| Socionics Personals |  | Female
Straight
16-25
Oceania
Libra
ENFj |
|  | Male
Straight
16-25
Middle East
Sagittarius
INTj |
|  | Male
Straight
26-35
North America
Pisces
INXj |
| | Join now! |
Who is who?Learn how to convert between different systems
V.I.An introduction into the widely used Socionics Visual Identification technique
TestsA collection of Socionics related tests and quizes
Q & AsAsk a Socionics related question or provide an answer to an existing one
ArticlesVarious articles on the subject of Socionics and Types in general
ForumsWant to discuss Type? Head to Socionics Forums!
|
| Questions & Answers |
| Question #1182594189 | Saturday, 23-Jun-2007 |
|
|
| I am both an INTJ and INTP, I showed close friends descriptions of each type and both "fit me to a T." At heart I am a die hard INTP, but my mind is like an INTJ, I love philosophy as an INTP would, but often prefer function above everything. Not only is my girlfriend (an ISFJ) an enigma to me, as she would be to an INTJ, she is also supplemental in personality to me like her personality would be to an INTP. My best friend I both mentor and am more of a "tribesman," our friendship also confirming my INTP/INTJ concoction. It is unbelievable but very revealing, and useful. Has anybody heard of a case like this? One who in his personal life resembles both personality types so intensely? Because it is both functional and intriguing I gearing my personality towards higher externalization and emotional output, which is doing quite well, and I am now very aware of others' emotions. I have developed a personality theory as such, and my duo personality seems to confirm my thesis. I would like to hear any comments or opinions on this. -- Snow |
|
|
|
| A11 Actually, Poster A5, as a real INTp I do realize how you can do it (to draw such a conclusion from two paragraphs). However, understanding how you can do that does not necessitate that I believe it is realistic by any means; as an INTj I can see how logically feeble it is for you to make such a value judgment off of a few paragraphs. But what you give with one hand you take back with the other; you say it is insane for me to see myself described exactly to a T in both profiles (from a verity of sources) and therefore conclude I could be both INTj and INTp, yet it is perfectly sane for you to read a couple paragraphs and determine that I am insane and know my personality type? Also, somehow my coming to a theory on personalities via reading on them is insane, but your conclusion drawn from reading my words is sane because you are an INTp. If you were an INTp and an INTj, you would see why your logic self-destructs. Also I never used the word "proof," you did three times, however. Also, Poster A5, I did not have an emotional reaction in the least, that is quite a lot to deduct from text. Now I know you'll probably pass that off as your INTp'dom shining brightly through, but it could very possibly be projection, or just a way to divert the conversation by invalidating the aruger rather than the argument. Also you said if I were an INTp I would try to prove my claim rather than get angry over it. Again, I was not angry, I was annoyed by your rudeness and diverting. I wanted this conversation back on track and open to discussion, not closed by your boisterous, "that's impossible" claim. So rather than try to heap on evidence for something I am not trying to prove but rather suggest, I decided to shoot your haughty and overconfident argument down, so the discussion would be open to true discourse rather than a competition of "who is surer of themselves." Also, my gearing my personality as I wish is not "feelier," because an emotional person typically does not have such control over their emotions. Every person has them, it is just to what degree and how they are expressed. I am finding it to be more functional and profitable, and different, to try to externalize and allow for more emotion. This having being restated, it is obvious you cannot understand that, which says more about your personality than mine. How about the traits that do contradict each other between the INTj and INTp, you ask? I actually lean towards the most optimal side, going either way, split down the middle 50/50. Hence my original post. Also my "Dr. Anonymous" statement was satirical. And actually, I was giving the most compelling "proof" for my theory, and that is myself. Unfortunately you, who doesn't give into "authority figures" (as you say), are bent on following the rules set by said authority figures. Thus when you read my idea you saw it as impossible, and have dedicated your time to proving me wrong (as either ignorant or lying, or just emotional and therefore irrational), rather than looking at this possibility. All you know about me is that I am claiming to embody essentially every trait in the INTp and INTj profile, not trying to convince anybody of it. If you do not take that much as truth then you should not be arguing with me because your argument is as irrelevant as the claim; because if the foundation of the conversation is faulty-it self-destructs. Would you argue with a Holocaust denier? Of course not, because their argument self-destructs and makes your retort very much irrelevant and is chasing the wind. However you continue to argue your certainty , which seems to suggest you hold a level of uncertainty you wish to curb via verbal victory. However, if you take my first claim as a truth and try not to invlidate me as being ignorant, a liar, overemotional or having an ulterior motive (wanting to so badly be an INTp as you before suggested), then I have provided the most compelling "proof" imaginable: a living specimen. One ready for questions and interaction and reciprocation. This you have not tested it at all, however, because the foundation idea is meaningless to you, as you are interested solely in winning the argument itself. In which case you can call me whatever personality type you like, it is truly irrelevant, you can assume all the personal issues and ulterior motives you'd like. Personally, I want to meet another like myself, get some ideas where this might take me, what could be going on here, if there is another case of this, alternate explanations and whatnot. Argue until your face turns blue that my cause is proving an impossibility, but my cause speaks for itself, as I came here for advice and information on my duo personality. If you do not concede that, you should not be typing at all. Call me a "liar liar pants on fire," then go along your merry way. -- Snow |
| A12 @Snow: It's even more obvious now that you are a feeler, funny that you don't see it yourself. But stop being so emotional, and try to have some sense in your posts. I never said you are insane, read what I said again, and try to think this time. Everything isn't about you. And stop taking things so personally. At least try in this conversation. "therefore conclude I could be both INTj and INTp, yet it is perfectly sane" It's sane and even very common, just horribly bad logic and shows lack of knowledge and understanding. Nothing else, definetly not that you "are both INTp and INTj". It's so ridicilous that you keep repeating that. And why do you keep repeating that? Everyone has already heard it the first time. Repeating it over and over, doesn't suddenly make it true. Especially since I said already WHY that claim is impossible, it's called the forer effect. To wich you said absolutely nothing, you didn't even try to dispove it. Instead you mumble some overemotional junk. "it is perfectly sane for you to read a couple paragraphs and determine that I am insane and know my personality type?" I didn't claim I know your type. But I know that you are Feeler for sure. It's so obvious, you don't even TRY to think. "I did not have an emotional reaction in the least, that is quite a lot to deduct from text." Your message was basically all about being angry and/or fustrated at me, just like in your last post. Or as you say annoyed, just a difference in degree, still an emotion. You don't talk about the issue, or try to prove how it is correct. You just talk about me and what I have said and how you feel about it, wich is totally inrelevant. Maybe you now claim that I do that also. I'm doing it only to show you that you are indeed a feeler, wich is just to disprove your claim. Especially since you simply ignore all thinking based information. So here's a better theory for you: you can't tell feeling from thinking, and make NF based judgements, and assume they are logical. It's not uncommon for some XNFx types to think they are being logical minded, when they in fact are not, wich any logical minded neutral arbiter can tell right-away. "because an emotional person typically does not have such control over their emotions." Here's the key error you make. Feeling isn't about having control over emotions, it's about making feeling based decicisions/judgements/goals etc. There are thinker types that can't control their emotions, in fact that's excatly because of their weak feeling functions. And some feelers have very good control over their feelings, because they know what it takes to change them. "I actually lean towards the most optimal side, going either way, split down the middle 50/50." I want to see that happen. So far you haven't displayed the strenghts of either. And how about the ones that contradict eachother but neither is better than the other? "I was giving the most compelling "proof" for my theory, and that is myself." Yes, and dragons are real, because you call your dog dragon. That's totally illogical. How about you now "tap in" to your INTp or INTj like you state you can do, and see how stupid that claim is. "are bent on following the rules set by said authority figures." No, just well proved theories, I don't care who makes them. I change my opinion the moment someone shows a better proved theory. That's called having the scientific worldview. "rather than looking at this possibility" Everything is possible. But when someone makes claim that's that stupid, without any proof, or attempt to disprove the previous theories that contradict that statement. Especially since the statement is both completely illogical, and also based on clearly false data. Data that's based on lack of knowledge, understanding and poorly made assessment of the subject. Therefore it needs to be shot down immediately. "Would you argue with a Holocaust denier?" Would you want Holocaust deniers opinions to start spreading, because nobody disproves them? "I came here for advice and information on my duo personality." I gave you advice: you have typed yourself wrong, and learn more. There's no better advice than that. -- Poster A5 |
| *Please note that the opinions expressed are not necessarily those of socionics.com* |
|
| Would you like to add anything? |
(When posting, we ask you to make the effort to qualify your opinions.)
|
|
