i've been trying to do a few of these (really!) but they are all coming out as
![Extroverted Logic](images/smilies/Te.gif)
descriptions. i'm not sure i have much to contribute that hasn't been already said in the
![Extroverted Logic](images/smilies/Te.gif)
thread.
Remember how this started. I wrote a description for INFp in the
![Extroverted Logic](images/smilies/Te.gif)
thread; and despite my best efforts for it to fit in that thread, people recognized it as being from an IP perspective; or at least, that's what people perceived (as I'm always skeptical about what my type really is). So anyhow, in this context, someone repeated something that had been said earlier, namely, Let's start an
![Introverted Intuition](images/smilies/Ni.gif)
thread.
The bottom line is, if you're INTp, what you write is something that you'll think is
![Extroverted Logic](images/smilies/Te.gif)
, but others will recognize as being
![Introverted Intuition](images/smilies/Ni.gif)
. So just write something, but don't feel it has to imitate the way they do it in the
![Extroverted Logic](images/smilies/Te.gif)
thread...i.e., personifying the type as one individual and writing about how that type is useful or not useful for worldly endeavors.
On the contrary, I think it would be more natural for an
![Introverted Intuition](images/smilies/Ni.gif)
type to write generally (not as a single "he" or "she"), with focus on how the other person affects your own mental state.
Far from concern about duplicating the
![Extroverted Logic](images/smilies/Te.gif)
thread, the bigger issue is that
![Introverted Intuition](images/smilies/Ni.gif)
type descriptions are more likely to be like the kinds of descriptions people have grown accustomed to, since many people believe Jung was
![Introverted Intuition](images/smilies/Ni.gif)
-dominant himself.
However, it would still be interesting to see what other people's perceptions are.
In particular, I'd like to know how *other* INTps perceive ESFjs in real life....because in my experience, I just don't see the "conflict" there....with the possible exception of when I was a kid and had ESFjs as teachers; but whether those teachers I'm thinking of (i.e., the ones who over-emphasize routine homework assignments and memorization) were really ESFj is open to debate.