me and the Myers-Briggs types


I’m an introvert.
But I don’t approach the outer world in any way fitting the Myers-Briggs definitions of cognitive functions, I think.
Here’s how I see the world/ how the world presents itself to me:

  1. everything is in a heartfelt value.

I see/perceive everything more or less connected to my heart. This has little to do with love for people (which is a trait of Fe in the Myers-Briggs personality typing).
Trees, clouds, birds, sounds, traffic, light, smells. Everything comes in, directly, and has an emotional value. There is nothing I see/notice that has not an emotional value. I feel everything in relation to myself.

This makes for an often overwhelming experience in the outer world.
Add to this my HSP and/or my adrenal insufficient cortisol to deal with stressors and you can imagine that lots of things I see in the outer world are hurtfull. I’m not talking about pitiful puppies or shocking news, no, just the flapping of treeleaves is enough to hurt me. Seeing a hare in the field. Which is why I spend a lot of time inside on beautiful Summer days.

by Andreas Krappweis

But without these extra hindrances seeing the world like this makes for a grand human experience!
What happens is that I -me, my identity, my ego- dissolves: I ám the cloud, the forest, the sounds, the traffic, the puppies, the leave.
It is all interconnected and all in a heartfelt way. Wordless.

But there’s nothing sage-y or profound or visionary about it. Nothing cerebral going on. Nothing that requires meditation.
Actually, it’s quite down to earth and real and self-evident. It’s just dirt and pebbles. I become the dirt and pebbles.

by Martyn E. Jones

Does anybody recognize this way of being? Am I a freak?
I have not yet encountered anybody who echoos this experience.
I can think of no use for this function in terms of career or job or worldy manifestation. It’s all private and without words, how could I put it to use for the benefit of society?

For years I have consciously restrained this experience, for fear I would lose my mind. I still do. But it is how I am, who I am, how I function.
Today I wonder if by restraining this natural automatic way of being, I have not driven myself to a bit of madness. Control freakyness. Or driven myself to illness at least.

I have no idea how to connect that way of experiencing the outer world to any of the cognitive functions proposed by Myers-Briggs.
Do you have an idea?

It should be one of the Introverted Intuition types:
INTJ
INFJ

or one of the Introverted Thinking types:
INTP
ISTP

or one of the Introverted Sensing types:
ISTJ
ISFJ

or one of the Introverted Feeling types”
INFP
ISFP

The second letter determines how the person experiences the impulses from the outer world.
They all use their second letter different, as influenced by their third letter.
Here’s a quick overview.
You’d say I gravitate towards Fe: feeling the outerworld. Only the theory states a preference for cultivating interhuman harmony. I have no interest in that. It would be rare for me to put myself into service of another person’s happiness.

So am I a hermit extrovert?
A non-social harmony seeker?
A lazy ass thinker?
A lovable freakfreak?
Am I what more than one person has called me: Luna Lovegood??

If I could chose my first two letters in the Myers-Briggs system it would be IF..
An introvert bleeding heart. With no desire to rescue kittens or unhappy people.
This is not allowed because your second letter should be confined to either an intuitive/cerebral or to a sensing way of perceiving the world: N or S.

My third letter would be N, because that’s how I organize my internal world, I’m an IFN.

I take all these heartfelt things from the outerworld and I combine them into conceptual structures in my head. I’ve got a theory for everything. Everything has a place and a role and a reason and consequences and influences and I see them all whenever I think of any one thing in particular. I see webs of connections. Elaborate system architectures.
I like to dwell in these structures. I live in them.
I use them when I go out in the world and take action (fourth letter) but I have not yet specified how I do this.

Well, I probably don’t understand the Myers=Briggs system right, the way I mumble this all up.
But one thing’s for sure: when I perceive the world it’s in a code of the heart. And I, the ego, can dissolve in doing so… ok two, two things are for certain. One: I wear heartgoggles to see the world. Two: my ego can dissolve. Three: internal structure is in concepts and theories.
Three! Three things are for certain!

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “me and the Myers-Briggs types

  1. Hey this is really interesting. Have you done the test and found out which one it typed you as? Another way of doing it is to read through all the profiles and pick the ones that seem closest. I think some people can be a combination of two or three, or a person might not fit any at all. No one system is going to describe everyone. We are more than the specific traits one system uses. But just wondering which one you think you’d be closest too. I love the different ways people think and see the world.

    • yeah, most tests came out on INTJ because I kept dodging the love-people angle of the questions about Fe. Some came to INFJ.
      Reading the profiles led me to INFP

      In yesterday’s post I write about some of my objections to this system :)

  2. I still think that you are describing Fi, not Fe. You “swallow” the world, make it you, making it an inward process, not an outward one. You do not seek to influence the world with this approach, you move the world into yourself.

    Fi is the dominant secondary function for INFP, and for ISFP, so I guess that those would come closest to what you describe about yourself. And I do think that you have more of an Ne than Se… but what do you think? Your remarks on how you perceive nature also suggest a strong Sensing… maybe that’s the thing… maybe we were looking at Intuition too much.

    Still thinking, digesting… not convinced. Also for my own type. I recognize your problem with the Fe, the world saving thing, I don’t have it either. That may be a flaw in Jungs type theory… I think I may be INiFiTe or something like that. Hey, that’s a real word :D I like it!

    • “INiFiTe, bigger on the inside!” :D

      INFP or ISFP, I keep tripping over: “When making decisions, they often give more weight to social implications than to logic.”
      social implications are seldom my concern when making decisions. I’m quite selfish. Also: not graceful (socially).

      Second, the Sensing is about details, not the big picture. So I’d go with N then.

      I keep hoping the MBTI system is wrongly interpreted by the majority of internet ;)
      Or perhaps I should go with the caveats: “they OFTEN give more weight to social implications…”

      yeah, I’d say I’m one of those weird INFPs then. I like what the Wikipage says about them, after the picture of Johnny Depp ;)
      Si as a tertiary function I do not recognize. But I’m one of the weird ones so that’s ok.
      You can call me Luna.

      • :)

        And still… did you read this? http://www.typelogic.com/infp.html
        The Fe cóuld perhaps manifest itself in a more conceptual interest in human beings (and their motivations) than the urge to save them all…? Or perhaps the social aspect is dimished by a starker introverted nature (isn’t that interesting – type letters canceling eachother out?).

        I’m merely guessing myself, and I cannot imagine that we can capture all people within only 16 types easily… especially once they have matured.

        Continuing on that train of thought: could the urge to grow, to learn, to improve, be a typical characteristic of one of the types? Making the very thing that blocks us from seeing the basic structure the type we really are?

        I still don’t know what I am. I don’t recognize your melting into the things around you, but a lot of what you say also rings true to my case. And I don’t want to save people or animals either. I’m selfish like that :)

        Sensing is not just about details, by the way, it is about all the small things coming in as they are, without an overlying idea/concept/value, where Intuition is about taking those same small things in as something that is internally connected in one or multiple ways. Sensing can provide you with just as big a picture as intuition, but is more perceiving, where intuition is more judging oriented, as I understand it.

        But hey, everyone interprets this personality stuff in their own way, from secondhand information interpreted by who knows how many others… it’s a shoe! No, it’s a sandal! Follow the shoe! (sandal).

        I guess we can make our own creative 8 letter types if we like to describe ourselves :)
        Hello, I’m INiFiTe TiNeFeE! Nice to meet you! (order to be verified and certified at some point) :)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s