/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15014813]

Books for a superior INTJ like me?

[Anonymous No.15014822]

>>15014813
Trains rule. Fuck you fight me

[Anonymous No.15014831]

>>15014813
thats not INTJ whats being described in your pic.
anyways, crime and punishment is what youre looking for, OP.

[Anonymous No.15014839]

I knew an INTJ, he had thousands upon thousands of hours logged in Skyrim, pretty based honestly, probably jerking off to naked argonians

[Anonymous No.15014854]

>>15014839
how can you be INTJ and not get bored with skyrim after thousands of hours?

[Anonymous No.15014864]

>>15014813
Anyone who puts stock in these astrological signs of modernity is automatically not a chad

[Anonymous No.15015274]

>>15014813
INTJ here. For some reason Goethe appeals to me immensely.

[Anonymous No.15015307]

>>15014813
Keep your memes right

[Anonymous No.15015351]

>>15015307
>daydreams about being a deity to compensate for feelings of inferiority
Relatable.

[Anonymous No.15015716]

>>15014813
>>15014831
>>15014839
>>15014854
>>15014864
>>15015274
>>15015307
Actual student of the cognitive functions here. Y'all seem to be confused about something. How can I help?

[Anonymous No.15015742]

>>15014813

coneheads aren't even that smart, this is slander

[Anonymous No.15015773]

>>15015716
what does it mean to have an inferior thinking function?

[Anonymous No.15015797]

>>15015351
I used to do that when younger

[Anonymous No.15015849]

>>15015773
I dont use a system with the idea of "inferior," but it probably just means underdeveloped. That would mean you're better at Feeling, not as good at Thinking. You still do both, but you might make more emotion/value based decisions than not.

Feeling and Thinking are really very similar. Both use logic and put thoughts together, but Feeling is just more....animaly. It in itself is a right-brained, less defined experience.

[Anonymous No.15015869]

>>15015849
wrong, it means you believe in MBTI!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA

[Anonymous No.15015960]

>>15015869
But it doesn't though
None of what I said comes from MBTI

[Anonymous No.15016065]

>>15015960
nah i'm just fucking with you, sorry about that. i feel pretty bad for pulling that on someone who earnestly wants to engage with others, but i've been sitting on that joke for a while. Anyway, cognitive functions still seem pretty bunk. first, they don't appear to exhaustively explain mental functioning; second, the descriptions usually given for each function aren't very clear. eg. your explanation of feeling vs thinking. also, Ni.
What does it mean to be better at 'feeling', or to have 'feeling' internally or externally directed? I'm not even sure what it means to have 'thinking' as something dominant over 'feeling' when these processes are so intimately linked.
I just don't see why you would use it over other theories that seem to better explain things without committing you to so rigid a structure as the cognitive functions.

[Anonymous No.15016083]

i'm intj and i just feel like a fucking loser

[Anonymous No.15016098]

>>15016065
Nah, it was a good joke. This shit goes beyond horoscope for me, and I want others to understand it, so I take the bait every time

>dont explain mental functioning
You're totally right. Jung just observed patterns in his clients and organized them this way. They're completely categorical

>the descriptions aren't clear
That's one of my biggest hangups with MBTI - the test lacks any construct validity. Get 10 "experts" in a room together and they'll all have different definitions. The fact that you and I are here trying to understand what any if it means is evidence of a bad system

The system I use explains them as human needs, and also looks at energy levels and sexual expression, all the while from a core those cognitive functions. For instance, both Jay Z and Kanye have Ni as their first function (ie. their major life patterns are dominated by it), but how they use it is very different.

[Anonymous No.15016150]

>>15016098
>the test lacks any construct validity. Get 10 "experts" in a room together and they'll all have different definitions.
Only because people are stupid (especially psychology "experts"). Meaningless metric.

[Anonymous No.15016161]

>>15016150
>nobody knows anything about psychology because it's all made up
Didnt realize you were a PoMo

[Anonymous No.15016178]

>>15016161
That's quite a leap.

[Anonymous No.15016212]

>>15016083
It's because the greatest pride also produces the greatest shame if not fulfilled, I know that feel even if I'm not supposed to be "empathetic". Whenever I do accomplish anything I personally think is of note I'm walking around literally bumping people out of my way though

[Anonymous No.15016221]

>>15016098
I suppose the cognitive functions could be useful in that sense. And it's probably closer to what Jung intended them to be.

[Anonymous No.15016253]

>>15016212
feel like i'm constantly irritated by regular people
and after a lifetime of shunning everyone it has backfired and now i'm socially retarded and a failure

[Anonymous No.15016267]

>>15014813
ENTP/ENTJ are far superior to both of those.

[Anonymous No.15016281]

>>15016221
Psychological wellness is about balancing our components. Some right brain, some left, some masculine, some feminine. Some run around like a crackhead, some stay in bed and to through old notes. Seeing your personality mapped out as a combination of cognitive functions can help you focus on building up your weaker areas. That's really all there is to it.

[Anonymous No.15016336]

>>15016267

ENTx are cokeheads

[Anonymous No.15016337]

everything Dostoevsky wrote.

>>15014864
this butthurt on every time. probably was molested as child by a psychologist.

[Anonymous No.15016476]

I just did this test, it says I'm INFJ-A
does that mean I'm gay?

[Anonymous No.15016494]

>>15016476
Not bad. NJ is top tier.

[Anonymous No.15016560]

I get either of these two depending on the day and where I take the tests from.
Basically I'm saying that judging/perceiving doesn't make a difference and all of you are beneath me as an INT-agnostic.
Literally I'm just INT, if you were big brained enough to play D&D you'd know what that stands for. Haha. Mere children before me.

[Anonymous No.15016563]

>>15016098
Do Kanye and Jay Z both have Gg as their second functions?

[Anonymous No.15016578]

>>15016098
>For instance, both Jay Z and Kanye have Ni as their first function
I hope you meant it as a hypothetical example.

[Anonymous No.15016579]

>All these betas and brainlets in here

imagine not being an entp chad, genius AND alpha

[Anonymous No.15016584]

>>15016579
Imagine requiring validation from other people, must suck being a psychological and emotional cripple despite being able to think.

[Anonymous No.15016598]

>>15016584
lol enjoy sitting in your room all day while jerking your little dick while I have a small circle of flunkies worshipping me. Introverts should be shot

[Anonymous No.15016619]

>>15014813
What's wrong with playing trains?

[Anonymous No.15016622]

>>15016598
I'm going to enjoy sitting in my room all day, and I'm also going to enjoy masturbating whenever I feel like it, and thirdly I'm going to enjoy listening to your ooga booga talk about how you big tribe man, big peepee, big war party of man smaller than you, because I have no egotistical or emotional investment in what you see as a contest, I just like pushing your buttons and seeing if your feral reaction will be to try and convince us of the size of your genitals or how the feelings you feel are big, important, and unknown to small unimportant ungas like us.
>>15016619
Trains are the most boring vehicle because they only run in exact pre-defined paths over and over. Hovercrafts are the thinking man's amusement vehicle, trains are efficient but monotonous.

[Anonymous No.15016632]

>>15016598
>"smart" extrovert's happiness and sense of purpose is tied to his physical location and if people are watching him do the menial pointless things he does
thing more big thing if at pub

[Anonymous No.15016668]

>>15016622
>>15016632
t. worms boasting about how much they enjoy burrowing through cow shit

You are subhuman, it doesn't matter you enjoy wallowing your own filth. Introverts must be put to death for the good of the nation.

[Anonymous No.15016670]

>>15016622
>Trains are the most boring vehicle because they only run in exact pre-defined paths over and over

Kinda of like an introvert?

[Anonymous No.15016677]

>>15016668
Are you sure it's not for the good of your fragile ego?
Because I run a fucking business and work on the side in between sitting in my room reading and jerking off, and as far as I can tell all you contribute to the nation is hypocrisy given you've gone from Mr. Machiavellian Social Puppetmaster to Mr. Stars And Stripes Against Degeneracy in the space of one post.
Grow an attention span, a useful skillset, and a dick big enough you don't have to post online about it.
>>15016670
There's that spatial and sensory retardation again.
>wtf that guy's still reading books? he already read one and he's just going to read another one even though it looks just the same? why would anyone do something like that more than once?
I assume you're too extroverted to be stuck in front of a computer posting like a sad sack on a Saturday night, but still looking at that same old sad phone in the same exact way so much is pretty sad and introverted bro, you'd better throw it at a random furnishing, tongue kiss some Corona-infested strangers, and go buy a pineapple to put your next phone inside of and keep things fresh and meaningful.

[Anonymous No.15016681]

>>15016677
bro corona virus closed all the clubs, im currently getting head from my girl while posting this

[Anonymous No.15016686]

>>15016681
>my girl
>implying he has the same girl for more than one day
Fucking boring-ass pointless life bro, come back at me when you use your inferior peons to set up an entire nation full of willing pussy devoted to you and only you so you can flip a coin a random number of times, go on a random walk through that nation, turn your head in random directions, and randomly decide which of those girls you will fuck for between 3 and 7 seconds apiece, decided at random. To keep things fresh and meaningful for your great intellect.

[Anonymous No.15016690]

>>15016686
I do that every other weekend, introverts will never know the pleasures of being extroverted.

[Anonymous No.15016698]

>>15016686
>>15016690
Hey bros I'm ambivert, I guess you fags will never know the pleasures of doing the hands free helicopter propping yourself up by the dick on a skateboard except the skateboard is a literal woman with wheels surgically added to her and I'm using telepathy to scribble on ghost Hawking's notes and disprove all his black hole stuff and call him a nerd and push him but at the same time I'm irl reciting my dissertation on sub-Higgs wavelengths to a crowd of introverts and extroverts crying and slobbering on themselves brought together by the mystic magic of my personal presence.

[Anonymous No.15017060]

>>15015716
I've heard that MBTI is good at understanding behavior but not at making predictions, is this correct?

[Anonymous No.15017235]

>>15014813
Lermontov's 'A Hero of Our Time' is good and relatable, but more importantly, how do I have sex as an INTJ? I went to a red light district once but I ran away after the whores in the brothels made fun of me for how young I was. Granted, I am eighteen now, but I still honestly have no idea how people find the courage and motivation to do something like that. I could get a girlfriend, but I find women boring and annoying to talk to; and even though I want to have sex once, I can't. What am I doing wrong, my INTJ brothers? (protip: it isn't my appearance)

[Anonymous No.15017383]

>>15015716
How do I know if I'm really the type I think I am?

[Anonymous No.15017503]

>>15017383
That requires quite a lot of introspection and reading on cognitive functions.

[Anonymous No.15017641]

>>15017503
I know, but who's to say that the way I perceive myself is not biased, regardless of how introspective I may be?

[Anonymous No.15017703]

>>15017641
Thats why you need to separate cognitive leanings from behavior.

[Anonymous No.15017723]

Imagine not being an emotionally crippled INFP. It must be so nice to be functional

[Anonymous No.15017725]

>>15017703
How?

[Anonymous No.15017729]

>>15016336
only when we are on coke

[Anonymous No.15018270]

>>15016578
Why?

>>15017060
I'd argue it's bad at both, but the underlying theory is good at both. It's still not going to *really* grasp causality, but it can describe patterns well

>>15017383
Ask your friends and family. Gather the perspective of 10 people and see how it goes. Hell, even the way you respond to their views will confirm or deny some aspects

[Anonymous No.15018317]

>>15018270
>Ask your friends and family
What if I have no friends and don't present an honest personality to my family?

[Anonymous No.15018336]

>>15018317
They're smarter than you think. People can generally tell when someone is holding something back, especially family since they've probably known you for a long time. An IxxP is going to have to REALLY push to convince people they're an ExxJ

[Anonymous No.15018351]

>INFP

[Anonymous No.15018362]

>>15018336
Well, they might be able to figure it out based on the four-letter assessment (the one 16personalities does) but I highly doubt they'll be able to figure out which cognitive functions I use, which is what actually matters.
I'm more or less aware of which functions I use more than others, but I don't trust my self-analysis enough to ascertain their exact order, or to be sure I'm not mistaking two functions that might feel similar.

[Anonymous No.15018390]

As ESTP, do I lack soul or a divine spark? Am I a cringe hylic?

[Anonymous No.15018400]

>>15018362
You might be surprised. If you obviously make decisions on your own more than checking in with others, and you have a lot of emotional or value tints in your language, that'd be evidence of Fi.

Are you thinking more about how the 4-letter code relates to the cognitive function stack? That's an easy explanation

[Anonymous No.15018429]

>>15018400
No, I know how the letters relate, I was just referring to the easy yet inaccurate way a lot of people type themselves and others: is he sociable (I/E), is he practical-minded (N/S), is he emotional (F/T), is he organized (P/J). It's an inaccurate simplification.
>evidence of Fi
I think I use Fe more than Fi, but I can relate to some Fi descriptions, which is why I was saying self-reflection has its limits.
The only function I'm fairly sure I barely use is Se (I'm not "in the moment" at all).

[Anonymous No.15018488]

>>15018429
Totally. What makes it even less accurate is that J/P were made up for the system - Jung had nothing to do with it. And, the fact that one can be split close to evenly on things like J/P suggest that someone could possibly, for example, be either FiNeSiTe (INFP) or NiFeTiSe (INFJ). And the functions don't work like that.

Jung first grouped them into "rational" and "irrational." F/T and S/N respectively. That's kinda vague language, so the system I found defines them as the human needs of Decision and Observation. Then, instead of focusing on letters, focus on the energy - Ni is going to have more of the same kinds of *general* problems as Si than it will with Ne

And yeah, I wasnt the anon who said self reflection. I've found since learning my type from external assessors that reflecting on interpersonal experiences helps a lot. But, statistically speaking, we're likely to get our types wrong if just coming up with them on our own

[Anonymous No.15018559]

>>15018488
>J/P were made up for the system
What matters is to determine the function stack anyway, once you've got that down, the actual letters don't matter too much.
And yeah you're right, that's why I dislike 16personalities and related websites, INTP and INTJ are a few questions apart despite having no actual function in common at all. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be any website which reliably assesses cognitive functions: those that exist are too easy to figure out and therefore lead to bias.

>Decision and Observation
Which functions fall under which designation?
>focus on the energy
What I did was read up on the cognitive functions, then read about the types and how they use them, in order to determine the most likely ones. It seemed to me that, as far as self-reflection alone goes, this was the best way to narrow down possibilities. But then there's the matter of leading, auxiliary, tertiary and inferior functions, as well as shadows, which are difficult to figure out.
>learning my type
What is it?
>interpersonal experiences help a lot
Although I don't trust in self-reflection too much, I'm also wary of those who'd single out a few behaviors and mannerisms and use that to give you a type you don't relate to at all. If we had a discussion and you told me I was ESFP, I'd just assume your methodology was flawed.
Isn't it important to relate to the function's (and the type's) descriptions on a personal level? There's the issue of loops and unhealthy behaviors that might affect your judgment, but overall, if a type really doesn't feel like it fits, I'm thinking it probably doesn't.

[Anonymous No.15018651]

>>15018559
Deciders are F/T, Observers are N/S

>leading, auxiliary, tertiary and inferior functions
Consistently, people with, say, heavy duty Ni and not so great Se will have similar life problems. Using the INFJ model, whether they prefer Fe or Ti seems to be about 2/3 of a chance (right now, the last time I heard any data) respectively. In other words, more people will do NiTi than NiFe, but that doesnt affect how good they do that second main function. An INFJ who prefers Ti is not "better," and they seem to put the same amount of energy into it as others do with Fe

>My type
In MBTI lingo, I'm an ENFP. In the better system, I am MF-Ne/Fi-CP/B(S)

>If a type really doesn't feel like it fits
Yeah, that's a good place for breaking down type into functions. You may not want to think of yourself as the Myers Briggs cartoon character ESFP "performer," but when you think of how you (hypothetically) use Se to gather sensory information and use it for the sake of your emotions and chemicals (reading books all day, maybe), you could be surprised. Not saying you're any of that. It's just more complicated than the internet wants it to be

[Anonymous No.15018652]

>>15017723
Don't worry INFP-brother. The lows just make the highs that much higher.

[Anonymous No.15018667]

>>15014813
Honestly I joke about genocide and am overtly racist, but everyone still likes me and my “hyperbole” jokes.

[Anonymous No.15018701]

>>15018651
What makes deciders rational and observers irrational, according to Jung?
What resources did you use to learn about cognitive function theory the way you're describing them?
>I'm an ENFP
Do the descriptions (such as the ones you can find on typologycentral) fit you? Would you say there's a particular website that describes the types accurately, and links cognitive functions to MBTI in a satisfactory way?
>You may not want to think of yourself as
It's more of a confirmation bias thing. If you really stretch the definitions, you can see all functions fitting your personality in one way or another. I don't think I use Se, but there are moments when I'm just enjoying the present through my senses; that happens. I don't think I use Ni, but sometimes I do have hunches about things. I think I use Ne a lot, but sometimes instead of jumping from one idea to another I'll unexpectedly decide to focus on one of them. Slight, presumably natural variations make it easy to mistake an exceptional occurence for meaningful data. In that regard, I think that cognitive function descriptions need to "click" rather than just fit some aspects of your behavior or thought patterns.
The issue is figuring out what "clicking" means, and which source provides trustworthy enough information that you can rely on it for your assessment.

[Anonymous No.15018757]

>>15018701
>What makes deciders rational and observers irrational, according to Jung?
That's why we don't use those terms anymore - too problematic. All he seemed to mean was that "rational" meant application (making decisions) and "irrarional" meant non-application (observations without action). No clue where he came up with the idea, but he grouped them that way

I use a system built by www.objectivepersonality.com
They type people using the same consistent definitions of functions, using a semi-structured interview ("objective" as in you are an object they view)

>Do the descriptions fit you?
Yeah, not too bad, once I figured out that I'm still technically an introvert (I live in Fi and not Te). One's personal story really explains how we express ourselves via the functions.

For everything else, that's where outside assessment helps. Everybody does every function all the time, so this uses a third party to note general patterns. Type won't always "click," and that in itself can be an example of one's type - I've had to Ne look at every possibility in my life to get this to make sense, but an Ni might completely scoff it off; an Fi might say "no way, I know myself," and an Fe might say "no way, my true friends know I'm not that type." We kind of dont like to feel trapped in a type, but man can it help map the rest of the universe.

Pic related is a decent description of functions. The T isnt that great, but the rest is good

[Anonymous No.15018864]

>>15015869
Based

[Anonymous No.15018900]

>>15017235
For being so smart you sure have no clue. Your going for a service, not more not less.

[Anonymous No.15018962]

>>15018757
>www.objectivepersonality.com
Looks like they have an interesting take on the types, subdividing them to that extent is a good idea. Too bad I don't have the luxury of taking a plane to Oregon for a personality test.
>not too bad
If you have enough time to read it, how (in)accurate do you think this is: https://www.typologycentral.com/wiki/index.php/ENFP
>Type won't always "click," and that in itself can be an example of one's type
So getting a certain result and feeling like it doesn't fit might just mean it fits then. That's troublesome.
The pic you posted seems helpful, using it as a reference I managed to identify four functions which I definitely prefer out of the eight.
I also found this in one of my folders, although I don't know how accurate it is.
From what you're saying though, I understand that self-typing is pretty much not possible, not with certainty at least, so that's too bad. After reflecting on, it I'd say I'm at least sure of Ne (constant branching off, cross-referencing and pattern-finding in large amounts of information, with no particular goal in mind; doing this by default, unconsciously and constantly) and Si (seeking out physical comfort and security as a priority, recollection of past events, experiences and sensations passively) at least, which is a start.

[Anonymous No.15019315]

>>15018962
That's the particularly interesting part of OPS - you record and send a video of yourself talking. No test, just an assessment of how you respond. And not just content - without even realizing it, I set up my video as a series of little Ne-Si stories to make sure they got all the sides of me (in other words, that they had enough info (which is what Se/Ne feels responsible for providing to the world)).

I skimmed through it. There's unfortunately a lot of abstract talking, overlap, and assumptions. Not every ENFP will present their functions in the same way, and they move in various ways throughout life; that's where particular stories come into play. Because some of us are Fi and others are Te, our behaviors will just straight up be different, aiming to complete different human needs. Sexual expression of functions (ie. is your Ne masculine like Koi Fresco or feminine like Owen Cook) will drastically affect how you look to others.

Here's another fun function pic I found. And it wouldnt surprise me if you were Ne - theres a reason so many Ne's spend time on this site

[Anonymous No.15019340]

>>15014813
If you're not intp or intj you're either fucking retarded or a woman (retarded)

[Anonymous No.15019476]

>>15019315
So you just send a video and they'll analyze it and get back to you with results? That sounds good. Thanks by the way.
>enough info (which is what Se/Ne feels responsible for
The "gather" aspect that they show on their frontpage's video?
>abstract talking, overlap, and assumptions
Okay. I wanted to determine if it could be used as a credible source, since it seems more exhaustive and provides more info than most resources online.
>it wouldn't surprise me if you were Ne
The top function is sometimes more difficult to figure out because of how deeply ingrained it is in our everyday thought processes, right? So would feeling like an Ne dom imply it would be more likely for Ne to be auxiliary? Or is that reasoning flawed?

[Anonymous No.15019844]

>>15019476
>Gather
Yep! That would be extraverted observation (ie "moar things")

>credible source
Obviously, the most credible source will be Jung's "Psychological Types." Everything else is interpretation. Kind of that internet-based "everyone is an expert and no one is an expert" thing. OPS constructed their interpretation from scratch, sy thesizing a handful of sources.

>Difficult to figure out
I think you're onto something there. We're balanced on our middle functions (I can easily go back and forth between Fi and Te), but the first and last are split so much it's hard to tell what's what. I've had my type for about 10 months and only just a couple weeks ago started recognizing I've been confusing Si and Fi

[Anonymous No.15019958]

>>15019476
Also, it's a paid deal. I know that raises red flags of the tribe controlling you, but trust me. They're just regular folks trying to make money doing what they love.

Their YouTube has a ton of free resources as well. I think it was around the end of 2018 when they did a "function flow checklist" series that really dive j to the particulars. Then they added his partner (who is present in all the paid stuff), and the channel has been more interactive. Lots of good stuff to play with.

If you want to be typed, you have to sign up for the class and be a member for a few months. This is because they're a business and want to make sure you've done the work so that you don't overload them with confusion later. After that, you send in whatever you like, as long or as short as you want, talking about anything at all (I followed the basic format of their suggested questions). A month or so later, you'll get your type, a few examples of others (at least I did), and audio recordings from each talking to you, directly, about stuff you mention in your submission

[Anonymous No.15019961]

>>15019844
For the three other categories, I'm guessing "identity" is about creating a consistent image of who you truly are; "tribe" is feeling productive and belonging in the community; and "organize" is about, well, classifying information and experiences?
> the most credible source will be Jung's "Psychological Types."
You're right, I was dumb not to just go with that in the first place. Is it more reasonable to start with "Man and his Symbols" first, though?
>everyone is an expert and no one is an expert
Our discussion is making me realize that MBTI as it currently is understood by most is pretty far removed from actual cognitive function theory, to the extent that it might as well be a completely different system. In that regard, when people say their "type is [whatever]", they're not even wrong since MBTI right now is associated with the 16personalities, humanmetrics, personalitycafe and other related communities, not with the underlying theory at all. Not sure if this makes sense, just a thought.
>We're balanced on our middle functions
How much truth is there to the claim that our third function is the general goal we strive towards, while the second function is the general framework within which we consciously work in order to reach that goal?

[Anonymous No.15019977]

>>15019958
Yeah, I'm aware, but it doesn't seem particularly expensive (20 bucks per month? that's fine), so the fact that it costs money wouldn't put me off from going through with it.
>you send in whatever you like
Video files I presume, not sound only?

[Anonymous No.15020048]

>>15019315
>>15018962
I like how these two files really complement each other, there's is usually so much contradictory information on these kind of things. To me that's a huge step toward reliability

[Anonymous No.15020182]

>>15018390
Hi INTJ here there's no such thing as a soul, it's just a word people use to pretend they know better than other people when they can't explain why they think a thing. And also a vague catch-all to handle mortality-related depression.
Even if a soul were real it would be worthless next to a healthy dose of human empathy, patience, and critical thinking.
>>15018757
Is the picture meant to describe things that are dominant in some people? I can't imagine how anyone couild function sanely without a balance between all of those basic things, how would you even think effectively?

[Anonymous No.15020333]

>>15019961
>more reasonable
Eh, he's not a terribly difficult read either way. Those concern such different subjects and neither is really better for "getting into him"

>pretty far removed
There was a book a couple of years ago, The Personality Brokers. I havent read it yet, but it's about how Briggs and Briggs-Myers came up with the assessment. I like what you said about how folks "aren't wrong" about their types; I cant even blame the creators. Assessments aren't their communities, and communities aren't even their subgroups.

>how much truth
The last time I saw a "study" done on types, it seemed like 2/3rds did the standard MBTI Judging (for example NeFi or NiFe) and the other third "jumped" their second function (NeTe or NiTi). So it's hard to even pay attention to second and third; we instead use the term "saviors" and "demons" to refer to whichever it is you're better at.
In that sense, if your demon is your third function, you'll absolutely use your second to try to get to it. Their theory is that that's primarily why we get into major problems - we keep using our right hand to move our left. The biggest problems are when we're actually enamored without right and legitimately believe our left hand is bad.

>>15019977
You can probably do audio, and they'd take that into consideration. If theres not enough material to type you, they'd let you know. I can absolutely see someone an INTJ who hates sensory sending in just an audio clip (and that may be why, once you've been typed, Dave sends you an audio clip rather than a video)

>>15020048
>>15020182
If you remember that Fi/Ti serve the same human need, you can reimagine the 8 functions as avenues to 4 needs. We absolutely all have the same needs, but some need more of one than the other! That's literally what "personality" means - some need more sleep (say SiFi) and some need more play (say NeTe). The letters just describe the *flavor* of expression. NeTe looks different from SeTe, but they serve the same human need. And I personally believe that everyone does do all combinations, but our "type" reflects the overarching life pattern. Like it or not, if one does a lot of Ne, they're going to not do much Si; they may do some Ni and Se here or there, but not *really*. Its more like we simulate them for the purpose of our "normal" personality type.

[Anonymous No.15020551]

>>15020333
>Assessments aren't their communities
Yeah. Speaking of, what's your opinion on the enneagram system?
>it's hard to even pay attention to second and third
So, what, we just notice one function in our stack? I'm not sure I understand what you mean. You can figure out (and perhaps come to a wrong conclusion, but that's not really the point) one of the functions you use automatically for thought processes, and which function you're most comfortable with, so that's at least two. I'm not familiar with the demon/savior terminology though so I'll look that up.
>they'd take that into consideration
Good to know, since I saw types were also grouped physiognomically so I wondered if that was a factor.
>Like it or not, if one does a lot of Ne, they're going to not do much Si
What about FiNeSiTe, TiNeSiFe and arguably NeTiFeSi? The former two should be using both, right?

[Anonymous No.15020575]

>>15014864
And are automatically a brainlet

[Anonymous No.15020704]

>>15014813
BOY DO I LIKE PUTTING MYSELF INTO BOXES
I'M ANTIFA DEMITRANSGENDER SCORPIO INTJ COMMUNIST MEXICAN WICCAN FEMINIST WEBCOMIC WRITER WITH A DEGREE IN PSYCHOLOGY, XHE/XER, 24, BLOOD TYPE O+, 120KG

[Anonymous No.15020715]

>>15020551
>enneagram
So, systems have organization. Jung worked with binaries (expansion vs inclusion, Platonic forms vs Aristotelian science, etc). Western zodiac combines four temperaments with a Hegelian dialect (radiant/thesis vs fixed/antithesis with mutale/synthesis in the middle). I have yet to figure out what the enneagram....means. Where does it come from? Who decided the 9 constructs? Are there subgroups (are 1-3 similar yet different from 4-6; is 1 like 4)?

>hard to even pay attention
My bad, that wasn't great wording. What I meant is it's less important whether you use the 2nd to reach the 3rd or vice versa; in this system, one will be stronger, but which one isn't universal. 1st will always be way stronger than 4th, 2nd and 3rd will always be relatively balanced, and you'll either be better at 2nd (which is how MBTI arranged it) or 3rd. There doesnt seem to be a magic quality to those who jump to the 3rd.

>the former two
Same concept as the last. Those types are INFP and INTP; in either case, their Fi or Ti is super strong and Te or Fe is super weak. In the middle, however, is more variable. For example, Bill Gates prefers Ne but Elon Musk prefers Si, even though both are INTP's. Because they're in the middle, yes, they will do both more easily than my type and the kasy one you mentioned

[Anonymous No.15020720]

>>15020704
>boy have I not figured out that my fear of being put into a box is directly tied to my fear of letting people see that I'm a sexual person and my ensuing fear of women

[Anonymous No.15020729]

>>15018270
What is the underlying theory?

[Anonymous No.15020738]

>>15020729
Carl Jung's "Psychological Types"

[Anonymous No.15020758]

>>15020715
>I have yet to figure out what the enneagram....means
As far as I know, there doesn't seem to be a clear explanation for why there are 9 enneagram types, but they are supposed to be interconnected.
> in this system, one will be stronger, but which one isn't universal.
Ah, alright, I think I get it.
So for an INFP, Fi will be the strongest function, Te the weakest, and Ne/Si can go either way. So how you access the second and the third isn't pre-defined (an INFP can access Si with Ne, or Ne with Si), it's a matter of personal preference and habits?
In any case, the overarching strongest function will always be Fi, and the one that they find most difficult to understand or express will be Te?

I'm going to sleep, hopefully the thread will still be alive tomorrow. It was nice talking to you either way.

[Anonymous No.15020781]

>>15020720
>

[Anonymous No.15020867]

>>15020758
You nailed the INFP example. As far as we can tell, there's nothing special that contributes to one preferring their 2nd or 3rd function. Keep in mind, all of this is just descriptive - none of it describes causality of behavior. There are any number of theories for how personality develops (I lean towards object-relations plus environmental details (someone might Fi music because their dad likes music, or they might Fi comedy because their grandma laughed at their jokes when they were 4)).

But yeah, I hope this helps in your future. It's all about balance and owning yourself. As Jung said, "until you make the unconscious conscious, it will direct your life and you will call it fate."

[Anonymous No.15020882]

>>15020781
Haha I'm projecting you're projecting no me no you
Everyone projects all day every day. That's how personality works. Whether one projects responsibility for oneself or screams like a little bitch afraid of one's own shadow (and assumes everyone else does the same but they're the "smart" one) is, well, up to you

[Anonymous No.15021009]

>>15015869
fucking kek

[Anonymous No.15021398]

INFP lurkers where you at?

[Anonymous No.15021471]

>>15014813
Imagine not being an INFJ chad

[Anonymous No.15021776]

>>15014813
This is pretty accurate. INTPs are STEMfag programmers, while INTJs have more soul and have an artistic and social side (they don't seek social situations, but can handle them well).
>>15020182
This for example is an archetypal INTP statement. If you're on the edge of INTJ/INTP, the INTP almost always wins.

[Anonymous No.15021803]

>>15021471
INFJs are world-changers. If the Great Man hypothesis holds any merit, most of the Great Men are INFJs. Jesus Christ (as), Buddha, and Muhammad (saw) were also INFJ.

[Anonymous No.15021848]

>>15021471
You know, bin laden DOES kinda look at bit like Jerry seinfeld

[Anonymous No.15022021]

>>15020704
Ah, a Mexican intellectual, I see.

[Anonymous No.15022038]

>>15018351
>ENFP

[Anonymous No.15022089]

>>15018351
>>15021471
>>15022038
>F anything

[Anonymous No.15022113]

>>15022089
Only one of those is a confirmed feeler

[Anonymous No.15022131]

Why do people insist on over-simplifying the nature of their consciousnesses and minds. It's treated like some kind of class system where I'm x class, you're y. A crude form of modern pop-psychology, not far-flung from those types of women who read characteristics of star signs and are convinced of their "set of characteristics" as a mind, and then being deluded into thinking they share anything with the great persons of the past because they share the same "cognitive type", honestly.

Has the same appeal, to simplify and so to let some external category define your internal consciousness, this convenient boxing will only serve to limit and lead you astray. Human consciousness is not like some sort of RPG type class system.

[Anonymous No.15022160]

>>15022131
lmao nigga let people have their fun
you're probably some intp fag

[Anonymous No.15022162]

>>15022131
It's just description, anon

[Anonymous No.15022171]

>>15022160
>nigga
>muh fun
Fuck back off to your discord you fucking loser.

[Anonymous No.15022183]

>>15022160
'which pokemon are you?' but people base their interpretations of their personalities upon the results. it's pretty gay bro

[Anonymous No.15022192]

>>15022183
So you feel icky identifying with a pokemon?

[Anonymous No.15022205]

>>15022160
Not just "fun" though sadly, nothing short of delusion on the part of any psychology that attests to somehow objectively categorising a whole mind. This is the limit of the scientific method and objectivity, and so you see the disastrous failure of such a system that attempts to bridge this gap and to categorise consciousness.

It only serves to simplify something that people are either unable or unwilling to properly try to address internally by relying on these external categories, like a crutch, its nature is inherently fallacious. In long, that's why I don't regard it as being just fun.

[Anonymous No.15022218]

>>15022162
It's a lacking and crude description then, and by its nature as such a limited description it actually imposes itself onto some people to the point they reduce themselves to fit into its parameters

[Anonymous No.15022256]

>>15022218
The problem is that it's not descriptive enough. What if you added layers and layers until, instead of 16, there were like 500?

[Anonymous No.15022259]

>>15015307
>opens 50 terminal windows and uses vim in all of them
kek, based. Literally me

[Anonymous No.15022349]

>>15021776
I think you're just saying that because me being INTJ messes up your point about INTPs, and you think a belief in souls or spirituality is needed for depth of moral and reflective thought, and creative ventures.
Sure, I code whenever I can summon the willpower and focus to. Everyone should know how to code at least something, it's like knowing how to drive in the 21st century. But my main revenue stream is my novels, I'll have you know.

[Anonymous No.15022539]

>>15020738
Heard a lot about Jung's work, what exactly did he do/accomplish?

[Anonymous No.15022798]

>>15015351
>not knowing that you’re superior without making up fictitious fantasies
Pleb

[Anonymous No.15023222]

>>15019315
>Nobody chooses teleportation

[Anonymous No.15023241]

>>15021776
>INTPs are STEMfag
This is retarded.

[Anonymous No.15023303]

>>15021803
I believe great man theory holds merit, because isnt the example if you swap Napoleon out with anyone else they would of done the same as he did or something? Its probably a 50/50 idea. These people were the perfect fit for whatever job, and there natural abilities that allowed them to obtain such position only enhanced it. Its a total strawman to say these people are only great because of the position they were in and has nothing to do with there character or personality.

[Anonymous No.15023325]

>>15022089

[Anonymous No.15023340]

>>15014813
tumblr astrology

[Anonymous No.15023567]

>>15020867
>all of this is just descriptive
Still worth looking into. Any system that can reliably map out some aspects of personality and behavior is interesting, and as far as I can tell, this is the most well-developed one.
>"until you make the unconscious conscious, it will direct your life and you will call it fate."
Can you make the full unconscious conscious?

[Anonymous No.15023718]

>>15018351
Enjoy commiting suicide

[Anonymous No.15023743]

>>15021471
Is it better for the unconscious to have exceptional access to the conscious, or the conscious to the unconscious?

[Anonymous No.15024097]

>>15023743
If you want to be an ubermensch you want unconscious to have access to the conscious, it will kinda just take over your will power and propel you to do what you're born to do. The conscious having access to the subconscious is knowing the information is there but not being able to do anything with it in reality.

[Anonymous No.15024131]

>>15018351
INFP is the chosen one who finds out he's the demiurge at the end of time

[Anonymous No.15024145]

>believing in a test that satisfies your wishful thinking and isn’t grounded on sound evidence

[Anonymous No.15024176]

>>15024145
>satisfies your wishful thinking
Only if you're dishonest.

[Anonymous No.15024878]

>>15014864
Right because personalities can’t be categorized and analyzed. Retard

[Anonymous No.15025340]

>>15022131
>>15022205
Do you also have the same problem with hard sciences? Why must we over-simplify gravity when the complexities of nature is so supreme? MBTI, at its core (Jungian functions, which is its only worthwhile part), is an empirical descriptive theory, and a fairly consistent one at that. It tells you no more than what you have already observed. I concede its misuse by many people, and I agree that MBTI itself is an oversimplification of a much reacher typology. But, any sort of descriptive theory, be it philosophical or scientific, is necessarily a simplification of nature, though I can't see how it must also be fallacious.

[Anonymous No.15025865]

>>15023567
Agreed. I just wanted to point that out, because people will conflate ideas about human behavior

I'd say no, about the unconscious, because I see it as the infinitely-expanding reservoir of information you just aren't privy to at that moment. It's less about magic, more about forgotten information. Stuff that you knew and then responded to with a maladaptation. Because we always move forward, we always get more information, and not all of it should be utilized; however, some of it can and should be made conscious in order to live a more free life.

[Anonymous No.15025886]

>>15024145
> caring about evidence

Boy, the 21st century gon hit you hard

[Anonymous No.15026036]

>>15025340
No, not at all, your comparison of psychology to the natural sciences is also fallacious. Yes, nature is complex but it's not beyond our understanding, it's complexity is only made up of simplicity which we can isolate individually and objectively verify and so can potentially understand even the most intricate of the complexities of nature in this way from its smallest components.

You'll find that truly complete philosophical or scientific theories do not oversimplify at all and preserve the complexity of the process they're seeking to explain and will rely upon a foundation of basic components that build up to the whole (although in regard to philosophy you'd find more subjectivity or assumed components rather than an absolutely objective rigour we'd apply to the external world)

My problem is with this categorisation is it seemingly contains none of the characteristics you'd find in the previous fields, and this is probably a greater issue with psychology, a non-objective field (objectivity, which is perhaps the defining trait of a science) larping as an equal to the natural sciences.

So no, you've attempted to lower the bar of the quality of proof of the natural sciences, which seeks to preserve and explain the complexity of nature, down to the level of this kind of psychology which assigns arbitrary characteristics like "thinking", "perception", "intuition" to peoples' minds (and then has the audacity to categorise and reduce the great minds of history to certain "thinking types"). It's an inherently flawed system, and even worse is that from what I've seen it claims to have distilled all the types of human consciousness down to "16 thinking types" often paired with some bland description "detailing" the nature of such people.

Only so much I can articulate here, but it should be apparent to most of the oversimplification and limitation of a system such as this which looks to finally objectively decipher the complexity of human consciousness to certain "types", with the same type of categorisation we've sought to categorise the external natural phenomena - an attempt in which it fails in tremendously

[Anonymous No.15026053]

>>15024097
>The conscious having access to the subconscious is knowing the information is there but not being able to do anything with it in reality.
I dunno isn't that kinda what Jung did, considering his mindset to be quite rational and aware, in contrast to Hitler.

[Anonymous No.15026244]

>>15026036
Nothing says "dont control me, bro" like being afraid of a diagnosis that informs treatment to free yourself from your self-imposed shackles

[Anonymous No.15026490]

>>15026244
quite the contrary, such a categorisation does more to limit and "shackle" you by its obtuse and crude description. Do you really think the likes of those 5 minute online "personality tests" where you choose from scale 1 to 5 to what intensity you feel x tell you anything of substance about yourself? Honestly laughable that you think understanding human consciousness would be this easy.

[Anonymous No.15026533]

>>15026490
So which is it, the online tests shackle you into never seeing yourself because labels in general are bad or because those specific labels are bad?

[Anonymous No.15026570]

>>15015716
>Y'all
FAGGOT

[Anonymous No.15026925]

>>15015307

Today I will remind them.

[Anonymous No.15027077]

>>15026053
Yeah, I think it makes sense according to the chart people like Hitler and Trotsky. Seems like the subconscious just takes over and propels you to you're highest potential subconscious goes further and just takes over the conscious, my two cents.

[Anonymous No.15027340]

>>15026570
I live in Alabama

[Anonymous No.15027974]

>>15027340
BASED

[Anonymous No.15028575]

>>15021776
no, intjs are more practical than intps and are more arrogant

[Anonymous No.15028611]

>>15026036
you shouls look into Jungian Typology. Your knowledge in psychology seems to be limited to 16personalities

[Anonymous No.15028684]

>>15014813
i had an INTJ friend in highschool once. he was the best student there. Despite of this, people treated him as a joke. people constantly degraded his masculinity, he was extremely insecure about his appearence(Se4). He always eclipsed me in exams but whenever I tried to initiate intellectual conversation, he seems to always disregard the things I say(Ti6). Overall, it seems that the INTJ, when immature, is an extremely insecure being with a fragile ego, someone who knows his shallowness but is willingly ignorant of it. And he probably was gay.

t. INTP

[Anonymous No.15028947]

>>15028684
i think intjs either achieve greatness or become intps i was an intj currently an intp i realized how much of a cringe lord i used to be and still am sometimes

[Anonymous No.15029251]

>>15028947
You can't change types, retard

[Anonymous No.15029689]

>>15029251
Bump because you're correct but also be nice

[Anonymous No.15030261]

It frustrates me how modern literature has such a bias toward Introverted Intuition.

[Anonymous No.15030308]

>>15029251
Incorrect. Head trauma, drug abuse and traumatic experiences can cause long term/permanent changes in your behaviour and personality.

[Anonymous No.15030334]

>>15014813
I went from INTP to INTJ to INFP to INFJ.

I've had every IN type, over the years. I don't know why the latter two letters aren't consistent for me.

[Anonymous No.15030358]

>>15014813
>sociopathy

a society full of that would be unsustainable. Would prefer a society full of apologetic autists, desu. Only BEING a predator is preferable. An environment full of them is ruinous. Not a desirable character to have around at all, based on this framing.

[Anonymous No.15030439]

>>15030261
Do you have any evidence of that?

>>15030308
They don't though, only cognitions and behaviors change. A Ti is going to be a Ti regardless of how hard they get kicked in the head. They'll just show it (and their shitty Fe) differently

[Anonymous No.15030479]

>>15030439
>Do you have any evidence of that?
Only anecdotal

[Anonymous No.15030486]

>>15024878
not by pseuds like you and Myers-Briggs, no

[Anonymous No.15030527]

>>15030479
I was just curious to see what you thought Ni was, what lit out the captures it, etc

[Anonymous No.15030532]

>>15028684
I usually ignore other as well, usually because I have already considered the logical conclusion what the other is saying. Having conversation, and actually making sense to other seems be very hard. Things that are so clear to me apparently are incomprehensible to others. I've never fully understand why, but probably I leave many assumptions (that should be obvious) unsaid.

[Anonymous No.15030830]

>>15029251
>>15029689
to be alive is to be constantly growing and dying you change all the time

[Anonymous No.15030993]

>ISTP

[Anonymous No.15031004]

>>15030993
what does the S stand for? Shagging?

[Anonymous No.15031031]

>>15027077
It also seems like the "thinkers" of history were more according to Jung in conscious relation to the unconscious, and not the other way around.

[Anonymous No.15031049]

>tfw ISFJ

[Anonymous No.15031084]

>tfw ISTP but medically unable to join the military

[Anonymous No.15031099]

>>15031084
unfortunate
what do you do instead?

[Anonymous No.15031133]

>>15031099
Right now im studying Archaeology (Euro) and planning to eventually get a firearms lisence after i graduate, that is if he corona recession doesnt fuck me over or my lungs

[Anonymous No.15031205]

>>15031133
think you’ll actually get to do interesting field work?

[Anonymous No.15031216]

>>15028684
I'm INTP and that pretty much describes me

[Anonymous No.15031263]

>>15031205
I certainly hope so but our 2 week fieldwork exercise in Aug is most likely going to be canceled which fucks over the rest of that semister but the year after that ill be able to do an internship with an archaeology company which should proving interesting

[Anonymous No.15031407]

>>15031263
Yeah all my work placements for my degree got put in the garbage, I’m basically fucked now