj (apparently Si subtype but not confirmed) which is well in line with the general Gamma/Delta/Te/Sensory trend in friendships.
- Good to note here that my circle of friends is rather small and I tend not to develop very "deep" friendships with most people. By "deep" I mean we don't affect each others life too much. However I tend to develop long lasting friendships (but they have a tendency to remain a bit shallow in some sense). I usually contact my friends (and they contact me) in order to do something together. Never do we contact each other when there are problems and help is needed (e.g. financial or emotional difficulties). It is always about "let's go to movie/concert/restaurant/bar/sports event/casual visit/...".

-> Points to Gamma or Delta

Temperament analysis:
- I tend to see myself as irrational type with rational tendencies. IP seems to fit although my general restlessness makes some people suggest EP or even EJ. IJ seems extremely unlikely.

-> Temperament is likely IP or EP with a chance of EJ

Functional analysis:
- Based on recent discussions and observations I tend to think Te>Ti. Generally I see T functions > F functions. This has gotten a bit blurred lately though and made me consider F-types. However currently I see T>F and Te>Ti.
- I have some problems with preference for Ni and Ne. I was for a long time convinced that Ni>Ne. Lately it has gotten a bit blurred. I think I can be rather competent with both but I'm not sure which is the Ego-Function anymore. Going by gut feeling alone I would say Ni>Ne.
- I see N functions > S functions. However I can't reliably distinguish my preference for Se and Si.

-> Unlikely an F-type (especially Alpha or Beta F-type). Likely a T-type (especially Gamma T-type but not totally ruling out Alpha T-type or even Delta T-type).

Test results:
- Most often from MBTI tests I get INTP (the very first I ever did gave me INTJ though)
- Most often socionics tests give me INTp

-> Needles to say this points to INTp

VI:
- I'm not going to post pictures But I recently conducted a small scale VI experiment with a video which pointed to N and T type and most common guess was INTp. I once did a similar thing with still pictures and had very different guesses where e.g. ESTj and ENFj were suggested and I was generally seen as extroverted and rational.

-> This points to INTp or to some EJ type

So from this I can conclude that Gamma NT is more than likely but not confirmed. Gamma NTs come in four flavours ENTj(Te), ENTj(Ni), INTp(Te), INTp(Ni).

Because of some controversial things in the evidence I have some problems putting myself to either end of this spectrum. Then again IP>EJ seems probably. So I'm now going to make a somewhat surprising move and suggest INTp(Te) as a current best guess based on the above evidence.

So if someone wants to contest this "diagnosis" then e.g. following arguments might be useful at this point of the analysis (in order of priority):
1) Argument in favour of INTp(Ni) subtype > INTp(Te) subtype
2) Argument in favour of ENTj > INTp
3) Argument in favour of Delta > Gamma
4) Argument in favour of Fe/Ti Quadra (Alpha,Beta) > Te/Fi Quadra (Gamma, Delta)

[Expat]

Relationships:
My relationships and circle of friends:
- Te seems to be the most common function
- Sensors are more numerous than intuitors
- NF types are nearly non existent (Beta NFs are completely non existent. Delta NFs are nearly non existent.)
- My wife seems to be ESTj (apparently Si subtype but not confirmed) which is well in line with the general Gamma/Delta/Te/Sensory trend in friendships.

This kind of evidence have relative value; we'd have to assume that you've typed them right. For instance, for a time you were divided between ESTj and ESFj for your wife, and what you've said recently about you two working together suggests to me that ESFj should still be considered.

- Good to note here that my circle of friends is rather small and I tend not to develop very "deep" friendships with most people. By "deep" I mean we don't affect each others life too much. However I tend to develop long lasting friendships (but they have a tendency to remain a bit shallow in some sense). I usually contact my friends (and they contact me) in order to do something together. Never do we contact each other when there are problems and help is needed (e.g. financial or emotional difficulties). It is always about "let's go to movie/concert/restaurant/bar/sports event/casual visit/...".

You see, that is better direct evidence, and for Fe>Fi if it's a consistent trend. Also, from our interactions and what "bugs" you, I have difficulty seeing you as a Fi>Fe type. You are Fe>Fi, I'm almost certain; but you are also probably a logical type so with good Te.

Temperament analysis:
- I tend to see myself as irrational type with rational tendencies. IP seems to fit although my general restlessness makes some people suggest EP or even EJ. IJ seems extremely unlikely.

-> Temperament is likely IP or EP with a chance of EJ

Ok.

Functional analysis:
- Based on recent discussions and observations I tend to think Te>Ti.

That is a key point - why?

- I have some problems with preference for Ni and Ne. I was for a long time convinced that Ni>Ne. Lately it has gotten a bit blurred. I think I can be rather competent with both but I'm not sure which is the Ego-Function anymore. Going by gut feeling alone I would say Ni>Ne.
- I see N functions > S functions. However I can't reliably distinguish my preference for Se and Si.

Yeah you're probably NT type, and if not N-dominant at least a N subtype.

-> Unlikely an F-type (especially Alpha or Beta F-type). Likely a T-type (especially Gamma T-type but not totally ruling out Alpha T-type or even Delta T-type).

Test results:
- Most often from MBTI tests I get INTP (the very first I ever did gave me INTJ though)
- Most often socionics tests give me INTp

-> Needles to say this points to INTp

Are you trying to discuss your type, or are you trying to make a case for INTp?

VI:
- I'm not going to post pictures But I recently conducted a small scale VI experiment with a video which pointed to N and T type and most common guess was INTp. I once did a similar thing with still pictures and had very different guesses where e.g. ESTj and ENFj were suggested and I was generally seen as extroverted and rational.

Yes and I also thought VI suggested INTp, but this is not everything.

-> This points to INTp or to some EJ type

So from this I can conclude that Gamma NT is more than likely but not confirmed. Gamma NTs come in four flavours ENTj(Te), ENTj(Ni), INTp(Te), INTp(Ni).

Because of some controversial things in the evidence I have some problems putting myself to either end of this spectrum. Then again IP>EJ seems probably. So I'm now going to make a somewhat surprising move and suggest INTp(Te) as a current best guess based on the above evidence.

I don't think you have a Fe PoLR.

As I said over PM -- does anyone remember when, in the early days, XoX "discovered" that he "was" ENFp and did a post full of "party" emoticons to celebrate? Rick even commented, "that happens when you realize you're ENFp". How likely is it that a INTp-Te would do that? Except as a sort if ironic joke?

[Phaedrus]

I am not going to contest your diagnosis at this point, XoX. As you already know, I have always felt that you and I think and reason in similar ways, and INTp has always seemed to be the most likely type for you, based on the things you have said about yourself in the past. Many of the things you say about yourself in this thread are consistent with how I am as a real life person, except that I tend to have more N types among my friends. That could be a coincidence, of course. My partner is an ISFj, and she tends to form more relationships with S types. Nowadays we spend most of our "friends" time with an ENTj-ESFp couple (not too surprisingly, I guess).

[XoX]

Relationships:
My relationships and circle of friends:
- Te seems to be the most common function
- Sensors are more numerous than intuitors
- NF types are nearly non existent (Beta NFs are completely non existent. Delta NFs are nearly non existent.)
- My wife seems to be ESTj (apparently Si subtype but not confirmed) which is well in line with the general Gamma/Delta/Te/Sensory trend in friendships.

This kind of evidence have relative value; we'd have to assume that you've typed them right. For instance, for a time you were divided between ESTj and ESFj for your wife, and what you've said recently about you two working together suggests to me that ESFj should still be considered.

I'm still divided between ESTj and ESFj because she does seem quite strong in some areas where ESTjs should be quite weak. I'm still more into ESTj side though I can't be absolutely sure about this. It would actually be a rather big difference whether she is ESFj or ESTj. Even with Si subtype for her out mutual relationship should be somewhat different. I agree that this evidence is of secondary nature to you but to me it is at least as important than the other evidence presented.

- Good to note here that my circle of friends is rather small and I tend not to develop very "deep" friendships with most people. By "deep" I mean we don't affect each others life too much. However I tend to develop long lasting friendships (but they have a tendency to remain a bit shallow in some sense). I usually contact my friends (and they contact me) in order to do something together. Never do we contact each other when there are problems and help is needed (e.g. financial or emotional difficulties). It is always about "let's go to movie/concert/restaurant/bar/sports event/casual visit/...".

You see, that is better direct evidence, and for Fe>Fi if it's a consistent trend. Also, from our interactions and what "bugs" you, I have difficulty seeing you as a Fi>Fe type. You are Fe>Fi, I'm almost certain; but you are also probably a logical type so with good Te.

I suspect I am rather weak in both Fi and Fe. So hard to put them in any specific order. Now an INTp(Te) would have a
Fe PoLR AND weaker than average Fi hidden agenda. Thus quite weak in both of those functions. So it comes down to whether I appreciate Fi or Fe in other people. I would be inclined to say Fi but without much evidence to provide at this point.

Also I think you read too much into these descriptions of mine. You perceive weak Fi there which might be correct. Then again I'm not sure why you perceive Fe in there? Many of the people included in that description have strong Te and weak Fi. I would be interested to know how a bunch of Gamma and Delta T-types tend to bond? I don't think they spend their time switching love letters. Then there may be a cultural component included which affects how I bond with my friends.

Then I think you pay too much attention to "what bugs me". I don't think anything really bugs me that much. It is more about where there is room for improvement than something actually bugging me. Well it might be the same thing in the end but I would think something "bugging" me would bring the relations more to the negative side instead of being just a minor annoyance.

Functional analysis:
- Based on recent discussions and observations I tend to think Te>Ti.

That is a key point - why?

The reasons so far are very fuzzy. One reason is that (as was said in another thread) I tend to accumulate more and more information and think that it will make the issue more clear. Where a Ti type would perhaps try to get rid of extra information "clouding" the argument. Now this is a somewhat controversial and hard to observe but...

Then I think that in the end of the day I am better in algoritmic thinking that structural thinking. Like I can easily come up with an algorithm to solve a problem but it is less trivial to structure that algorithm into several implementable units. Actually I tend to not give that much priority to the structure as long as the solution works which tends to bug INTjs and ENTps who I have worked with (well one of each so not a reliable case). Now this is all very subjective but still best there is at the moment.

- I have some problems with preference for Ni and Ne. I was for a long time convinced that Ni>Ne. Lately it has gotten a bit blurred. I think I can be rather competent with both but I'm not sure which is the Ego-Function anymore. Going by gut feeling alone I would say Ni>Ne.
- I see N functions > S functions. However I can't reliably distinguish my preference for Se and Si.

Yeah you're probably NT type, and if not N-dominant at least a N subtype.

Evaluating the probability of that is too difficult at this point. I'm ready to give up the N-subtype hypothesis for now because it may act as an unnecessary psychological barrier.

-> Unlikely an F-type (especially Alpha or Beta F-type). Likely a T-type (especially Gamma T-type but not totally ruling out Alpha T-type or even Delta T-type).

Test results:
- Most often from MBTI tests I get INTP (the very first I ever did gave me INTJ though)
- Most often socionics tests give me INTp

-> Needles to say this points to INTp

Are you trying to discuss your type, or are you trying to make a case for INTp?

Why do you see those two as contradictory? (Edit: I have nothing against being e.g. ENTp. However so far I have problems accepting my ENTpness not least because I don't seem to have any Alpha friends really and according to "flocking" hypothesis that would be a very rare case indeed. So I chose INTp as the best possible hypothesis I can make at this point considering all the existing data and recent developments.)

I don't think you have a Fe PoLR.

Fe PoLR is as good a choice for PoLR as any. It is way more likely than most other available options.

As I said over PM -- does anyone remember when, in the early days, XoX "discovered" that he "was" ENFp and did a post full of "party" emoticons to celebrate? Rick even commented, "that happens when you realize you're ENFp". How likely is it that a INTp-Te would do that? Except as a sort if ironic joke?

This is why I am trying to start over. If you dig up every single post I have made in the past year (which are numerous) then you end up with so many contradictions that you have to rule out all the types. I have not stricktly followed the behavior pattern of any single type. I don't remember why I was so happy about me ENFpness but I did not physically make those faces I probably was in some sort of emotional "AHA!" state which I had to give up pretty soon after giving it a second thought. I don't think I would do such a thing as an ironic joke though (something Sycophant, Cone or Niffweed might do). I do acknowledge that some potential INTps show "negative" behavioral traits which I try to avoid in public. I'm not sure if that is enough to dismiss my INTpness though.

Better not forget that some INTps do use emoticons and "celebrate". Perhaps in a bit less expressive style than I did but e.g. here is an example (I was actually going to post my own celebrations in that thread but then the NT club was killed )
http://the16types.info/forums/viewtopic.php?t=10201

[XoX]

I am not going to contest your diagnosis at this point, XoX. As you already know, I have always felt that you and I think and reason in similar ways, and INTp has always seemed to be the most likely type for you, based on the things you have said about yourself in the past. Many of the things you say about yourself in this thread are consistent with how I am as a real life person, except that I tend to have more N types among my friends. That could be a coincidence, of course. My partner is an ISFj, and she tends to form more relationships with S types. Nowadays we spend most of our "friends" time with an ENTj-ESFp couple (not too surprisingly, I guess).

I think I can agree to what you say. You have shown more "stubborn" behavior in discussions ending up in long arguments where I tend to leave arguments quicker. Also you use less emoticons and show a bit more consistent face to the external world Other than that we seem surprisingly similar.

[XoX]

About the PoLRs...

I tend to think that Fe and Si are both potential PoLRs. I'm not sure what others. Ti is difficult as occasionally I think it is rather strong but then sometimes not, lol. Kind of same with Fi. Se? Not too strong but I have a gut feeling that not my PoLR. Ne and Ni are not PoLRs. I don't believe Te PoLR anymore.

so

Si PoLR is possible because I tend to be "really bad at Si stuff"
Fe PoLR is possible because I tend to be unable to and uninterested in managing my public impression or choosing and sticking to a specific social role (among other things).

other theoretically potential but less likely PoLRs...Ti, Fi, Se
not really potential PoLRs Ne,Ni,Te

[XoX]

Another piece of evidence mostly for amusement...

Just to evaluate whether the distribution of my contacts here reflect the distribution of my real life relations I did some analysis of the PMs currently in my box (the rate of PMing is fast enough to keep the box full but also slow enough so that the PMs span over a long period of time).

I calculated the distribution along Quadras and it looks like this:
% of Posts / % of People
4. Alpha 16,7% / 14,3% ~ 15,5%
1. Beta 33,3% / 35,7% ~ 34,5%
3. Gamma 22,9% / 21,4% ~ 22,15%
2. Delta 27,0% / 28,6% ~ 27,8%

So it seems I PM most with Betas, secondly with Deltas thirdly with Gammas and lastly with Alphas. Now this might just reflect the overall distribution of these types in this forum or something and at first sight it seems hard to see what is the main pattern here...only thing clear is that Alpha is least popular which would give support for Gamma > Alpha as it would be unlikely that I have least interaction with my own Quadra.

If we manipulate the data a bit and use a weighted mean where the Quadra percentage gets a weight of 2, wing Quadras weight of 1 and conflicting Quadra no weight then we get an estimate...
Alpha 23,3%
Beta 26,7%
Gamma 26,7%
Delta 23,3%

here Gamma and Beta seem to gain most support with Delta and Alpha least support.

If we just use a simple weight of 1 for Quadra and wings and 0 for conflicting Quadra then we get...
Alpha: 25,9%
Beta: 24,1%
Gamma: 28,2%
Delta: 21,8%

Here Gamma comes out as a winner but surprisingly Alpha is second just above Beta and Delta is the last.

The sort of "skewing" of results tells about my unexpected amount of contact with Beta Quadra. It is likely that this can be explained without assuming my Betaness as in the weighted mean analysis Beta doesn't come out as strong.

So no definite support here for any Quadra in general but this increases the perception that Gamma is more likely than Alpha which is exactly what my real life relations reflect too. If we stick to me being NT then this increase the likelihood of INTp or ENTj and decreases the likelihood of INTj or ENTp.

[discojoe]

I can see Xox being INFp. I saw his video, and the only thing that really stood out was "IP." In this topic you have also posted a lot of "confusing" mathematical information in an effort to understand yourself and discover your possible type, which seems like something an INFp would do ( hidden agenda).

[XoX]

I can see Xox being INFp. I saw his video, and the only thing that really stood out was "IP." In this topic you have also posted a lot of "confusing" mathematical information in an effort to understand yourself and discover your possible type, which seems like something an INFp would do ( hidden agenda).

Very good. And you are right about the confusing mathematical information. Though I don't trust it too much as evidence I do seek directions based on that. It is something you can "touch" so to speak. Gives some grounding even if very feint. I do have a fond of statistical information (I'm not sure what type that points to). Then again I understand it can't be used as the only evidence. However is interest in juggling such "confusing" statistical information related to Ti? Ti seeks to simplify not complicate. On a more superficial level I can see how "to understand" hidden agenda could be applicable here.

But well if we open up the INFp option again then it will put pretty much all evidence presented so far in a bad light. It suggests Te-PoLR, strong Fe, working Fi, conflict with Delta Quadra...it pretty much conflicts with everything settled so far. It will lead to yet another "Big Confusion"

So I'm careful not to do that yet. I guess the least I can do at this point is to seriously consider INTp(Ni)>INTp(Te). But I read the subtype descriptions once again and based on those I'm not yet ready to say INTp(Ni)>INTp(Te). Then based on ANY description I have read I haven't been able to put INFp>INTp (but I don't trust descriptions too much).

[Kristiina]

According to my knowledge and experience, I'd place INTp among the least likely types. I'd even say you're more likely INTj. And even if you really are a logical type, the probability goes as follows - ENTp, ENTj, INTj, ESTj, ISTp, ISTj, INTp.

I'd even say that INFp is possible, although I have doubts about the Fe.

And if you excluded ENFp because of VI, it's just silly. People can see any type in every picture if they think they already know what type they are seeing. VI should never be seen as any credible method of typing, especially if people who type you know you. PS! I didn't see the video until it was not online anymore. It doesn't matter, I don't get any clear VI opinion for people that I have already typed.

[XoX]

According to my knowledge and experience, I'd place INTp among the least likely types. I'd even say you're more likely INTj. And even if you really are a logical type, the probability goes as follows - ENTp, ENTj, INTj, ESTj, ISTp, ISTj, INTp.

I have a feeling this thread will lead to yet another confusion as people don't seem to share anything in their perception of me

Now your list doesn't seem to follow any definite pattern:
The order of Quadra likelihood says: Alpha, Gamma, Alpha, Delta, Delta, Beta, Gamma
The order of temperament likelihood says: Ep, Ej, Ij, Ej, Ip, Ij, Ip
Leading function likelihood says: Ne, Te, Ti, Te, Si, Ti, Ni

So to me this data seems pretty much completely random and I can't get much generalized information out of it. That it is how you see me on a personal level which is good to know but not very useful in analysis.

I'd even say that INFp is possible, although I have doubts about the Fe.

Now this adds to the trend that many people do see me as possibly INFp. I may have to take another look at that type. ESTp as a dual if not impossible even if I don't have had any romantical relationships with ESTps. INFp descriptions just are not to the spot...

And if you excluded ENFp because of VI, it's just silly. People can see any type in every picture if they think they already know what type they are seeing. VI should never be seen as any credible method of typing, especially if people who type you know you. PS! I didn't see the video until it was not online anymore. It doesn't matter, I don't get any clear VI opinion for people that I have already typed.

Well VI has rarely been supportive of ENFp for me. In ENFp what bugs me the most (in addition to descriptions not fitting too well) is their supposed focus on people which I think I lack. Especially I don't think I have their ability to actively form new and lasting bonds with other people. Also their general attitude towards life seems to be somewhat different than mine (I can't elaborate this more now). ENFp would somewhat fit my circle of friends except it sharply conflicts with my tendency to have good relations with ISTjs and ESTps. Well it is a distant possibility.

So the confusion is increasing as we now have at least INTp, ENTp, INFp, ENFp on the table. Especially noticing how Fi, Ti, Fe and Te are there both as suggested creative functions and suggested PoLR functions. Something doesn't add up. One or more of the perceptions presented in this thread so far must be seriously flawed.

[XoX]

I want to use this opportunity to tell (more like apologize ) that I have several PMs unanswered for reason or another (some have been for some time). I am in the process of answering them soon

[XoX]

I add this recent quote from tcaud here:

After some level of linguistic analysis, I'm concluding that Xox is INTp-INTj

Since I don't know exactly what an INTp-INTj is and it doesn't look like he is going to explain it I don't know what to say to that. Apparently it means some form of crosstype from INTp and INTj but I'm not aware of the most recent developments of his theory.

Anyways this sort of supports the case for INTp.

[FDG]

Loads of meaningless words have been wasted over this same topic...take a stance already!

[implied]

totally confused type. haha. some type who gets hung up in details quite a bit to the point that they cannot see the whole picture.

[XoX]

totally confused type. haha. some type who gets hung up in details quite a bit to the point that they cannot see the whole picture.

This sounds like a very good comment. It might contain the key to right answer.

I did some Google searching and at least MBTI INFJ is known to do this:

"They are not good at dealing with minutia or very detailed tasks. The INFJ will either avoid such things, or else go to the other extreme and become enveloped in the details to the extent that they can no longer see the big picture. An INFJ who has gone the route of becoming meticulous about details may be highly critical of other individuals who are not."

I'm not sure how to map this to socionics as it might not be that straightforward. Anyways this definately means I have to bring socionics INFj back to the table. It hasn't been there lately because IJ temperament have been dismissed and no one has suggested Fi-dominance in the last six months or so. Then my generally good relations to Beta STs is as big a problem with INFj as it is with ENFp. The strenght of INFj is that it would be compatible with my marriage as well as with my many Gamma & Delta thinking type friends.

But ENTp, INTp, ENFp, INFp, INFj it is now More comments please The natural next stage to look at is Reinin dichotomies but I let this develop a bit further before I go there.

[XoX]

Loads of meaningless words have been wasted over this same topic...take a stance already!

When meaningless words are wasted then nothing is really lost. And I'm trying to take a stance I wonder if we could be conflictors even though you were the first person from this forum who caught my eye (Expat being the second). I also remember we having quite naturally flowing discussions back then. And to some extent we still have. Then again you were ENTj back in those days... If we take some quotes from you in those days we can see how people change their self perceptions when new information arrives. Like when you wrote in those erotic type threads that you are "most definately a victim" etc. Taking a faulty stance is no better than taking no stance at all. I think I'm slowly learning that. I still somehow think you could be ENTj btw. For some reason I tend to relate to Te-types both in real world and here. There is some more food for the INFj hypothesis.

[FDG]

Pretty unlikely that I am ENTj. The only other option that would make sense is ENTp.

Anyway, if you dig the first thread I made asking for my type, there's a post done 10 days after the first that say "I think I could also be ESTP".

Enough for my type You said you disliked Te???? And now you relate?

[XoX]

Pretty unlikely that I am ENTj. The only other option that would make sense is ENTp.

ENTp would better explain your attitude towards INFj and ISFj (as you see ISFjs more annoying in general because of their Se). Then I don't know. Perhaps I don't see you as a bringer of chaos like ENTps often are. Doing Smeagol threads like Gilligan did etc. Well I don't think we want to talk about your type in this thread

[XoX]

Enough for my type You said you disliked Te???? And now you relate?

I don't trust my subjective opinion anymore "Hard" fact is anyways that most often I spend time with people with strong Te (if my typings are correct). I might even have married one. Last sunday I was spending time with ENTj and ESTj and I'm not complaining. I have mentioned other reasons some posts back which also suggest Te>Ti Quadra.

But I'm really interested in the INFj now. Se PoLR, Fi leading and IJ temperament are problematic. Other than that INFj would functionally and somewhat even Quadra-wise comply with my own and other people's perceptions as well as with concrete data about my relationships.

[FDG]

[quote="XoX"]

But I'm really interested in the INFj now. Se PoLR, Fi leading and IJ temperament are problematic. Other than that INFj would functionally and somewhat even Quadra-wise comply

NO damn! If everything is problematic then it cannot comply!

Perhaps I don't see you as a bringer of chaos like ENTps often are. Doing Smeagol threads like Gilligan did etc.

Well if I don't like to do them I don't do them. Like, I think there are things that are funnier to do.

[Expat]

I suspect I am rather weak in both Fi and Fe. So hard to put them in any specific order. Now an INTp(Te) would have a
Fe PoLR AND weaker than average Fi hidden agenda. Thus quite weak in both of those functions. So it comes down to whether I appreciate Fi or Fe in other people. I would be inclined to say Fi but without much evidence to provide at this point.

I don't think you appreciate Fi when it feels like "bad Fe". That's what you find "bitchy" and "it looks like you're angry" and "it spoils my mood" etc.

Also I think you read too much into these descriptions of mine. You perceive weak Fi there which might be correct. Then again I'm not sure why you perceive Fe in there?

What I perceive is Fe>Fi preference, not necessarily Fe "as such".

Many of the people included in that description have strong Te and weak Fi. I would be interested to know how a bunch of Gamma and Delta T-types tend to bond? I don't think they spend their time switching love letters.

We bond by having deep conversations talking about personal topics and experiences, and being there for the other precisely when they most need it, and usually having "serious" discussions rather than "fun" ones.

The reasons so far are very fuzzy. One reason is that (as was said in another thread) I tend to accumulate more and more information and think that it will make the issue more clear. Where a Ti type would perhaps try to get rid of extra information "clouding" the argument. Now this is a somewhat controversial and hard to observe but...

Actually that's a good point.

Then I think that in the end of the day I am better in algoritmic thinking that structural thinking. Like I can easily come up with an algorithm to solve a problem but it is less trivial to structure that algorithm into several implementable units. Actually I tend to not give that much priority to the structure as long as the solution works which tends to bug INTjs and ENTps who I have worked with (well one of each so not a reliable case). Now this is all very subjective but still best there is at the moment.

Right.

This is why I am trying to start over. If you dig up every single post I have made in the past year (which are numerous) then you end up with so many contradictions that you have to rule out all the types. I have not stricktly followed the behavior pattern of any single type. I don't remember why I was so happy about me ENFpness but I did not physically make those faces I probably was in some sort of emotional "AHA!" state which I had to give up pretty soon after giving it a second thought. I don't think I would do such a thing as an ironic joke though (something Sycophant, Cone or Niffweed might do). I do acknowledge that some potential INTps show "negative" behavioral traits which I try to avoid in public. I'm not sure if that is enough to dismiss my INTpness though.

Better not forget that some INTps do use emoticons and "celebrate". Perhaps in a bit less expressive style than I did but e.g. here is an example (I was actually going to post my own celebrations in that thread but then the NT club was killed )
http://the16types.info/forums/viewtopic.php?t=10201

Everyone uses emoticons, but not to the point of "throwing fireworks" with them. Besides, steventj was being, yes, ironic, he wasn't celebrating anything.

About the PoLRs...

I tend to think that Fe and Si are both potential PoLRs. I'm not sure what others. Ti is difficult as occasionally I think it is rather strong but then sometimes not, lol. Kind of same with Fi. Se? Not too strong but I have a gut feeling that not my PoLR. Ne and Ni are not PoLRs. I don't believe Te PoLR anymore.

so

Si PoLR is possible because I tend to be "really bad at Si stuff"
Fe PoLR is possible because I tend to be unable to and uninterested in managing my public impression or choosing and sticking to a specific social role (among other things).

other theoretically potential but less likely PoLRs...Ti, Fi, Se
not really potential PoLRs Ne,Ni,Te

I think we can rule out Si or Se types for you, that's agreed.

I can see Xox being INFp. I saw his video, and the only thing that really stood out was "IP." In this topic you have also posted a lot of "confusing" mathematical information in an effort to understand yourself and discover your possible type, which seems like something an INFp would do ( hidden agenda).

Very good. And you are right about the confusing mathematical information. Though I don't trust it too much as evidence I do seek directions based on that. It is something you can "touch" so to speak. Gives some grounding even if very feint. I do have a fond of statistical information (I'm not sure what type that points to). Then again I understand it can't be used as the only evidence. However is interest in juggling such "confusing" statistical information related to Ti? Ti seeks to simplify not complicate. On a more superficial level I can see how "to understand" hidden agenda could be applicable here.

But well if we open up the INFp option again then it will put pretty much all evidence presented so far in a bad light. It suggests Te-PoLR, strong Fe, working Fi, conflict with Delta Quadra...it pretty much conflicts with everything settled so far. It will lead to yet another "Big Confusion"

discojoe's point was a good one indeed, but it may be something else than Ti HA.

[Expat]

totally confused type. haha. some type who gets hung up in details quite a bit to the point that they cannot see the whole picture.

This sounds like a very good comment. It might contain the key to right answer.

It might indeed.

So far I have seen the following reasons (not necessarily together) for people to remain undecided about their type (as opposed to quickly choosing the wrong type):

- strong -- not necessarily dominant. That makes them comfortable with uncertainty (up to a point) and willing to explore the alternative typings, they may even find it "boring" to settle on one type quickly.

- Negativism, perhaps mostly when coupled with Narrator: That makes them look at what does not make them one type rather than what makes them one.

The latter is made worse when there is lowish use of Te (but not necessarily Ti>Te), I think. The person decides quickly that "I can't be that type because I do not xxxxxxxxx", and moves on, when sometimes that type wasn't correctly understood in the first place due to incomplete information.

So that would leave us with - -

Alpha-Delta, plus INTp and INFp (strongish Ne)
EPs and IPs (the Negative-Narrative combination)

If we eliminate all the sensors, we have

ENTp, INFp, INTp, ENFp, [s:28db4e7468]INTj[/s:28db4e7468], INFj. Where I think INTj can be crossed out.

[tcaudilllg]

INTp-INTj means that interior critique is directed toward the end of providing analysis. Which is what you've done in this thread more or less. I'm sorry, I don't have time now to discuss it further.

[XoX]

- strong -- not necessarily dominant. That makes them comfortable with uncertainty (up to a point) and willing to explore the alternative typings, they may even find it "boring" to settle on one type quickly.

- Negativism, perhaps mostly when coupled with Narrator: That makes them look at what does not make them one type rather than what makes them one.

Even though some people perceive certain positivism in me here in the forum personally I have pretty consistently described myself as a Reinin negativist. I can be encouraging towards others when I see a reason to but I don't see this as positivism. I'm actually rather "gloomy" person and often try to force myself to be more positive Narrator-Taciturn is not as clear but in my previous analyses I have pretty consistently put myself into Narrator side with some internal doubts.

Actually the two above points make a lot of sense. Especially the lower bullet describes rather perfectly how I approach my type hunt. By looking at what does not make me one type. And even though I initially focus on the big picture eventually, in search for increased certainty, I tend to get into too detailed analysis and trying to put ALL the pieces in place. Now because this is not an exact science (yet) this process eventually leads to ALL types being disqualified in which case I have to start the process again. And I just keep looping this

The latter is made worse when there is lowish use of Te (but not necessarily Ti>Te), I think. The person decides quickly that "I can't be that type because I do not xxxxxxxxx", and moves on, when sometimes that type wasn't correctly understood in the first place due to incomplete information.

I have much better "hit %" in issues where I have practical experience but make more mistakes in something which I only have theoretical information to base my judgement on. But anyways I tend to do what you described.

So that would leave us with - -

Alpha-Delta, plus INTp and INFp (strongish Ne)
EPs and IPs (the Negative-Narrative combination)

If we eliminate all the sensors, we have

ENTp, INFp, INTp, ENFp, [s:b031729382]INTj[/s:b031729382], INFj. Where I think INTj can be crossed out.

If you assume Negativist AND Narrator and apply it to that group then it only leaves INTp and ENFp. So I would still keep that group together but arrange it (INTp = ENFp) > (ENTp = INFp = INFj)

So between INTp and ENFp the differing Reining dichotomies are...

INTp: Dynamic, Far-sighted, Constructivist, Process-Oriented, Resolute, Democrat
vs.
ENFp: Static, Careless, Emotivist, Result-Oriented, Reasonable, Aristocrat

As long as we stick to the Narrator-Negativist there is no need to evaluate the other types this way. Both of these types are Fi>Fe though.

[Not A Communist Shill]

The possible types XoX lists are either Victim or Infantile types (or whatever the proper translation is) - maybe studying these would help a little? (if his wife is ESTj\ESFj, that is obviously => Caregiver, which might suggest Xox = Infantile, although Infantile + Victim are more similar to each other than the others).

I like XoX's posts - maybe we could have a round up of who hates him? He comes across as sort of passive to me, and I can sense some at least, so I think Ixxp -> IxFp. I don't think I can rule out ENTp + INTp, but ExFj seems unlikely IMO (but it's difficult to tell on a forum).

[XoX]

INTp-INTj means that interior critique is directed toward the end of providing analysis. Which is what you've done in this thread more or less. I'm sorry, I don't have time now to discuss it further.

That sounds like it makes sense but the explanation is rather superficial. When you have time you could post something about how that type is constructed functionally and stuff like that. And is it closer to traditional socionics INTp or INTj? I assume INTp. In any case the sentence "interior critique is directed toward the end of providing analysis" is a rather good description. I have to constrain this side of me in order to be socially accepted, heh In this thread I try not to constrain it and as we can see it starts to bother and bore people rather quickly.

[XoX]

I like XoX's posts - maybe we could have a round up of who hates him?

Oh no Don't encourage the vultures.


I prefer the hate mail in PM format.

[Not A Communist Shill]

It might seem silly, but one thing I found useful to give me greater certainity of my type was to read the four descriptions at this site for each quadra, then list them in order of likelihood. So, if you got ISFp as no.1 for Alpha, and INFp for Beta, it would imply IxFp, but if you put ENFj, it would imply . I found that I obviously wasn't ESFj, but that I liked it, and that there were some details in the ISFp description I found appealing. Whereas with the Gamma quadra, I saw similarities with INTp, but it felt like an illusion of me. The rest of the Gamma descriptions seem quite raw and in my face - I didn't like them too much. Delta seem like a shadow of myself, and Beta seemed like an exaggeration - I could see some similarities but it seems fairly obvious to me I was from the planet Alpha .

(If you understand any of this, you are probably a type).

[XoX]

It might seem silly, but one thing I found useful to give me greater certainity of my type was to read the four descriptions at this site for each quadra, then list them in order of likelihood. So, if you got ISFp as no.1 for Alpha, and INFp for Beta, it would imply IxFp, but if you put ENFj, it would imply . I found that I obviously wasn't ESFj, but that I liked it, and that there were some details in the ISFp description I found appealing. Whereas with the Gamma quadra, I saw similarities with INTp, but it felt like an illusion of me. The rest of the Gamma descriptions seem quite raw and in my face - I didn't like them too much. Delta seem like a shadow of myself, and Beta seemed like an exaggeration - I could see some similarities but it seems fairly obvious to me I was from the planet Alpha .

(If you understand any of this, you are probably a type).

Actually I might try that to see if it gives similar results to our current analysis which is already narrowed to a rather small set of types.

However I fail to see how understanding that would make me a type. It does seem a rather straightforward and simple method which anyone could basically use. Assuming of course that I correctly understand it

[Not A Communist Shill]

lol, I was joking .

If I remember, I found it difficult to order the Beta types - I couldn't differentiate easily between ISTj and ENFj for example - they both felt half-right + half-wrong - but the process of reading + ordering help me get the vibe of each quadra, temperment, quadra etc, so hopefully you'll be the same .

[XoX]

lol, I was joking .

Hah. Ok. I'm slow

Anyways I quickly ordered the types based on my current impression of them (I might do this again in more careful way later). Then I tried to seek some correlations there but I'm not sure if I used your system or invented a new one, lol. You can analyze this with your system if you want to

Alpha
ENTp NeTi
INTj TiNe
ISFp SiFe
ESFj FeSi
=
Dominating functions Ne+Ti

Beta
ENFj FeNi
INFp NiFe
ESTp SeTi
ISTj TiSe
=
Dominating functions Fe+Ni

Gamma
INTp NiTe
ENTj TeNi
ISFj FiSe
ESFp SeFi
=
Dominating functions Ni+Te

Delta
ENFp NeFi Ne+Fi
INFj FiNe
ISTp SiTe
ESTj TeSi
=
Dominating functions Ne+Fi

Summary:
Strong: Ne + Ni
Also there: Ti, Te, Fi, Fe
Weak: Si + Se

Analysis: N >> zillion times >> S which makes it hard to separate F and T preference.

Result: N-type with extremely strong N-subtype. Probably Ne or Ni as leading function but might be rational N type with very strong N-sub too.

Anomalies: ENFj>INFp which breaks the pattern and could imply that Ne > Ni. It could also mean some kind of hidden preference for Fe e.g. a hidden agenda so this anomaly would slightly point the final result to be ENTp (Very Strong Ne Subtype).

[Not A Communist Shill]

System...? lol.

Your ordering seems really bizarre - I expected some consistencies, at least. You seem to favour the Ixxp + Exxp temperment, but your preference for ENFj in Beta but 4th place for ESFj is really strange (it might be a good idea to do a detailed analysis of those two - your perception of + might be similar to your perception of behaviour.

If you like ENFj more than ESFj, that means you favour , which possibly puts the Alpha quadra as your 1st choice ideal wise...either that, or you find it difficult to order the Beta quadra (you have issues, lol.).

You could still be ENFp or INTp though, so...the exercise wasn't much good (I think it would help to digest the details of the profiles, if your will allow it...did I say ? oops ).

From preliminary analysis, then:
Exxp -> Exxj -> Ixxj and
Ixxp

Ne -> Ni -> Fe -> Te\Fi\Ti

Also, your Beta\Gamma orderings suggest that you only favour Ni when Te is your secondary function, and that you favour over .

Hmm..if we ignore Beta + Gamma, and presume you are ENxp, due to your inconsistency in your ordering of INxp + ENxj types (which is a weak assumption), it seems you favour Fi over Ti because ISFj -> ESFp + ESTp -> ISTj (because the descriptions refer chiefly to ego block functions, I presume you favour Ego block Fi rather than SuperEgo block Fi), which would make you ENFp...but this is all very weak, and based on your quick orderings + long established views about what your type about be .

Also, you put ISTj fourth in Beta (ENFp's conflictor), but put ISFj third in Gamma - but you put the types in order of similarity to you, not in order of how much you liked them (not sure if this is entirely the same thing).

[XoX]

Your ordering seems really bizarre - I expected some consistencies, at least.

Oh there are some N-functions dominate everything else. This might blur the line between all other functions because the N-functions are so strong. Like an ENTp or ENFp with extreme Ne-sub have a hard time figuring out Fi vs Ti difference and so on. Perhaps I'm assuming too much.

You seem to favour the Ixxp + Exxp temperment, but your preference for ENFj in Beta but 4th place for ESFj is really strange (it might be a good idea to do a detailed analysis of those two - your perception of + might be similar to your perception of behaviour.

Yes ENFj > INFp is clearly an anomaly. I did that because I don't relate really at all to INFp descriptions. However I do relate to the chameleon like character of ENFj. And I wouldn't call myself a "romantic" like INFp descriptions call INFps. Then I relate to ENFjs in that they are prone to give warnings about impending DOOM and such. So it was not that much of functional preference for Fe. Just that INFp descriptions are so not me.

However I have to put INFp above ESTp and ISTj because the sensory vibe those descriptions give is even less me than INFp descriptions. So this remains an anomaly until I can find an INFp description which fits better I guess INFp has all the reinin dichotomies wrong or something.

ISTj is last because I can at least temporarily act like an ESTp but I doubt I resemble ISTj like...ever.

If you like ENFj more than ESFj, that means you favour , which possibly puts the Alpha quadra as your 1st choice ideal wise...either that, or you find it difficult to order the Beta quadra (you have issues, lol.).

Why? Perhaps it just shows preference of Ni > Si. I'm totally not ESFj and the main reason is that I seriously lack Si which is strong in ESFjs. ENFj don't have this problem.

You could still be ENFp or INTp though, so...the exercise wasn't much good (I think it would help to digest the details of the profiles, if your will allow it...did I say ? oops ).

Exactly what we need...more details

From preliminary analysis, then:
Exxp -> Exxj -> Ixxj and
Ixxp

Ne -> Ni -> Fe -> Te\Fi\Ti

This sounds reasonable. It is actually pretty much what I concluded in the previous post. Seems to suggest ENTp (Ne Sub).

Also, your Beta\Gamma orderings suggest that you only favour Ni when Te is your secondary function, and that you favour over .

Hmm..if we ignore Beta + Gamma, and presume you are ENxp, due to your inconsistency in your ordering of INxp + ENxj types (which is a weak assumption), it seems you favour Fi over Ti because ISFj -> ESFp + ESTp -> ISTj (because the descriptions refer chiefly to ego block functions, I presume you favour Ego block Fi rather than SuperEgo block Fi), which would make you ENFp...but this is all very weak, and based on your quick orderings + long established views about what your type about be .

I'm not sure I'm following you completely here. How does ISFj > ESFp and ESTp > ISTj make me Fi > Ti ? In the first one I chose Fi leading over Fi creative. In the second I chose Fi PoLR over Fi Role. I'm not sure if you can say, based on that, that I favour Super-Ego block Fi over Ego-Block Fi.

The reason why I preferred ISFj > ESFp was that well I'm so not ESFp, lol. You put me and ESFp side by side and there is a clear difference. ISFjs however are kinda silent and not that expressive which is (superficially) more me. But ok perhaps if I would concentrate a bit more on the profiles and not my real world experiences then I would put ESFp > ISFj but it is hard to dismiss my experiences in this case. Apparently I base some of the orderings purely to profile and in some I let my real world experiences affect the result. Because I lack experience on some types this probably twists the results a bit.

So my approach arrived in ENTp (Ne Sub), your approach apparently to ENFp (Ne Sub) although you kind of touched ENTp (Ne Sub) earlier there. Perhaps this means something. ENFp would be a negativist-narrator so it would fit better with the previous analysis with Expat. I'm not totally satisfied with the Reinin dichotomies yet though as many of the other ENFp dichotomies don't seem that good at first sight.

[Not A Communist Shill]

gah, I suppose I was a 'bit wrong' in some places *cough*...sorry!

[XoX]

gah, I suppose I was a 'bit wrong' in some places *cough*...sorry!

Heh In the end I think this discussion contributed greatly to this thread. I actually enjoyed it.

[XoX]

ENTp, INFp, INTp, ENFp, INFj

Based on the previous and somewhat subjective analysis I would perhaps lift ENTp and ENFp again to number one candidates. Followed by INTp as a black horse. I have less faith in INFp and INFj but let's keep them in too.

The Reinin dichotomy problem really needs to be solved soon...

Currently I see myself as Negativist-Narrator. That would point away from ENTp and towards ENFp and INTp. However I have problems seeing myself as ENFp. There is no concensus that I could be INTp. I'm constantly pointed out that Fe>Fi which would point to ENTp. It is a bit conflicting still.

So either I'm not Negativist-Narrator or I have Fi>Fe.

What is needed next is
- definition of Fi
- definition of Fe
- definition of Negativist-Positivist dichotomy
- definition of Narrator-Taciturn dichotomy

By comparing those and deciding which fits this conflict should be solved.

[Exodus]

totally confused type. haha. some type who gets hung up in details quite a bit to the point that they cannot see the whole picture.

Te HA.

(I am reminded of Joy's typing thread - devolving into a Reinin dichotomies free-for-all and whatnot.)

[Expat]

If you assume Negativist AND Narrator and apply it to that group then it only leaves INTp and ENFp. So I would still keep that group together but arrange it (INTp = ENFp) > (ENTp = INFp = INFj).

No. That's not what I meant and it's not correct.

Nobody's purely Negativistic or Narrator, and anyway subtypes would blur this.

What you have to look at - as Smilingeyes pointed out, and I fully agree - is how the dichomies "move together" along temperaments.

Negativism and Narrator - which is reflected in the "Critic" stance of INTps - is a combination seen in EP and IP temperaments. So you don't have to be an INTp to be in that combination on occasion.

Also, as I have consistently said in the forum, and over PM, and it has been confirmed -- there's no way you are a Fi type. No way an INFj or ENFp. Forget about that.

INTp is just possible, but I think ENTp or even INFp-Ni are far more likely.

[Expat]

So either I'm not Negativist-Narrator or I have Fi>Fe.

Again, NO !!!!!

To give you a clear example, an INFp-Ni could easily "move" into the Negativist-Narrator area while still remaining Fe>Fi.

Do not look at those dichotomies as being so static.