[AliTree]

i seem to be one of the few that actually really likes ESTJ's, males exclusively though. i get along well with them. *shrugs*

[Functianalyst]

Originally Posted by lisakki To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I thought he was fairly clear in both the matrices: Notice that I never said that we differed in our views, beliefs, or lifestyle. Keirsey in that first quote basically describes my entire experience with my parents. We agree on just about every issue, but when we have casual conversations our interests are completely different. When we both talk in general about life, I like to talk about my analysis of my strengths and weaknesses, my philosophy and goals towards life, and how I can improve myself. They focus much more on the specific instances. Just to give you an example, if I happen to do poorly on a test, my mother immediately suggests talking to the teacher to try to get some points back, finding out exactly what I did wrong and make sure I cover it for the final. I, on the other hand, like to analyze what was wrong with my method of studying, my time management, and how I can better improve my studying skills in general for all tests. She focuses on the specifics of the moment, and the most practical way to immediately get as many points back as possible. I think in the long-term, to find a way that doesn't just fix the problem of the now, but also in the future. Neither of us are wrong, because both are important, but it's just an example of how our preferences for a certain function can manifest in the way we communicate and approach problems. This isn't to say that SJ's can't think in the big picture, or NT's can't focus on the most immediate and pressing, but I think it's just an example of how the preferences can cause something to come to mind first, and the lesser preference to come later.

As I said, readers view the Jahori windows and make an inference that based on Keirsey's theory the SJ and NT are completely opposites. What the information cannot tell you, and as you can see from your illustrations, that the cognitive functions are completely missing from the equation. When you consider them Si-Te-Fi-Ne vs Ni-Te-Fi-Se, they are essentially the same process. Furthermore, Keirsey never delved deeper into the fact that we are not one pure temperament. We have a most preferred and lesser preferred temperament. Mine are SP-NT.

But back to your parents, did they confirm their types, or is this your interpretation? The reason that I ask is that I knew an ISTJ co-worker who described her parents similarly, but when questioned, she realized that it was the parental role that she was observing, not their true types. You may not be able to observe that until you see your parents in roles that do not call for parenting and/or you become a parent yourself.

---------- Post added 05-02-2010 at 10:00 AM ----------

I remain baffled how most of you claiming that you do not like ESTJs, know when you are interacting with one. I generally cannot tell an introvert from an extravert since they play roles for different circumstances. I would have sworn that two people at work were true extraverts, but both informed me differently. When people find out that I am an introvert, they think that I am joking. Since the Si is basically hidden, how do you know that you're not observing ISTP, ENTJ, INTP, etc? It sounds to me like you're not claiming to not like ESTJs, instead you're claiming to not like ESTJ behavior.

[creativesoul]

Originally Posted by Functianalyst To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I remain baffled how most of you claiming that you do not like ESTJs, know when you are interacting with one. I generally cannot tell an introvert from an extravert since they play roles for different circumstances. I would have sworn that two people at work were true extraverts, but both informed me differently. When people find out that I am an introvert, they think that I am joking. Since the Si is basically hidden, how do you know that you're not observing ISTP, ENTJ, INTP, etc? It sounds to me like you're not claiming to not like ESTJs, instead you're claiming to not like ESTJ behavior.

Why do you keep assuming we don't know the person we are talking about?????

I don't think everyone needs to have the actual Myers Briggs test result on hand to know that:

a) I vs E: someone derives energy externally vs. internally (this is a very simple assessment in my opinion - extroverts chose to surround themselves in activities that involve other people and make decisions based on many people's opinions)

b) S vs N: at a professional level, 5 minutes into someone's presentation, I can tell whether they are S or N. S's go straight into tactics and do not generally have the strength to carry out conceptual discussions... therefore, questioning and discussing strategy is generally never part of an agenda. ESTJ's especially tend to offer in a team "structure, rules and people processes" that often lack a sense of creativity or flexibility.

[Amphorian]

Originally Posted by creativesoul To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Why do you keep assuming we don't know the person we are talking about????? I don't think everyone needs to have the actual Myers Briggs test result on hand to know that: a) I vs E: someone derives energy externally vs. internally (this is a very simple assessment in my opinion - extroverts chose to surround themselves in activities that involve other people and make decisions based on many people's opinions) b) S vs N: at a professional level, 5 minutes into someone's presentation, I can tell whether they are S or N. S's go straight into tactics and do not generally have the strength to carry out conceptual discussions... therefore, questioning and discussing strategy is generally never part of an agenda. ESTJ's especially tend to offer in a team "structure, rules and people processes" that often lack a sense of creativity or flexibility.

The best way for a type to be determined is by the person taking tests and reading up on how the personality theory works before realizing what they're true type is. For quite some time I believed I was an INTJ because I constantly tested as such (and still do) but I always felt "misplaced" for some reason. It was the fact that ISTPs actually can appear like INTJs (See
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
)


a) Introversion verse extroversion isn't as easy to tell in a person as you might believe. I know extroverts (I asked all these people I'm mentioning personally about how they gain energy or they took the test) that do act like extroverts but others (like an ESTJ to boot!) that appeared to be introverted from an outside view. The only person that knows how they gain energy is the person themselves.


b) Actually no, the Sensor verse Intuitive divide isn't so readily apparently either. INTJs with their get it done attitude at times will appear like what people believe is stereotypically of a sensor (mainly an SJ stereotype). While an ISTP like me will tap constantly into my intuition (Ni) quite often and appear like an intuitive despite being a sensor. I actually love discussing conceptual concepts quite often, especially with my younger sister and here on this forum.



It is far more appropiate to explain how types work using their functions, and how those functions create an interaction style then using the dichotomies to understand the MBTI. The cognitive functions when working in tandem is what makes us our types; however, certain sets of functions can have manifest similar behaviors in different types.

[Functianalyst]

Originally Posted by creativesoul To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Why do you keep assuming we don't know the person we are talking about????? I don't think everyone needs to have the actual Myers Briggs test result on hand to know that: a) I vs E: someone derives energy externally vs. internally (this is a very simple assessment in my opinion - extroverts chose to surround themselves in activities that involve other people and make decisions based on many people's opinions) b) S vs N: at a professional level, 5 minutes into someone's presentation, I can tell whether they are S or N. S's go straight into tactics and do not generally have the strength to carry out conceptual discussions... therefore, questioning and discussing strategy is generally never part of an agenda. ESTJ's especially tend to offer in a team "structure, rules and people processes" that often lack a sense of creativity or flexibility.

I am making that claim based exactly on what you just described. You did not claim to have observed an ESTJ type, you claimed to have observed someone with ESTJ mannerisms, based on your understanding of type. That's prejudicial and in error. All you have confirmed is how inept we are in attempting to assume we can read types.

Based on what you have just said is a complete fallacy. ISFJs are notorious for surrounding themselves in activities with other people, so you would fail to have discerned the E/I dichotomy if were observing an ISFJ. Furthermore all SJs are group oriented therefore even ISTJs can feel comfortable in surrounding themselves in activities. As for the second illustration of using S/N, what are you describing as conceptual and which function are you claiming that is used to do this?

[Beryl]

I get along great with the ESTJs i have met and they are not conformists. They can be a bit abrasive, sure, but other than that I have thoroughly enjoyed their company and I like what they have to say. I think there is a big difference too between young XSXJs and old ones. I think we need to keep that in mind. On a last note, I don't think any other word is more appropriate for ESTJs than the enforcer. They are great at yelling.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Functianalyst]

Moved my final thoughts to this subject to
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.

[lisakki]

Originally Posted by Functianalyst To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

As I said, readers view the Jahori windows and make an inference that based on Keirsey's theory the SJ and NT are completely opposites. What the information cannot tell you, and as you can see from your illustrations, that the cognitive functions are completely missing from the equation. When you consider them Si-Te-Fi-Ne vs Ni-Te-Fi-Se, they are essentially the same process. Furthermore, Keirsey never delved deeper into the fact that we are not one pure temperament. We have a most preferred and lesser preferred temperament. Mine are SP-NT. But back to your parents, did they confirm their types, or is this your interpretation? The reason that I ask is that I knew an ISTJ co-worker who described her parents similarly, but when questioned, she realized that it was the parental role that she was observing, not their true types. You may not be able to observe that until you see your parents in roles that do not call for parenting and/or you become a parent yourself. ---------- Post added 05-02-2010 at 10:00 AM ---------- I remain baffled how most of you claiming that you do not like ESTJs, know when you are interacting with one. I generally cannot tell an introvert from an extravert since they play roles for different circumstances. I would have sworn that two people at work were true extraverts, but both informed me differently. When people find out that I am an introvert, they think that I am joking. Since the Si is basically hidden, how do you know that you're not observing ISTP, ENTJ, INTP, etc? It sounds to me like you're not claiming to not like ESTJs, instead you're claiming to not like ESTJ behavior.

My parents took the test on mypersonality.info. I don't know how good that one is, maybe there's a better one, but that's what I got from it. Their behavior goes far, far beyond just parenting, and the Si is just dead obvious in my dad, because his other functions are severely underdeveloped. For example, he used to write return addresses on emails "better safe than sorry", and it took me nearly a month to convince him otherwise. You simply can't see that kind of behavior, all the while knowing his ISTJ temperament, and not attribute it to a strong Si. There was no other reason for him to behave that way.

Let me just clarify, I don't "dislike" SJ's. I don't dislike any type in general. My former boss when I was a busboy was an SJ of some sort, and we both liked each other because of our work ethic and attitude. I'm not saying that an NT can't have a close relationship with an SJ. I am very close to my parents, but it's not naturally close. We're close because each of us devote time, patience, and understanding to make it that way. This is completely different than with my best friend, who's an ENTP.

I understand what you're saying, that the cognitive functions should take precedence over everything else. Ni-Te and Si-Te should theoretically just be two different ways to reach the same conclusion. You're obviously more read in this than I am, and you probably some insights into this that I don't have. But one of the reasons I became interested in the MBTI was how accurate it was in describing both me and my parents, and so far I haven't seen a single thing in Keirsey's book that contradicts my experience. Maybe you're right, after all I could just be an exception.

[lioness]

YES. Just YES.

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

On second thought, it is my duty to add substance. I forget these things.

I had an ESTJ boss. Very. Very. Very. Bad.

She had to be in control of everything and everything had to be performed to her standards and in her way, which was not the only way for things to be done.

Just. Avoid. ESTJ. Bosses. And you're good.

[Axel]

I don't really have problems with the people I know who are confirmed ESTJ's. I love that I can rely on them being set in their ways. If they say something is going to be done, it will be, no question about it. And admire that kind of determination in a person.

One of my friends is a confirmed ESTJ. I wouldn't exactly call him stupid, he has very good track of anything he does. There isn't a single machine he owns that he can't pick apart and put back together again. If we are going somewhere you can always count on him finding the way there, even if he has never been there before he can usually tell you the time of arrival. He "handles people" - meaning that they don't really stand a chance against him when he has made up his mind, he simply runs them over until he gets what he wants from them, and he breaks them apart with merciless logic.

ESTJ's are not to be trifled with, if you have one on your side you should be happy, because they can take care of business like no one else.

Of course there are annoying parts to. He is very set in his ideas. When I want to give him a different perspective on something I actually have to go get a pen and paper and make a "map" about it for him, otherwise he won't be able to take it in. I usually talk in general ideas and he interprets them as specific points, so we are bound to argue from time to time.

Luckily for me he shares the thinking preference, so we do have some common ground. That is the channel we have to use to communicate because we both value organisation and efficiency.

I have to agree with Functianalyst on what he says about not judging people based on type, there is alot more to it than that. I'm not even sure what type I am myself so how would I be able to guess other peoples types? All you can really do is to ask them to take the test, and even then it may be wrong.

[creativesoul]

Originally Posted by Functianalyst To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I am making that claim based exactly on what you just described. You did not claim to have observed an ESTJ type, you claimed to have observed someone with ESTJ mannerisms, based on your understanding of type. That's prejudicial and in error. All you have confirmed is how inept we are in attempting to assume we can read types. Based on what you have just said is a complete fallacy. ISFJs are notorious for surrounding themselves in activities with other people, so you would fail to have discerned the E/I dichotomy if were observing an ISFJ. Furthermore all SJs are group oriented therefore even ISTJs can feel comfortable in surrounding themselves in activities. As for the second illustration of using S/N, what are you describing as conceptual and which function are you claiming that is used to do this?

You are awfully defensive and offensive for someone who seems to want to really debate this theory.

I don't quite understand. Why are you on this thread if you already have the answer? Actually of everything you've written in this thread, I don't see you presenting any final conclusion - only attacks to various people's method of data collection. What is your real point of view anyway? Do you have one or are you just here to pontificate?

Everyone else - I thank who has given input.

[Functianalyst]

LOL, surely you jest, how can I be threatened by someone using rudimentary language to describe type? You still assume that dichotomies E/I, S/N, T/F.... can be applied in the real world. Knowing that a need to be part of or belong to, is a basic core value of all SJ types should be basic knowledge. The fact that you had the audacity to make your claim shows that you are clueless to type.

---------- Post added 05-02-2010 at 10:10 PM ----------

	Originally Posted by lisakki To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	For example, he used to write return addresses on emails "better safe than sorry", and it took me nearly a month to convince him otherwise. You simply can't see that kind of behavior, all the while knowing his ISTJ temperament, and not attribute it to a strong Si. There was no other reason for him to behave that way.

I am not sure how putting return addresses on emails would be type related. That sounds more like someone who has limited knowledge of the technology. That could be any older person who has chosen not to use computers, regardless of type.

	Originally Posted by lisakki To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I understand what you're saying, that the cognitive functions should take precedence over everything else. Ni-Te and Si-Te should theoretically just be two different ways to reach the same conclusion.

Actually the cognitive functions is how we should apply the theory in the real world. When we attempt to make type applicable from using dichotomies, we keep it at a theoretical level. Fair enough Lisakki, and thanks for the clarifications.

[Amphorian]

@creativesoul: Believe it or not Functianalyst was one of the forum members that helped me on my own journey to understanding cognitive function theory in the appropiate light.

Also I understand you might not like the way Functianalyst's presents his argument but there is merit. The personality theory of MBTI isn't meant to be used in a generalized sense nor is it meant to stereotype. Jung first theorized on the cognitive functions in order to understand different personality types better and how they interact with each other. Jung meant to gain an understanding and bridge gaps such as between communication, not peigon hole people into boxes.

Our cognitive functions are actually very fluid and we most likely use all eight every day. It is our preference and preference of order in which we utilize them that determines our personality types.

Myers-Briggs created a system based off of Jung's observations in order to test the masses. They used a basic understanding to formulate a test along these dividing lines: extroverted/introverted, sensory/intuitive and thinking/feeling. The judgemental and preciever dichotomy actually has nothing to do with the cognitive functions at all but was part of the letter code Myers-Briggs created.

Here's an example:

INTJ - J in an introvert means the second letter is introverted and the third letter is extroverted (Ni-Te)
INTP - P in an introvert means the third letter is introverted and the second letter is extroverted (Ti-Ne)

ENTJ -J in an extrovert means the third letter is extroverted and the second letter is introverted (Te-Ni)
ENTP - P in an extrovert means the second letter is extroverted and the third letter is introverted (Ne-Ti)

Behaviors for the J/P dichotomy was added later on after Myers-Briggs did some testing. However, in light of such one must realize the MBTI test only results in about 75% accuracy. Behavioral components of MBTI through the dichotomies isn't a good way to understand the type of other people, and that is what Functianalyst was getting at. The types of other people is based of off a cognitive process and we can not get into another's head to see the real process going on. We can only make observations, ask questions and make assessments based off what we know; however, that doesn't make us correct when determining another's type. Only they, after testing and learning the personality theory will then know their true type. It's not easy learning all of the theories either.

Functianalyst is asking of you to learn further into the personality theorizing before presenting arguments about them. That is all.

[Marcus Septim]

I may know a certain someone who does:P,Although my best friend is one

[Elfrun]

I often struggle with strong Te users and historically ESTJs are the type that I find hardest to play nice with with as I do not do things they way that they want them done while simultaneously refusing to allow others to have authority over me without justification, a problem when working with many TJs indecently, but rather than focusing on why you don't get along with those you've met who you believe are ESTJs why not try to understand why they operate the way that they do. Your preference isn't right, their preference isn't right, they're just different.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.

Originally Posted by Seducer To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

ESTJ: usually very stupid, rude, loud, bossy, insensitive, cold, robotic workaholics, very duty oriented. They have a strong compulsion to control people and have everything their way. They're full of stupid, wrong ideas and notions. They're ignorant. They lack intellect, imagination, abstract thinking, creativity, understanding, any kind of intellectual interests, etc. They like to hang out with their friends a lot and they like to play or watch sports. They usually do stupid jobs. The last thing I want is a stupid person with stupid ideas trying very hard to control me. An army drill sergeant is the perfect embodiment of an ESTJ.

Yr doing it wrong.

[Functianalyst]

Originally Posted by Elfrun To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I often struggle with strong Te users and historically ESTJs are the type that I find hardest to play nice with with as I do not do things they way that they want them done while simultaneously refusing to allow others to have authority over me without justification, a problem when working with many TJs indecently, but rather than focusing on why you don't get along with those you've met who you believe are ESTJs why not try to understand why they operate the way that they do. Your preference isn't right, their preference isn't right, they're just different. To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. .

You're an ENTP, you don't do things the way any type wants you to.

[LifesEcstasy]

I would say creativesoul's ESTJ's are the more negative variety and I would agree that when they are negative they can be just like that. I know someone who is a negative ESTJ as a shadow of another type, and they are exactly like this. Controlling, overbearing, unoriginal, critical of everything, needing others to conform so they can feel good.

But, that's only as a shadow type. I'm sure in the positive context they have more appealing attributes than this.

[lisakki]

	Originally Posted by Functianalyst To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I am not sure how putting return addresses on emails would be type related. That sounds more like someone who has limited knowledge of the technology. That could be any older person who has chosen not to use computers, regardless of type.

You could say "I am not sure how xxxx would be type related" for literally anything. I'm sure there are millions of reasons why a person could do something. Someone might have taken the test incorrectly. Some sexual abuse, genetic defect, alien experiments, mental illness, could all explain any behavior we attribute to cognitive functions. I could apply MBTI knowledge with great success, yet perhaps it might be all luck and none of it had anything to do with MBTI at all. In any case, my dad is neither old nor is he stupid enough to think that "the internet is a series of tubes," thank you very much. Again, I realize you can find a million explanations for his behavior, but I chose the MBTI because out of all the ways I can think of to explain the situation, it has so far proven to be the most accurate, and therefore the most practical.

	Actually the cognitive functions is how we should apply the theory in the real world. When we attempt to make type applicable from using dichotomies, we keep it at a theoretical level. Fair enough Lisakki, and thanks for the clarifications.

You wrote earlier, and I quote "As for your assertion, I don't recall Keirsey ever claiming that NT is the opposite of SJ," and I simply pointed you to the section where he asserts this, and anecdotal evidence supporting his claim(there is no conclusive evidence for MBTI by scientific standards, period). Until I read from a legitimate source that this assertion is wrong, you'll have to forgive me for assuming that Keirsey is right on how I should apply his theory and not some random person on the internet.

[Sinequanon]

	Originally Posted by lisakki To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	You could say "I am not sure how xxxx would be type related" for literally anything. I'm sure there are millions of reasons why a person could do something. Someone might have taken the test incorrectly.

The difference is: you have made a claim, that a specific behavior is related not just to type but to a cognitive function. Functianalyst isn't making a general argument against types begeting certain behaviors*, but rather against the specific behavior you cited as being indicative of a specific cognitive function. I don't think it's unreasonable to ask you to elaborate on your example. I am not seeing the connection either, but I also am not sure you're incorrect.

(*At least, I don't think he is...)

[lisakki]

Originally Posted by Sinequanon To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

The difference is: you have made a claim, that a specific behavior is related not just to type but to a cognitive function. Functianalyst isn't making a general argument against types begeting certain behaviors*, but rather against the specific behavior you cited as being indicative of a specific cognitive function. I don't think it's unreasonable to ask you to elaborate on your example. I am not seeing the connection either, but I also am not sure you're incorrect. (*At least, I don't think he is...)

The same argument holds for relating to a cognitive function. Can you honestly name one behavior that you could 100% without any doubt attribute to a specific cognitive function? I chose that specific example because, according to Linda Berens, an author Functionanalyst seems to prefer:


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


With introverted Sensing, there is often great attention to detail and getting a clear picture of goals and objectives and what is to happen. There can be a oneness with ageless customs that help sustain civilization and culture and protect what is known and long-lasting, even while what is reliable changes.

To me, putting a return address on an email seems like a perfectly reasonable example of the bolded portion of this description Putting a return address on a letter is a tradition that has lasted for centuries. However, with the advent of email the methodology of sending letters has changed. I made the connection that my dad tested ISTJ and therefore has Si as his primary function, and I thought this was a reasonable analysis using Berens' description.

What I meant to suggest in the previous post is that this behavior could be attributed to anything. Functionanalyst suggested that my dad was old and perhaps didn't understand the technology, and I assured him that this was not the case. But we can go on with the reasons. Maybe when he was a child something significant happened that involved return letters. Maybe he has a phobia of having letters returned to him. I think my connection was reasonable given the circumstances, and I stand by my analysis.

[INTJoe]

I do not really care for ESTJs.

They are steadfast in their wrongness. That's what is most annoying. So, so forcefully wrong. GAHHHH.

One thing that needs to be acknowledged when generalizing type is in what arena have you known an ESTJ? Knowing an older ESTJ at work is far different from knowing a young ESTJ as a friend.

If an ESTJ is older than you, that means their idea or thought is automatically correct.
If an ESTJ is higher ranking than you, that means their idea or thought is automatically correct.

End of story.

I worked "with" an older ESTJ lady at my last job and she was a total bitch who made working a living hell. She would call the client directly (superseding the ENTJ boss) and make promises that she had no clue how to deliver, then walk around the office trying to get people either to help her or do her work. Seriously, everybody hated her guts. Except, apparently, for the owner and the boss, as they were convinced she "got stuff done". Total fucking clueless ass-kisser.

After hours I had no problem having a casual conversation with this lady, but during work I wanted to throw her out the window so fucking badly.

[Firebrand]

	Originally Posted by Functianalyst To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	You're an ENTP, you don't do things the way any type wants you to.

	You still assume that dichotomies E/I, S/N, T/F.... can be applied in the real world.

Oh, the irony!

[floramacivor]

Originally Posted by Amphorian To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

INTJ - J in an introvert means the second letter is introverted and the third letter is extroverted (Ni-Te) INTP - P in an introvert means the third letter is introverted and the second letter is extroverted (Ti-Ne) ENTJ -J in an extrovert means the third letter is extroverted and the second letter is introverted (Te-Ni) ENTP - P in an extrovert means the second letter is extroverted and the third letter is introverted (Ne-Ti)

ENTP - P in an extrovert means the second letter is extroverted and the third letter is introverted (Ne-Ti)
INTP - P in an introvert means the third letter is introverted and the second letter is extroverted (Ti-Ne)

ENTJ -J in an extrovert means the third letter is extroverted and the second letter is introverted (Te-Ni)
INTJ - J in an introvert means the second letter is introverted and the third letter is extroverted (Ni-Te)

So then, an ESTJ isn't just an extraverted ISTJ, and an ENTJ isn't just an extraverted INTJ?

[Gobbbler]

Okay first, although I do think that people can be too quick to think that they know someone's type and that people do present differently in different roles, I also think that you can definitely know someone's type without the test. Some people are just very strong representatives of their type. For instance my father is very obviously an ISTJ. Not only can you easily pick out the individual functions, but none of the other profiles even come close. Of course, I know my father very well as both a parent and a man (now that I'm older). My mother on the other hand, I can't figure out.

Originally Posted by floramacivor To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

ENTP - P in an extrovert means the second letter is extroverted and the third letter is introverted (Ne-Ti) INTP - P in an introvert means the third letter is introverted and the second letter is extroverted (Ti-Ne) ENTJ -J in an extrovert means the third letter is extroverted and the second letter is introverted (Te-Ni) INTJ - J in an introvert means the second letter is introverted and the third letter is extroverted (Ni-Te) So then, an ESTJ isn't just an extraverted ISTJ, and an ENTJ isn't just an extraverted INTJ?

Forgive me for even taking a crack at this as I am a newbie and don't understand the functions to any depth, but I think you could be looking at it the wrong way. First extroversion versus introversion is a fundamental preference that is most likely the most innate preference and the first one to develop/be displayed. The E versus I difference in those pairs you mentioned really just flips the preference of the functions so that the introverted functions are stronger in the INTJ or ISTJ, but the extroverted functions are stronger in the ENTJ or ESTJ. For example, the INTJ and ENTJ both prefer to use primarily Ni and Te (as their first two) and then Fi and Se (as the next two). It is just that in the introvert, the Ni is relied on more than the Te and the Fi more than the Se (and so on). So ENTJ's and INTJ's are both introverted intuitives and extroverted thinkers, but as an extrovert, the ENTJ naturally prefers/uses the function that fits his preference to engage with others and the INTJ prefers/uses the function that fits his preference for self. (Or you could argue the preference for Te or Ni leads to the E or I, but I believe the I or E comes first).

[Blse]

Originally Posted by Gobbbler To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Forgive me for even taking a crack at this as I am a newbie and don't understand the functions to any depth, but I think you could be looking at it the wrong way. First extroversion versus introversion is a fundamental preference that is most likely the most innate preference and the first one to develop/be displayed. The E versus I difference in those pairs you mentioned really just flips the preference of the functions so that the introverted functions are stronger in the INTJ or ISTJ, but the extroverted functions are stronger in the ENTJ or ESTJ. For example, the INTJ and ENTJ both prefer to use primarily Ni and Te (as their first two) and then Fi and Se (as the next two). It is just that in the introvert, the Ni is relied on more than the Te and the Fi more than the Se (and so on). So ENTJ's and INTJ's are both introverted intuitives and extroverted thinkers, but as an extrovert, the ENTJ naturally prefers/uses the function that fits his preference to engage with others and the INTJ prefers/uses the function that fits his preference for self. (Or you could argue the preference for Te or Ni leads to the E or I, but I believe the I or E comes first).

You got it exactely right in the part you bolded. In MBTI extroversion and introversion refer solely to the ordering of the functions. The sole difference, MBTI-wise, between an INTJ and ENTJ is that Te comes before Ni, and Se before Fi, in the ENTJ. It is then speculated that because of this shift in preferences certain behaviors will follow. Because an ENTJ, like myself, has Te above Ni, (s)he will be more focused on the outside world and derive more energy from it. This is the basis for the profiles you find everywhere, resting on the assumption that if your primarily preferred cognitive function is outwards directed, so is much of your behavior and sources of energy. Thus, in a technical sense, the terms extroversion and introversion are used differently in MBTI than in mainstream psychology.

For instance, you're pondering whether your are INTP or INTJ, right? The best way to figure that out is to see which functions you use most. If you use Ti instead of Te more, and Ne instead of Ni, you're INTP. Is your thinking outward directed (Te)? Is your intuition inward directed (Ni), then you're an INTJ.