Back in April, as part of an “introversion” showdown with PPFP, I posted my Myers-Briggs results and asked you to do the same. The response was tremendous! Conclusion: my friends enjoy personality tests!

If you missed the MBTI post, it’s never too late to add your results! Click here, to join in on (or review) the fun!

So, a couple of weeks ago, at Leadership Ottawa’s 3i Summit, when I learned about the “Big Five” personality traits, I thought, “Aha, new personality test post here I come.” Just in time for those slow-moving holiday work days!

What are the “Big Five” personality traits? According to a heap of independently verified research, they are the five traits to which all personality can be reduced. The traits are (courtesy of Wikipedia):

1. Openness – appreciation for art, emotion, adventure, unusual ideas, curiosity, and variety of experience.
2. Conscientiousness – a tendency to show self-discipline, act dutifully, and aim for achievement; planned rather than spontaneous behavior.
3. Extroversion – energy, positive emotions, urgency, and the tendency to seek stimulation in the company of others.
4. Agreeableness – a tendency to be compassionate and cooperative rather than suspicious and antagonistic towards others.
5. Neuroticism – a tendency to experience unpleasant emotions easily, such as anger, anxiety, depression, or vulnerability.

A short version of the test can be found here. According to this test, I’m a O96-C96-E42-A14-N3 (click the link, if you want to learn more about my result). Essentially, I score in the 96th percentile for O & C, the 42nd for E, the 14th for A, and the 3rd for N.

Based on these results, the test tells me: “1) You enjoy having novel experiences and seeing things in new ways; 2) You are very well-organized, and can be relied upon; 3) You are neither particularly social or reserved; 3) You find it easy to criticize others; 4) You probably remain calm, even in tense situations.”

All in all, this seems like a pretty fair assessment. Initially, I didn’t like the notion that that I find it easy to criticize others but it occurs to me that this trait is essential for an inquiring mind such as my own. Criticism itself is not necessarily harmful. Rather, it is more of a question of how one goes about criticizing. Personally, I am working on bringing more sensitivity and thoughtfulness to this inquiring mind of mine.

I would love to know your results and what you think of them! Please take the test and post the results and your reflections below!

Who wants to take bets that PFPP will be more extroverted than me? Again! (Oh, no he didn’t!)

For more posts like this, click here.

When it comes to career paths, INFJs have a vast array of options.  Though they are the rarest of the Myers Briggs introverted personality types, they are often gifted and capable of excelling in whatever they set out to accomplish.  Despite their wide range of interests and abilities, some INFJs may experience difficulty winnowing down their choices with regard to careers, jobs, or college majors.  This article is meant to assist these introverts in their quest for a vocation that is well-suited to their values, skills, interests, and abilities. 

Like their INTJ counterparts, INFJs may land in several different interest domains on the Strong / Holland Inventory.  However, of the six RIASEC domains (i.e., Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, Conventional), INFJs are most likely to display interests in the Social and Artistic realms.  It is important to realize that while those of the Social domain exhibit interests in people, it is unnecessary to be an extrovert to enjoy these types of careers.

Among the most popular careers, jobs, and majors for Social INFJs are those in religion / ministry, teaching / education, mental health counseling, and medicine / healthcare.  They may enjoy work as priests, ministers, pastors, nuns, monks, theologians, rabbis, or other types of religious workers.  With regard to teaching, INFJs may be found at all levels, from elementary up to the university (along with INTJs, they are commonly found in academia).  This personality type may be found teaching the full spectrum of subjects, although many INFJs shy away from mathematics and business.  This personality type is also frequently encountered in healthcare.  INFJs may be physicians of all sorts (e.g., family practice, internal medicine, psychiatry, ophthalmology, pathology, neurology).  They may also choose to study pharmacy, dietetics / nutrition, nursing, audiology, optometry, physical, occupational, or speech therapy.  Those with a holistic bent may, like their INFP counterparts, gravitate toward alternative medicine, choosing to study homeopathy, naturopathy, chiropractic, yoga, massage, or acupuncture. 

INFJs also frequently possess artistic interests.  They often make excellent novelists, poets, and creative writers, but may also do well with visual arts and design.  Or, if they are not great artists themselves, they may choose to study art history or become art / museum curators.  Many INFJs possess exquisite, refined tastes and feel the need to somehow situate themselves in the midst of the arts and culture.  They often relish classical music, operas, orchestras, Broadway productions, and other forms of high culture. 

Perhaps to the surprise of other personality types, INFJs often show equivalent aptitudes in the sciences as their thinking counterparts.  These individuals may possess Investigative interests that may range from the physical sciences (chemistry, geology, astronomy, physics) to the social sciences (history, economics, psychology, sociology, geography, anthropology, archeology, political science, etc.).  Investigative-Artistic INFJs may also opt to study philosophy, critical theory, the humanities / liberal arts, theology, law, and languages.  Of all types, INFJs are among the best-suited for library sciences. 

INFJs with a relatively mild preference for intuition may enjoy “Conventional” jobs and careers.  This may involve working with data and a variety of administrative / clerical tasks.  When combined with Social interests, they often enjoy work in human resources, personnel, and management.  For INFJs with Realistic and Enterprising interests, refer to the lists below for common career choices.

Realistic:

• Computer science, software design, systems analyst
• Urban planning
• Dental hygienist, medical assistant, laboratory technician
• Engineering
• Physicist, chemist, astronomer
• Architect
• Archeologist
• Veterinarian, veterinary medicine
• Forestry, parks and recreation
• Environmental scientist, geologist, geographer

Investigative:

• Biologist, neuroscientist
• Lawyer, attorney
• Economist
• Philosopher, theologian
• Health sciences, public health
• Sociologist, political scientist, historian
• Information / library scientist, librarian
• Researcher or research assistant
• Critic, art, film
• Physician, doctor: neurologist, psychiatrist, pathologist, internist, ophthalmologist, radiologist
• Non-fiction writer
• Pharmacist

Artistic:

• Playwright, dramatist
• Curator
• Dancer
• Graphic / website designer
• Musician
• Interior designer
• Photography, photographer
• Painter / sculptor
• Novelist, poet, editor, creative writer
• Actor
• Film producer / director

Social:

• College professor
• Therapist, occupational, physical, respiratory
• Optometrist, audiologist, speech language pathologist
• Dietician
• Life coach
• Health educator
• Nurse, nurse practitioner
• Osteopath, chiropractor, homeopath, naturopath
• Psychologist, clinical, counseling
• Social worker, counselor
• Teacher (all varieties)
• Priest, pastor, rabbi, monk, nun, minister

Enterprising:

• Consultant
• Marketing / advertising
• Entrepreneur
• Manager / executive
• Organizational psychologist

Conventional

• Administrator, school principal, superintendent
• Human resources
• Technical writer, proofreader

Explore the personality type profiles:  INTJ  INTP  INFJ INFP 

Return to Home Page

*Many INFJ careers may also work well for Enneagram Fours (4w3, 4w5), Ones (1w9, 1w2), Sixes (6w5), and possibly some Fives (5w6, 5w4).

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://personalityjunkie.com.

When it comes to the world of work, INTJs are among the most impressive of the Myers Briggs introverted personality types.  Not only are they often intellectually gifted introverts, but INTJs can envision the big picture without overlooking  important details.  However, in some cases, their formidable abilities and broad interests may make it difficult for them to choose a career path, job, or college major.  Hopefully, this article will serve to abet and elucidate this process for those of this personality type. 

Whereas other types may be more limited in their interest domains on the Strong / Holland Inventory, INTJs are among the few personality types that may land in any of the categories.  They do, however, tend to populate certain domains more than others.  On average, the number one interest domain for INTJs is “Investigative.” Those preferring investigative interests are typically thinking types who are often interested in science.  The type of science preferred is determined by the nature of their other interest categories.  Those gravitating toward careers, majors, and jobs in the physical sciences–physics, astronomy, chemistry, etc.–as well as engineering and computers, will typically have some degree of “Realistic” interests.  These types will tend to be more interested in “things,” that is, the physical world, than they are in people.  The degree to which the INTJ has  “Conventional” interests may also play a role in their career preferences, as laboratory science requires a great deal of precision, patience, and thoroughness.  These of course are natural attributes for many INTJs, contributing to their propensity for scientific excellence as well as their attraction to university research (INTJ is the quintessential personality type for college professors, far outnumbering all other types). Another Investigative career typically very well-suited to this personality type is that of an economist.

The next common interest domain for INTJs is “Artistic.”  This usually attracts those with a strong preference for intuition and whose thinking preference is relatively attenuated.  Jung and Nietzsche are good examples of introverted judgers whose interests were more artistic than scientific.  Those falling into the Artistic interest domain may be attracted to a variety of jobs, careers, and majors listed below. 

Similar to INTPs, INTJs whose interests fall in between the Investigative and Artistic domains may experience the most ambivalence with regard to career choice.  Despite this, INTJs possess a greater number of options than INTPs, as their ability to easily work within existing systems and organizations should make the decision-making process somewhat less painstaking.  Investigative-Artistic leaning INTJs often enjoy work in the social sciences, philosophy, psychology, psychiatry, biology, law, critical theory, as well as various writing careers.  Software and computer systems design also require creativity and may be a good fit when combined with Realistic interests.

As is the case with INTPs,  most INTJs do not score most highly in the “Social” domain.  Those who do enjoy working with or studying people may choose a career in medicine (e.g., internal medicine, neurology, psychiatry, etc.), psychology, or college teaching.  INTJs with a religious bent may opt to study theology or go into the priesthood. 

With regard to the “Enterprising” domain, many INTJs choose jobs in business, consulting, or entrepeneurship.  INTJs can thrive as upper-level managers or executives (assuming they have good people skills), while also making excellent entrepeneurs.

The following careers, jobs, or majors may be of interest to the INTJ personality type:

Realistic:

• Computer science, systems analyst, informatics, programmer
• Software design
• Engineering (all types)
• Urban planning
• Chemist, mathematician, astronomer, physicist
• Applied science, technology, technician
• Environmental science, geography, geology
• Architect

Investigative:

• Actuary
• Biochemistry,biology, neuroscience
• Law, lawyer, attorney
• Economics / economist
• Financial planning / planner
• Philosopher, theology, theologian
• Health sciences, public health
• Researcher or research assistant
• Social sciences (psychology, sociology, political science, history, anthropology, etc.)
• Information / library sciences, librarian
• Critic, critical theory
• Non-fiction writer
• Physician, doctor: neurologist, psychiatrist, pathologist, internal medicine, opthamologist, radiologist
• Pharmacist

Artistic:

• Dancer
• Playwright, dramatist
• Actor
• Musician
• Interior designer
• Graphic / website designer
• Painter / sculptor
• Creative writer, blogger, journalist, editor
• Photography, photographer
• Film producer / director

Social:

• College professor
• Therapist, respiratory
• Optometrist, audiologist
• Psychologist, clinical
• Teacher / educator, science, mathematics
• Priest, minister, rabbi, monk, nun

Enterprising:

• Entrepreneur
• Management, manager (upper level / executive)
• Consultant (any type, including political)
• Organizational psychologist

Conventional

• Administrator, superintendent, school principa
• Technical writer

*Many INTJ careers may also work well for Enneagram Fives (5w6, 5w4), Ones (1w9, 1w2), and possibly some Sixes (6w5).

Explore the personality type profiles:  INTJ  INTP  INFJ INFP 

Return to Home Page

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://personalityjunkie.com.

Alhamdulillaah, I finished the MoU between LMS and Miracle Institute for tomorrow morning seminar before 12 o’clock today. Insyaallaah, I’ll meet mas Deni and mas Anggun after Jumat’s prayer, mas Anggun was the chairman of the institute.  After stretched my arms overhead, I do ‘blogwalking’. It was quite sweet noon to do that at Salman’s akhawat dormitory. Yup, I update my blog routines lately. My fiends, Yudha P. Sunandar,  told that ‘good’ blog presents: atractive, relevant, and original  content; good appearance; communication with the readers; easy to access; and have contact page. Jazakallaah, Bro!!

Voila, I found quiz to test my personality type at Kang Oong’s blog. Actually, you can see my personality type at the right side of my blog. But hey, the quiz shown same result as that one. They said I’m an ESTJ, The Guardian^^

The Guardian

You’re a natural leader and a quick, logical decision maker.
Goals are important in your life, and you take many steps to achieve them.
You enjoy interacting with others, mostly through work related activities.
Your high energy level means that you are great at getting things done!

In love, you tend to bring stability to relationships.
You feel comfortable being in charge, and you enjoy being a provider.

At work, you take charge. You thrive in structured environments and don’t mind enforcing the rules.
You would make a great teacher, judge, or police detective.

How you see yourself: Realistic, stable, and pragmatic

When other people don’t get you, they see you as: Rigid, bound to rules, and a bad listener

Want to know my strengths and weaknesses? Here they are…

ESTJ strengths:

• Generally enthusiastic, upbeat and friendly
• Stable and dependable, they can be counted on to promote security for their families
• Put forth a lot of effort to fulfill their duties and obligations
• Responsible about taking care of day-to-day practical concerns around the house
• Usually good (albeit conservative) with money
• Not personally threatened by conflict or criticism
• Interested in resolving conflict, rather than ignoring it
• Take their commitments very seriously, and seek lifelong relationships
• Able to move on after a relationship breaks up
• Able to administer discipline when necessary

ESTJ weaknesses:

• Tendency to believe that they are always right
• Tendency to need to always be in charge
• Impatient with inefficiency and sloppiness
• Not naturally in tune with what others are feeling
• Not naturally good at expressing their feelings and emotions
• May inadvertantly hurt others with insensitive language
• Tendency to be materialistic and status-conscious
• Generally uncomfortable with change, and moving into new territories

Hohoho, who on Allah’s green earth knew that I have those weaknesses?

* before I posted this article of course

And, i do think this: it was never too late to change things =D

Those of the INFP personality type, similar to their INTP counterparts, sometimes encounter difficulty discovering long-term satisfaction in their careers, majors, and jobs. INFP college students may experience similar difficulties in identifying a major which fits their skills, interests, and abilities.

One factor in the INFP’s difficulty identifying a suitable career path is the ebb and flow of their interests. Like INTPs, they may quickly grow restless and impatient when performing the same job or studying the same subject for a sustained period of time. This may be less common among INFJs and INTJs, who tend to do better with follow-through and project completion.

On the Strong / Holland inventory, INFPs often exhibit “Artistic” and “Social” interests. Those interested in the “arts” may be drawn to music, theater / drama, visual arts, healing arts, graphic design, interior design, and the like. Others may opt to study creative writing, poetry, or literature, perhaps even at the graduate level. If combined with “Realistic” interests, those of the INFP personality type may choose to study landscape or traditional architecture, archeology, sculpting, software design, or environmental science.

INFPs possessing “Social” interests will often gravitate toward healthcare / medical professions, counseling, ministry, psychology, journalism, or potentially teaching. Since they tend to be more perceptive than directive, INFPs typically do better in one-to-one interaction than teaching large groups. If they do opt to teach, they will usually enjoy the role of facilitator rather than lecturer, believing in the value of organic and experiential learning.

Those possessing both “Social” and “Realistic” interests, may choose to study nursing, physical or occupational therapy, or holistic health careers such as massage, yoga instruction, acupuncture, chiropractic, etc. INFPs make the best “healers” of all types, using their extraordinary perceptiveness, intuition, and feeling to improve the health and well-being of others.

INFPs with a mild feeling preference may also select “Investigative” jobs and careers. They may enjoy majors and occupations in the social sciences, such as psychology, sociology, and anthropology, as well as health or biological sciences. Investigative INFPs may also display interests in journalism, non-fiction writing, and other careers in research or scholarship. Many of the top scholars in the humanities are likely of this personality type.

Though less common, some INFPs may exhibit “Enterprising” interests. If endowed with sufficient extraversion, attention to detail, and the ability to follow-through, these types can do quite well with entrepreneurial endeavors. Entrepreneurship grants them the autonomy and freedom they desperately desire, unfettered by the strictures of organizational life. For INFPs who do opt to start their own business, many will select the non-profit route. Though typically not as lucrative, nonprofit careers allow them to work toward something that accords with their values and allows them to make a difference.

The following lists exemplify the types of jobs, majors, or careers that may be well-suited for the Myers Briggs INFP personality type:

Realistic:

• Computer science, software design, programming, systems analyst
• Landscape architecture
• Architect
• Engineer (although often preferred by judging types)
• Archeology, archeologist
• Veterinarian
• Medical assistant, laboratory technician
• Forestry, parks, recreation; park ranger
• Environmental scientist, geology

 Investigative:

• Biology, neuroscience
• Researcher, research assistant, scholar
• Social sciences (sociology, psychology, anthropology, political science, geography, history)
• Librarian, library sciences
• Investigative journalist, reporter, editor
• Physician, doctor of medicine, psychiatry, pathology, internal medicine, ophthalmology
• Philosopher, theology, theologian, linguist
• Critic, art, film
• Humanities, philosophy, critical theory
• Public health, health sciences
• Physician, doctor: neurology, psychiatry, internal medicine, etc.

Artistic:

• Dance
• Actor
• Musician
• Interior design
• Graphic / website design
• Creative media producer
• Painter, sculptor
• Photography, photographer
• Poet, creative writer, playwright, dramatist, screen writer

Social:

• College professor
• Life coach
• Translator
• Physical, occupational, respiratory therapist; optometrist
• Audiology, optometry
• Massage therapist, yoga instructor, acupuncture, osteopathy, homeopathy
• Nurse, nurse practitioner
• Mediator, diplomat, peace studies
• Minister, pastor, rabbi, priest, monk, nun
• Psychologist (clinical or counseling), psychiatrist
• Counselor, social worker
• Dietician, nutritionist
• Teacher, English, drama, art, music, foreign language
• Human resources
• Speech language pathologist

Enterprising:

• Entrepreneur, nonprofit
• Marketing, advertising
• Consultant, educational

Explore the personality descriptions / profiles of introverts:  INFP INFJ INTP INTJ

Return to Home Page

INFP career interests may overlap strongly with those of Enneagram Fours (4w3, 4w5), Nines (9w8, 9w1), Fives (5w4), and possibly some Threes (3w4).

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://personalityjunkie.com.

Scenario: Driving to New Jersey with friends to see a concert.

Location: Grand Central Parkway Westbound

Incident: tons of traffic on the Eastbound side, lots of smoke and then we see an SUV smoking and starting to flame on the shoulder.

Conversation:

Husband 1: Wow, looks like that just happened.

Me: We should call 911.

Husband 1: Nah, somebody else will call.

Husband 2: Ah, forget it, that guy is already toast. Looks like it’s gonna blow.

Other wife: (while dialing 911) Are you guys kidding me?!

Scary part is that the 911 operator was so dimwitted there is a good chance that car had blown before she could understand what between exits 5 and 6 meant, had to take my friend’s cell number (more than once) and then asked if she wanted to be connected to the Fire Dept. By then we were already over the Triboro bridge.

Yikes.

So, here is another poll. Are you the someone else will call guy, the he’s already a goner guy or the 911 chick?

Haven’t had enough of me yet? You can also read me at 50-Something Moms Blog. For photo enthusiasts, visit Leaving the zip code, photos from outside the comfort zone.

:  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  : 

Convergent thinking begins with a diversity of ideas or facts and moves toward an answer, solution, or integration. Convergent thinkers often seek understanding by developing explanatory theories or syntheses. Grand unifying theories or “theories of everything” are attractive to these types.

Divergent thinkers proceed in the opposite direction. These types are less interested in rationally-articulated truth than creating something of artistic, aesthetic, or emotional interest. In other words, they prefer the beautiful to the true, being moved rather than being correct. Divergent thinkers celebrate diversity and feel little need to reduce it, as doing so may detract from the beauty and uniqueness of the individual.

Another type of thinking is analytical thinking. Analysis involves breaking something down into its constituent parts in order to understand those parts, how they interact, and how they might influence the behavior of the whole.  This type of thinking shares one important commonality with convergent/synthetic thinking, namely, they both work with information that is already present.  Synthetic thinkers seek to integrate existing information while analytical thinkers seek to break it down.  Though  synthetic thinking involves an element of creativity in imagining possible relationships between things, both of these types differ significantly from divergent thinking, which focuses on the creation of new ideas.  As such, divergent thinkers envision what could be, rather than manipulating what is.

For those familiar with the Myers Briggs personality framework, it may come as little surprise that thinking types are generally more disposed to convergent and analytical thinking than their feeling counterparts. This is especially true for INTPs and INTJs, as both of these types enjoy analytical and theoretical pursuits. Sex differences may also impact how we think. In his book, The Essential Difference, Simon Baron-Cohen highlights the most salient differences between males and females. In his view, males, on average, are inclined to be “systemizers” or “systems thinkers,” while females are disposed to be “empathizers.” In other words, males, on average, are more concerned with understanding the structuring and cause-effect relationships of systems, whereas females are often more attuned to people and interpersonal relationships. This may indicate that males, regardless of their thinking-feeling preference, are more disposed to convergent or analytical thinking, potentially explaining why they are frequently drawn to philosophy, the physical sciences, and mathematics.  As has been a topic of various online forums, it might be worth considering how female INTPs, for example, differ from their male counterparts.

Nietzsche’s writings serve as a worthy example of an individual experiencing tension between convergent and divergent thinking. While his overall style is creative, non-formulaic, and aphoristic, some of his writings assume a more metaphysical or theoretical bent. One might suggest that Nietzsche possessed an strong preference for intuition, perhaps even a slight feeling preference, which was counterbalanced by his masculine tendencies toward convergent thinking and what he calls “the will to power.”

In summary, I would like to close with a list of factors and personality functions related to both divergent, convergent and divergent styles of thinking:

Divergent

• Prefer intuition, perceiving, feeling (in descending order of importance)
• Predominantly “right-brained”
• Commonly preferred by ENFPs and INFPs
• Strong intuitives preferring feeling (or mild thinking) of other types may also regularly display this type of thinking

Convergent

• Typically prefer thinking rather than feeling
• Common among males
• ENTPs and INTPs are the most common “synthesizers” of information

Analytical

• Typically prefer thinking
• Common among males
• Predominantly “left-brained”
• Most pronounced in ISTJs and INTJs
• Feelers with a strong preference for introversion and judging may also display this type of thinking

Holistic

• Typically prefer intuition and perceiving (a feeling preference may also increase the likelihood of this style of thinking)

Note:  INFJs, depending on the strength of their preferences, may exhibit marked proclivities for divergent and/or analytical thinking. 

Return to Home Page

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://personalityjunkie.com.

There is little doubt that Jung was both an introvert and a strong intuitive. After all, he spent much of his time mining the interiors of his own psyche—interpreting dreams, deciphering archetypes, and discerning the typological functions. As I’ve written elsewhere, I find it curious that several different personality types have attempted to claim Jung as their own: INFP, INTJ, INFJ, INTP, and the like. It seems that when one of the great minds strikes a chord of resonance within us, we assume that he or she is of a similar personality type to our own. Perhaps this is why Jung is so popular across the personality spectrum, as his writings reveal a level of truth and neutrality that transcends our typological differences.

We should also recognize that Jung was of superior intelligence, which undoubtedly contributed to the nuance, complexity, and depth of this work. In my experience, such geniuses are more difficult to type because of their ability to think at different levels and to don different intellectual hats.

Since there is already near consensus that Jung was an intuitive introvert, we are left with the task of deciphering his thinking-feeling and judging-perceiving preferences. We could also take a different route, looking at Jung holistically to determine the degree of fit with each of the various types. Though I think either route is valid, I will focus primarily on the latter method merely because it feels more appropriate in this instance.

Was Jung an INFP?

Of the four types, INFP seems the least likely type for Jung. While capable of seeing the big picture and valuing holism to a certain extent, Jung was far too analytical, systematic, and attentive to detail to qualify as an INFP.

Was Jung an INTP?

The fact that INFP is Jung’s least likely type doesn’t bode well for the INTP. Though Jung was seemingly very even-handed and adaptable in his writing, his work seems more consistent with that of a judger than perceiver. Since INTPs are often right-brained thinkers, they are frequently attracted to monistic (a TP quality) and holistic (an NP quality) explanations. They tend to be more interested in synthesis (the unified whole) than analysis (the parts), finding connections between disparate elements and uniting them under a single theoretical umbrella.

Jung was both deeply analytical and pluralistic in his thinking. Although a student of Eastern religions, he seemed to retain a more marked degree of delineation between what was human and what was divine than is typical of monistic perspectives, such as Buddhism. Jung also articulated a pluralistic psychology comprised of numerous psychological archetypes and symbols, a sort of inner Platonic realm. He saw these symbols as deeply meaningful and integral to human spirituality. INTPs, in contrast, are more apt to emphasize the unity of mind and body, as commonly described in Buddhist metaphysics. Another argument against deeming Jung an INTP is his body type. Jung sported a rather large and imposing physical frame, distinct from the characteristically ectomorphic (i.e., elongated, narrow, lighter-weight) body type commonly found among INTPs.

Was Jung an INTJ or INFJ?

We have now arrived at the final and most difficult point in our discussion, attempting to discern whether Jung was a thinker or feeler. While less-seasoned students of personality typing may be apt to quickly label him a thinker, things are not that simple. Though Jung displayed great powers of analysis, both the thinking and judging functions may affect the degree to which one is analytical; FP types are the least analytical, while TJ types are the most analytical. Sex may also play a role, with males, on average, displaying a more pronounced analytical and “systemizing” bent than females (see Baron-Cohen’s The Essential Difference). So clearly we cannot rule out the notion that Jung may have preferred feeling merely based on his powers of argument and analysis.

Though difficult to prove unequivocally, It is my assertion that Jung was actually an INFJ rather than an INTJ. The most compelling reason for this, in my view, is Jung’s ineluctable attraction to religion and spirituality. While he was no stranger to scientific thought, Jung consistently reiterated his belief that attempts at pure objectivity, hyperrationality, and scientism had left humanity in a rather disenchanted and dismal state. So rather than endorsing the scientific salvation narrative, Jung turned to religion and psychology. He felt that the overarching problem in his psychiatric clientele was a lack of purpose and meaning in life. For the vast majority of individuals, Jung believed that a religious solution was essential for restoring their psychological health and vitality.

While it would be unfair to suggest that INTJs are not religious or interested in spiritual matters, for Jung, these were matters of ultimate importance. If Jung had been a strong thinking type, it seems likely that his penetrating intellect would have led him to study mathematics, the sciences, or philosophy. Instead, he opted to devote the majority of his efforts toward humanistic and religious topics, those which are most commonly embraced by feeling types. Even a cursory exploration of career demographics suggest that religious vocations are of marked and frequent interest to INFJs, while falling lower on the priority list for INTJs. It is also worth noting Jung’s regular use of “art therapy,” both personally as well as with his clients, which is certainly consistent with an INFJ designation.

In conclusion, I think that INFJs have the greatest right to claim Jung as one of their own. Though his feeling preference was likely much less pronounced than his intuition, his work represents a wonderful embodiment of a profoundly gifted and widely influential INFJ.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://personalityjunkie.com.

Most people have some idea of the difference between introverts and extroverts. The extreme introvert is typically thought to be very shy, to prefer solitude, and to feel uncomfortable and self-conscious in social situations. Extreme extraverts, on the other hand, are known for their sociability, enthusiasm, and confidence in the social arena. While we rarely have trouble picking out these extreme types, most of us fall somewhere closer to the middle of the spectrum. President Obama serves as a good example, with some people typing him an introvert (see this post), while others consider him more extraverted. For those with a moderate personality type, it is possible to feel like an introvert in some situations and an extrovert in others. This can make it difficult to discern your true preference. The purpose of this article is to help you sort this out and determine whether you are an introvert or extravert.

Although some people treat introversion and extraversion as single traits, they are actually composites of a number of different traits which tend to hang together. These entail not only social considerations, but emotional, psychological, and physical factors as well. Let us begin with the social aspects.

A common misconception is that most introverts are either anti-social or socially inept. While it is true that introverts certainly need more time alone than extraverts, many have developed effective social skills to the point of not appearing overtly introverted. Moreover, it is a misnomer that introverts do not enjoy social situations. Like anyone else, introverts enjoy the company of friends and the opportunity to express themselves. They do, however, differ from their extroverted counterparts in a couple respects. First, introverts tend to be more cautious in selecting who they open themselves up to. Second, they often carry different standards for social discourse, such as a desire to discuss serious topics in smaller groups rather than large-scale networking at a party.

Emotionally, introverts are often more self-conscious, nervous, and anxious than the more domineering extraverted types. They may also experience more negative emotions and greater fluctuations in their mood (this is especially true of introverted feeling types, see INFP and INFJ). This may cause extroverts to view them as depressive types, whereas introverts may see themselves as more realistic and less naively optimistic.

Introverts comprise 80% of those with a “sensitive personality.” This sensitivity extends beyond emotions, as introverts are often more sensitive to loud noises, commotion, and other distractions. This may explain why they have more difficulty with multi-tasking than extroverts. Because of their sensitivity, introverts generally dislike being put on the spot or having to perform in front of others. They would rather have time to collect and prepare their thoughts, often preferring to put them in writing. This innate sensitivity should not be viewed as a weakness, but as a unique strength. Sensitive personalities are often drawn to scholarship, the arts, counseling, and other valuable careers.

Psychologically, introverts direct their attention inwardly. Rather than being highly absorbed in material comforts, outside events, or the newest fads, introverts are often more engrossed in their own thoughts, feelings, fantasies, and values. They tend to be self-reflective and can be “deep” thinkers, sometimes spending extended periods of time in contemplation or indulging their active imaginations. Since they are often getting lost in their own thoughts, outsiders may perceive them as aloof, indifferent, or absent-minded. Though to some degree this may be true, most of these signals are conveyed unwittingly, as the introvert is merely doing what comes naturally. For similar reasons, introverts may be perceived as “slow to respond,” as they must reverse the direction of their focus from within to without.

Physically, introverts tend to be slower in their movements, less demonstrative, and not as physically energetic as extroverts. They are also more independent of their physical surroundings, capable of amusing themselves inwardly should the need arise. Introverts have lower rates of obesity than extraverts, which may result from both genetic and lifestyle factors. They often display an ectomorphic (i.e., long, thin, narrow) body type, in contrast to extraverts who are often squarer or rounder in their natural physique.

In determining whether you are an introvert or an extravert, it is best to examine yourself with regard to each of the above dimensions (i.e., social, emotional, psychological, physical). Consider these not only in the context of the present, but also your tendencies earlier in life. Research has shown that “inhibited” and “highly reactive” temperaments (both of which relate to introversion) are often present from birth. If you can evaluate yourself according to this bigger picture, you will come to a much more accurate knowledge of whether you best fit the bill of an introvert or extravert.

Return to Home Page

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://personalityjunkie.com.

by A.J. Drenth

In Part I of this discussion, we highlighted the common incongruence between the theoretical predictions of Type Dynamics and the how people score on judging-perceiving inventories.  We concluded the discussion by questioning how we might move forward in a way which minimizes the confusion that often clouds this personality dimension.  In this discussion, we will consider some potential solutions to this most challenging aspect of the Myers-Briggs personality system. 

To begin, when describing personality types, it is best to consider the habitual attitudes, behaviors, thoughts, and feelings of the individual. In doing so, it is important that we avoid focusing entirely on one dimension to the near exclusion of others. One can observe differences in this regard among different theorists. David Keirsey, for example, emphasizes the observable behavior of the personality types while downplaying psychodynamics. In contrast, Carl Jung was more interested in describing psychodynamics than he was in detailing the overt behaviors of the various types.

The judging-perceiving dimension has been described with respect to both cognition and behavior. Cognitively speaking, judgers are said to desire closure and planning, while exhibiting more decisiveness than perceivers. Perceivers are said to prefer to leave matters open, allowing for the infusion of more information prior to making decisions. With regard to behavior, judgers are thought to be more organized, deliberate, and tidy, with perceivers acting more hastily and impulsively, less concerned with the structuring of  their surroundings.

Understood this way, the judging-perceiving dimension makes pretty good sense and coheres quite well with the leading academic model of personality, the five factor model (i.e., “Big Five”). The problem, as articulated here and in Part I, occurs when people take their J-P results and attempt to understand them under the auspices of Type Dynamics. For instance, a person scoring as an INFJ, according to Type Dynamics, should display a stronger preference for intuition (specifically “ introverted intuition”) than feeling. This is quite ironic if we consider the fact that intuition is actually a perceptive function, meaning that under Type Dynamics, judgers are thought to be, on average, more perceptive than perceivers. In essence, this implies that judging types are actually less interested in closure than perceivers. No wonder people are confused!

In all fairness to the orchestrators of Type Dynamics, their ideas are based on Jung’s ideas about the introverting and extroverting of functions. This was Jung’s way of reconciling discrepancies that he sometimes encountered between individuals’ inner world and outward behavior, especially evident among introverts. But is it really feasible to suggest that outwardly decisive and organized individuals (i.e., judgers) are usually more internally intuitive and irrational than perceiving types? Are we really that divided in our psychological functioning? Or, would it seem more likely that judgers are judgers through-and-through, inside and outside? Or, perhaps it is best to avoid making such predictions altogether, proceeding instead on a person-by-person basis?

Although avoiding theoretical prediction is certainly the most empirically-precise option, it moves us in a direction away from personality “typing,” which may detract from its inherent appeal. For me personally, I am willing to sacrifice some degree of accuracy for the elegance and parsimony of some sort of theoretical framework.  But before explaining my proposed approach, I would like to suggest that inner-outer discrepancies may actually have little to do with the judging-perceiving dimension. Instead, they are more likely to correspond with our personal and private selves, as well as whether we are introverted or extraverted. Introverts, for example, who are typically more inhibited than extraverts, will often conceal their emotions and thoughts from outsiders, sometimes causing them to be perceived as colder or less emotional than they really are. This does not mean, however, that introverts possess a divided psyche, but only that they are careful about who gets to see it. Moreover, all types adjust their behavioral presentation to better cohere with outer circumstances, this is merely a fact of human psychology, sometimes called “self-monitoring.”

From my perspective, type theory needs to incorporate ”left brain” vs “right brain” differences among the types, as well as a consideration of thinking styles (i.e., convergent, divergent, synthetic, holistic).  Hemispheric dominance serves a way of connecting outward differences in presentation and behavior with inward differences in thinking style.  This allows us to be more balanced in our approach, not focusing exclusively on psychodynamics or behavior.  Incorporating hemispheric dominance also helps connect type theory to biological science.  I should give credit to Lenore Thomson, author of Personality Type, who did a nice job of introducing this sort of thinking into the Myers-Briggs framework.

I suggest that NPs, especially NFPs, are, on average, the most right-brained of all the types.  These types are often attracted to global and holistic approaches; they focus on the forest rather than the trees.  Right-brained types may be willing to sacrifice some of the facts or details for the sake of elegance of explanation or artistic expression. These types are not as logical, linear, or analytical as TJ types, but tend to learn things holistically and experientially in an “all-at-once” fashion. When NPs communicate, they often do so in more of a random, non-linear manner.  STJs are typically the most left-brained. They tend to be more analtyical, organized, linear, detailed, and sequential in their explanations.

The other personality types can then be located between these two extremes, with SPs and NJs falling somewhere near the center. For these functional pairs, it may be difficult to decide whether they are more left-brained or right-brained. For this reason, incorporating observations regarding outward behavior (as is commonly done to determine judging-perceiving differences), as well as thinking style, should be considered in developing a more comprehensive understanding of one’s judging-perceiving preference.  See this post for more information about the different thinking styles.

Here are some examples of how this might all come together for the introverted intuitive personality types:

INTJ (on average, most left-brained of introverted intuitives): Excels with formal logic, analysis and planning, including things such as analytic philosophy, technical writing, strategic planning, scientific writing, computer programming, etc. Generally quite articulate. These left-brain qualities are in accordance with their preference for designing and reworking systems and structures.  They are analytical  and “systems” thinkers.  If their thinking preference is mild and intuition is strong (such as in the case of Nietzsche or Plato), these types can also exhibit divergent/ poetical thinking, evincing a greater employment of the right side of the brain.

INFP (most right-brained of introverted intuitives): Creative, holistic, imaginative, random. May not be as verbally articulate as judging types. Usually very perceptive, often preferring one-to-one interaction versus large group teaching. Highly represented among psychotherapists, counselors, holistic health practitioners, etc.  They are often divergent and holistic thinkers, sometimes synthetic, but not as analytical.

INTP (falls closer to center of L-R brain continuum): May not be as strictly logical or verbally articulate as INTJs. May be less likely to specialize due to their desire to see the biggest possible picture (INTJs are often more content to focus on smaller-scale, more clearly defined systems). INTPs often enjoy philosophy, but are more likely to focus on the theoretical elegance of an argument rather than adhering to strict logical rules. They are often synthetic thinkers (Ken Wilber is great example of a master ”synthesizer.”)  Female INTPs, or males with a mild thinking preference, may be more inclined toward divergent / creative thinking.

INFJ: (also falls close to center of L-R continuum). Interestingly, this type shares similarities with the INTP in regard to hemispheric preference, as both fall near the center of the L-R continuum (Carl Jung is a classic example of this, having been typed by different people as INTP, INTJ, or INFJ, see this discussion.). INFJs can be gifted communicators and writers, adept at channeling their right-brain creativity into a well-articulated left brain format.

Home Page

I would love to hear your thoughts on this issue or field any questions related to my approach to this topic. So post your comments and be sure to return to this site for future developments. http://personalityjunkie.com Or better yet, subscribe to my RSS feed (top of page) which forwards you new posts as they are published.

1. Reynierse JH, Harker JB. Preference Multidimensionality and the Fallacy of Type Dynamics: Part 2 (Studies 4-6). Journal of Psychological Type. Issue 11. Nov 2008.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://personalityjunkie.com.

Along with introversion and extraversion, determining one’s preference for judging or perceiving often represents a formidable challenge for those attempting to discern their personality type.  I say this as someone who struggled with this personality dimension for many months, if not years.  With many hours banked reflecting on this issue, I was able to identify a number of reasons for these difficulties, several of which we will discuss in this post.

One problem, which did not become entirely clear to me until recently, is that introverts generally show less variability in this dimension that extraverts. While both introverts and extraverts can display strong judging preferences, it is less common for introverts to exhibit an extreme preference for perceiving. As a result, a greater percentage of introverts fall near the midline of this dichotomy than is true of extraverts. Another issue, which will comprise the remainder of our discussion, is the inherent difficulty of the judging-perceiving dimension as it is currently understood and employed within the Myers Briggs framework.

In his seminal work, Psychological Types, Carl Jung did not explicitly employ a judging-perceiving dichotomy for his types. He did however, closely approximate this distinction by classifying those who rely most heavily on intuition or sensing as “irrational” types, with those regularly exercising their thinking or feeling judgments representing Jung’s “rational” types. We can readily see how this maps onto the Myers-Briggs judging-perceiving dichotomy, with judging types appearing more “rational” and perceiving types more “irrational” (at least outwardly).

Jung recognized the fact that there is frequently an incongruence between a person’s outward behavior and inner psyche. He observed, for example, that an individual who appeared cold and unemotional to the casual onlooker may actually be concealing a volatile and passionate emotional interior. In order to better understand and classify such individuals, Jung saw it necessary to understand the S-N and T-F dimensions in light of introversion or extraversion. He also introduced the notion of psychological compensation. Here’s how this all worked:

Paraphrasing Jung, for introverts to function in an extraverted world, they must compensate and learn how to function in an extraverted fashion. Because of this, Jung believed that what you see is not always what you get when it comes to introverts. The behaviors and attitudes typically displayed by introverts, according to Jung, do not typicially reflect their strongest preferred function. Rather, they are utilizing a lesser function for the purposes of compensation. According to Jung, the introvert’s dominant function (i.e., S, N, T, or F) is often concealed. Extraverts, however, do not need to compensate nearly as much in daily affairs, because they are merely doing what comes naturally to them. This led Jung to assert that extraverts outwardly display their preferred function, making it easier to discern their dominant function and psychological type.

Under Jung’s system, it was necessary for a person to possess a fair amount of background information in order to understand his designations of “rational” and “irrational” type. This was especially true when attempting to classify introverts. Presumably for this reason, Isabel Briggs Myers and her mother, Katharine Briggs, decided to add the judging-perceiving dimension to Jung’s framework. In theory, this would take some of the confusion out of Jung’s methods, making his system more user-friendly and easily accessible to the layperson.

In adding the judging-perceiving dimension, Myers-Briggs tried to remove any guesswork with regard to whether or not a person was outwardly rational. They did this by attempting to measure it directly. If a person came across as rational (e.g., decisive, formal, deliberate) and preferred to impose their rational preferences on their surroundings (e.g., organized, orderly), he or she was said to prefer judging. If appearing indecisive, informal, adaptable, and less concerned with the structuring of the environment, the individual was said to prefer perceiving.

From a practical standpoint, instituting the J-P dimension was an obvious winner. People could simply take a test, get a good sense of their personality type, and go home for a beer.  But Myers and Briggs did not stop at empiricism and practicality, they also hoped that their J-P dimension could serve to clarify and further develop Jung’s psychodynamic theory. This is where things get a little harry.

On the one hand, we have the straightforward personality inventory items which evaluate judging and perceiving as a distinct dimension of personality. On the other hand, Myers-Briggs proposed an intricate theory of relationships between the various personality dimensions which is said to correspond to one’s J-P preference. This is commonly called Type Dynamics.

To use a computer analogy, the simple understanding of judging and perceiving, such as that derived from taking a brief personality quiz, might be thought of as a blue hyperlink (like those on this page), comprised of a word or short phrase. The theoretical understanding, as espoused in Type Dynamics, is analogous to the intricate code which underlies that simple link. Unlike the one-to-one correspondence we find in the world of computers, however, people are much more complex and difficult to predict, so that their answers on a personality test may not correspond with the predictive psychological theory. In other words, there is often a disconnect between the simplicity of the personality test and the complexity of the individual; the hyperlink is broken.

I have already discussed the empirical failure of Type Dynamics here. To sum it up, Myers-Briggs theory has proven to be no better than chance at predicting an individual’s strongest function in accordance with his or her judging-perceiving preference. As an example, per Type Dynamics, INTPs should demonstrate a stronger preference for introverted thinking than for introverted intuition. INTJs, in contrast, should exhibit a stronger preference for introverted intuition than for introverted thinking. Unfortunately, when these two types are pitted against each other in an empirical test, no clear pattern emerges. INTPs are, in general, just as internally intuitive (i.e., introverted intuition) as INTJs, while INTJs are equally internally rational (i.e., introverted thinking) as INTPs.

So what are we to do with this debacle? Do we completely renounce personality type theory, moving in the purely empirical direction of the academic Five Factor Model (the “Big Five”)? Do we attempt to repair Type Dynamics so that it coheres more closely with the evidence? Or perhaps there is another way of solving this dilemma?  This will comprise our focus for Judging vs Perceiving: Part II.

Return to Home Page

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Based on a work at introvertedpersonalitytypes.com.

I will be the first person to tell you that I am an introvert.  I’m not the type-A, outgoing, party-starting personality that loves to the be center of attention.  It’s true that I am able to speak or play my guitar in front of crowds and I’ve even been involved in skits before so I may not be at the most extreme end of introversion.  However, after a long day, I have to recharge my batteries by being by myself.

Being an introvert has been a difficult thing for me to deal with lately because my circumstances have been tough and my friendships have suffered as a result of my introverted tendencies.  The last year-and-a-half has knocked me on my back and then proceeded to kick me while I was down.  I needed to recharge…but I also need my friends.  Thus enters my dilemma.  While taking time to deal with life, my friendships have gone away.   How does an introvert deal with this?

The distance I’ve needed to withdraw seems to be tied to the level of difficulty I’m facing and, since I’ve been coming out of an extremely trying time for me, I needed to crawl into a pretty deep hole.  However, now that I’m starting to get my feet back on the ground, my sense of normalcy is facing a relational vacuum.  I used to know hundreds of people (no joke) by name and I would have considered them all friends.  Within that group I had others that were very close to me that I talked with them quite often.  But now I think I have a total of two (2) friends that I’m still in touch with.  Yes, two.

My old friends did not leave at once; nor would I say I had no responsibility for their leaving–in my distress I didn’t feel like reaching out to many people. I guess I’m just surprised they’re gone.  It’s a lesson learned in maintaining relationships similar to “if you don’t use it, you lose it.” Well, if you don’t keep in touch with your friends, you lose them.

Not all is lost. I’ve been making new (awesome!) friends and turning some old acquaintances into friendships. It’s been like starting over from scratch. Perhaps my life needed a purge to start fresh, but I have a feeling I will deal with the introvert’s dilemma again someday in the future.  This time I need to stop it in its tracks!

Are there other introverted people that have dealt with this before? Let me know!

Is Barack Obama an introvert?  These days, it’s almost assumed that Presidents, especially in America, are extroverts.  This is entirely understandable, considering the fact that successful politicking requires a number of traits we think of as “extraverted.”  These include things such as dominance, assertiveness, high energy levels, fluidity of speech, the ability to think on one’s feet, and some degree of warmth and affability. 
I would like to argue that Barack Obama displays a number of introverted qualities, qualities which seem to catch many people off guard. Here are few things I’ve noticed. First, if you’ve ever read his books, such as Audacity of Hope or Dreams from My Father, Obama is a deep and highly self-reflective individual. He was not one of these kids who was raised in wealthy and prestigious circumstances and knew from a young age that he wanted to be president. Although he was very precocious, his mission did not become apparent without a great deal of thought and reflection over the course of his life. Considering his introspective nature, if he wasn’t so dang busy, he’d probably enjoy a good book on personality typing:)

Obama also exudes introversion in his demeanor and stated preferences. He is very measured in his speech, clearly preferring to think before speaking. I also remember reading a story about his love for teleprompters. Though this may be true of most politicians, it would seem a good indicator of introversion, wanting to think through every word prior to delivering a speech. A recent story which gained attention, involving Obama bowing during his trip to Asia, serves a good example, in my view, of his willingness to relinquish the omnipotent Emperor role that some seem to expect from the American President. Personally, I found the bow refreshing, a way of showing good will and a willingness to approach the meeting in an unpretentious, open fashion.

Last, Obama has the body type of an introvert. He is primarily an ectomorph, with a mild amount of both endomorphy and mesomorphy. Ectomorphs are long and lean, generally with narrower faces. Though body type and personality type are not always congruent, it nonetheless serves as another check in the introverted column for Obama. BTW, if you are wondering how I would type Obama, I would go with INFP and Enneagram 3w4. His introversion is mild with strong extraverted compensation, he is highly intuitive, near the center on thinking-feeling, and displays a mild preference for perceiving.

Return to Home Page

In Riso-Hudson’s system, the enneagram is primarily meant as a tool for personal growth and understanding. It is not meant to typecast anyone into a limited box as one, or even two personality types. However, their test results are designed to “describe” a person in terms of two adjacent types on the diagram. As such, I am definitely a 4/5 without any doubt. This corresponds to INTP in the Myers-Brigg’s personality assessment test and I am so consistently placed in other systems of personality that I rarely, if ever, see any discrepancies. That’s not to say I adhere or give credence to any system – even with the 99.9% coincidence of agreement. For example, I am intrigued by numerology and astrology but I do not “believe” in either as a predictive system of personality or anything else for that matter. Extend that to most other systems, including tarot, I-Ching, runes, crystals, Kabala, or whatever. I am fascinated by the information I can learn from many different systems, but that’s as far as I go. Anyway, all that to say I am not a faithful adherent of much of anything, but eclectically I gather from all and apply it to myself (and others too I guess … typical Four)

So, since I slept all day and I am still wide awake … here is my other half if you will.

Type Five: The Investigator

Focused, observant, curious, insightful, studious, complex, profound, perceptive, whimsical, unsentimental, exploratory, independent, visionary, pioneering, innovative, objective, understanding, playful, compassionate, and nonattached. Negatively, they can be detached, preoccupied, high strung, isolated, impractical, unconventional, uncompromising, extreme, and provocative.

They exemplify the desire to understand, to look beneath the surface and arrive at a deeper insight about their reality. They prefer the life of the mind, both as a way of understanding and as a way of escaping. Their inner world is more real and vivid to them than the external reality. They tend to experience something and then spend hours, days, or even years, seeking to understand it. They love playing around with concepts, overturning the accepted way of looking at or doing things. They are the most independent and idiosyncratic of the personality types. They are the ones we would normally label as loners and misfits. They can seem downright odd to other people. They are intensely determined to pursue their own questions, to swim in ideas they find fascinating, often to the point where “real world” considerations, such as relationships or finances or even basic needs become neglected or forgotten – the proverbial absent-minded professor. They have an extraordinary ability to focus on something they are considering, staying with a problem or a question or an idea until it is solved to their own satisfaction, or until they conclude that it is unsolvable. They are not ones given to boredom; there is always something to stimulate their energy and focus and curiosity.

When they find someone whose intelligence and interest they respect, they are invariably talkative and social. They love to share their insights and expertise with anyone who appreciates what they have to share. They are often a treasure trove of information, speculations, opinions, and trivia. They can also just as easily seem to be impenetrable enigmas who remain aloof and distanced, strange, quirky, yet somehow intriguing … from a distance of course. They always have more going on than what meets the eye.

Fives want to understand reality, to possess knowledge, to find their own niche for themselves that others have not explored, to have the freedom to explore their own inner worlds, to have sufficient solitude and time and space for their projects, and to feel confident, capable, and powerful, for knowledge is power. They do not want to feel uninformed or incapable, to have their competency questioned, to accept easy answers, to feel intruded on or managed, to be forced to respond before they feel ready to, to suffer the ignorance of others, or to ask for help.

They spend more time by themselves than any other personality type, yet they also need companionship and connection. They fear needing the affection and warmth of others though. They believe to ask or to need is to impinge on their own independence and freedom. They also internally believe that their needs are so intense they would be too much for another. Sadly, if either their independence or freedom is at risk, they will often retreat from the relationship, even if they love the person. They are the most able personality type to live without significant relationships on all levels. That doesn’t ever mean they do not want relationships, but that they are generally unwilling to compromise themselves for the sake of a relationship. They simply would rather do without. If they do find someone they are intensely loyal. They can be funny, affectionate, and highly sexual. Yet, they always remain in that unsteady balance between their desire for solitude and their desire for meaningful connection.

They easily feel intruded on and need perhaps more privacy and time alone than many others. They often personalize rejection and retreat from others. They are easily overwhelmed by others’ emotional needs. They can appear to be overly secretive, not expressing their feelings or giving verbal or non-verbal clues. They seemingly enjoy antagonizing or attempting to undermine the beliefs of others, not to be mean, but just to get others to question and think for themselves. They frequently cut themselves off from others, withdrawing into deep isolation, burrowing deeper as others try to draw them out.

They observe everything with extraordinary perceptiveness and insight. They possess a searching intelligence and are mentally alert and curious, little escapes their notice. They explore reality with a child’s sense of wonder. They love to ask questions. They enjoy learning and are excited by knowledge. They can be remarkably open-minded and tolerant despite an often black and white demeanor.

They cope with conflict by retreating inward, but eventually they need stimulation and interaction and return. They are characterized by restlessness and hyperactivity, often developing insomnia because they find it so difficult to just slow down – outwardly and inwardly. They often bounce between extremes, appearing almost bipolar. When they feel someone or something is intruding on them, they will attempt to leave, to escape, or simply shut down, becoming detached or silent and unresponsive. They can also become – at the other extreme – feisty, argumentative, confrontational and relentlessly provocative.

Self-preservation Fives/Isolation are the most introverted. They need long periods of privacy and solitude. The hoarding element of their personality is most often evidenced in the areas of resources, living space, and personal space. For them, less is definitely more. They are usually intensely private. They need lots of time by themselves to regenerate their personal energy. Many choose to live alone, while those in partnership often seek out a place of their own, a nook or study or simply a room where they can go and close the door and where no one intrudes. They tend to collect things for themselves as well. Whatever interests them, they stockpile to have on hand.

Fives grow by developing a deeper relationship with their bodies and their feelings, not just their minds. They must put themselves out there into the world, develop trust in others, share their knowledge and experience with others, and acknowledge all of their needs, allowing others to meet them.

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

So, how’s that for a portrait of me? I already have my opinion, but it is subjective and biased of course. Then again, I am a stranger to all and you cannot possibly confirm or argue against any of this. I suspect, however, that anyone with enough time and effort could easily verify the veracity of both types, simply from my words in certain song lyrics and even more easily through my poetry and blogging. So, this is me. Eerily accurate if I do admit it myself.

Sick since last night or early this morning again, feverish, and a few other symptoms I will not disclose for the sake of propriety. I doubt it is the flu, too chronically reoccurring. Resembles something from my past, but I am trying to ignore it – maybe it will go away.

But, consequently, I slept nearly all day and much of the evening and therefore I am not tired or sleepy or even remotely capable of returning to bed, so I watched two DVDs, The Grudge 2, and Ten Nights of Dreams, non-coincidentally both within the tradition of J Horror (Japanese horror) and both directed by Takashi Shimizu. Incidentally, neither is responsible in any way for my sleeplessness either, although I enjoyed The Grudge 2 immensely, but then again, I prefer that type of horror over against almost everything within the American genre.

Restless tonight, feel confined even though I have a good reason to be inside. Obviously, at 11:49 pm I am not going for a walk or anything either, so I guess I must resign myself for an inner walk. I’ve mentioned personality type-casting before, enneagram, Myers-Briggs, even numerology and astrology and Jungian archetype psychology for example. It is one of my life-long fascinations. I should offer disclaimers and all that, but this is just my way of putting words to what I see when I look in the mirror, and they aren’t even my words … I am exploring the types as presented by Don Riso and Russ Hudson as they apply to my own results after taking their RHETI test. The online free ones are usually confusing and most often inconclusive by the way, but I purchased their books which offer the full test. Anyway … this is me …

(Discovering Your Personality Type from which all of this material is excerpted)

Type Four: The Individualist

intuitive, sensitive, impressionable, quiet, introspective, passionate, romantic, elegant, witty, imaginative, and self-expressive, creative, inspired, honest with themselves, emotionally strong, humane, self-aware, discreet, and self-renewing. Negatively, they can also be moody, emotionally demanding, self-absorbed, withholding, temperamental, dramatic, pretentious, and self-indulgent.

They exemplify the desire to be themselves, to be known for who they are, and to know the depths of their own heart. They are aware of their own emotional states. They pay attention to their changing emotions and try to determine what their feelings are telling them about themselves, about others, and about the world around them. This attunement allows them to discover deep truths about human nature, to bear compassionate witness to the sufferings of others, and to be profoundly honest with themselves about their motives. They can also become lost within their own feelings, preoccupied with emotional reactions, memories, and fantasies, both negative and positive.

They can be subtle and expressive, putting words to feelings and states that others may recognize, but could not have expressed so eloquently. By being emotionally honest they encourage others to look more deeply into their own feelings and selves.

Even if they are not artistically creative themselves, they often are involved with those who are, seeking out other poets, painters, musicians, and photographers. They often dress in such a manner as to express outwardly, what they feel inwardly, and are not ones to simply follow the trends and fashion sense of others. They tend to emphasize all of the ways in which they are unlike others, wanting to distinguish themselves from others and be unique. They deeply want to know who they are and to show themselves as being special. Driven by this need, they can feel alone and misunderstood, becoming creative ‘outsiders’ and they are proud of this.

Consequently, they often struggle with alienation, sadness, and melancholy. They focus on their real and honest feelings, perhaps more than other personality types, which tends to actually foster and prolong these feelings within themselves.

They want to express themselves and their individuality, to create, to maintain certain moods and feelings, to withdraw and protect their vulnerabilities, to take care of emotional needs before attending to anything else, and to attract a ‘rescuer’ who will understand them. They do not want to lose touch with their feelings or to feel ordinary, to have their uniqueness and individuality go unrecognized, to have their taste in anything questioned, to be required in social settings, to blindly follow impersonal rules and procedures, or to spend time with people they perceive as lacking taste or emotional depth.

They seem to suffer from chronic self-doubt and extreme sensitivity to others’ reactions to them. They often hold a secret, inner image of who they think they could be. They sometimes believe that if they could somehow become different from who they are they would be seen and loved. There is a constant comparison between their idealized secret self and who they know themselves to actually be. They do not appreciate many of their true qualities because they cannot see them or accept them when compared to the fantasy.

They can be highly sensitive to others, almost empathic, and enjoy any kind of genuine sharing with another. They are excellent listeners, genuinely caring about what another is trying to share, but they can also get caught up in their own emotional reactions and become deaf and blind to objective truth as shared by another. It isn’t that they do not care, but more that their own feelings and reactions overwhelm their abilities and they become self-absorbed in their own cycles and thoughts and emotions. They tend to idealize others, becoming disappointed when they get to know the reality more honestly. They also project their own expectations onto others quite easily, again, often leading to disappointment, rejection, and devaluation. Their moodiness can be very difficult to handle and unintentionally and sometimes even unconsciously they ‘make’ others walk on eggshells. They commonly withhold attention and affection, punishing the other. They can also be touchy and hypersensitive to even the least slight.

At some level, they believe they are missing something that other people seem to have, that something is wrong with them. It is difficult for them to feel good about themselves or to appreciate the good things in their world. They are correct in perceiving that there is something inadequate or incomplete about the ego self, but they incorrectly assume that they alone suffer from this problem. They habitually compare themselves to others, concluding they got the ‘short end of the stick’. They expend much energy on this concept, thinking they have been singled out by fate for bad treatment, bad luck, unsatisfying relationships, bad parenting, and broken, unfulfilled dreams.

They need to see how they perpetuate their own suffering by continually focusing on old wounds rather than truly processing those hurts and letting go of them in a way that would allow them to heal.

They strive to be true to themselves. They are emotionally honest and are not afraid to reveal themselves to others “warts and all”. They are highly intuitive and creative. They treat others with gentleness. They can be wonderfully expressive with an ironic, witty view of life and themselves, often finding humor in their own foibles and contradictions. They are in touch with the ever-changing nature of reality, observing more than others, paying attention to those things many of us never notice at all.

They attempt to defend their hurt feelings (and gain attention) by withdrawing from people and withholding their own affection and attention. They usually recognize that this very action or attitude drives others away. They then usually overcompensate to re-establish their connections and solidify their relationships. Since they usually react out of stress, they can become manipulative, creating dependencies, trying to win others over again. They are masterful at talking about relationship, at making themselves more needed. At at an extreme, they could become more similar to an unhealthy Type Two, becoming possessive.

In another unhealthy pattern, they may become more controlling or critical of others, more in the manner of a Type One personality. They can become impatient and critical, demanding others to meet their own high, idealistic and often unreachable standards they hold for themselves. This idealization of the other person often quickly disintegrates into irritations, annoyances, devaluing, and even resentment. Ironically, they are usually also aware, acutely, of what they are thinking and feeling towards this other and inwardly, the self-torture recycles on itself in a seemingly endless loop. They know what they are doing, they just can’t seem to escape the pattern.

If they can allow themselves to objectively observe themselves, there is an increased chance for integration, movement towards a healthier Type One. If they can see themselves, see their patterns and behaviors and accept them more readily rather than wasting so much energy on focusing on those unhealthy traits and patterns, they can escape the emotional turbulence and their need to maintain an emotional crisis, just for the sake of the crisis moment. They can become more practical, grounded, realistic, and objective. Generally, this involves stepping beyond themselves, becoming involved on some level with others outside of themselves. For the Type Four, this is a defining moment, an investment in someone else in some manner or something else even.

(note: I have not fully concluded which “Instinct” I fall into in Riso-Hudson’s enneagram system, but I seem to mostly FIT the ‘Sexual Instinct’ so I have related that as follows)

They focus their envy and hypersensitivity in their intimate relationships. They are emotionally intense, which is both their gift and their curse. They possess both a capacity and a desire for profound intimacy and they are incredibly insightful when it comes to human nature and the ups and downs of relationships. They have a sultry, sullen quality which can be attractive and mysterious or viewed as snobbery and distancing if misunderstood. They quickly and wholeheartedly pour their energy into the object of their affection, easily becoming infatuated or even seemingly obsessed from another’s point of view, sometimes irrationally and immediately. They are unconsciously drawn to people who possess qualities and talents they believe they lack. They seek to complete themselves by associating with or merging with the other. Of course, this almost never works, which leads to the disintegration of the idealized other and they can even blame the other for reminding them of what they feel they are missing within themselves. To say they are often on a roller coaster ride of emotions, from one extreme to the other is an understatement. Again, Type Fours almost always are aware of their own feelings, even these dark ones, and they are also often prone to expressing them in self-destructive ways, believing they are inadequate, faulty, missing something, etc.

Life lessons for a Type Four would include: recognizing that all the hurts and losses of the past are real, but there isn’t a need to keep revisiting them. This process keeps them imprisoned in their past, not living in this present moment, the one time and place in which their real feelings and their true identity can be found and experienced. They need to recognize that living in the past moves them further away from their most authentic self and their truest self-expression.

(note: there are 3 or 4 other books written by these authors exploring more and more about each personality type and their website also offers more in-depth information if anyone is curious. enneagraminstitute.com)

I have been depressed a lot this week, mostly yesterday and today though.  I have been praying a lot and thinking and talking to the hub… it hasn’t been the best of days but it hasn’t been the worst of days.  I am really glad to have a healed relationship with my hub now… I would never be able to press on without it.  It is now one area of my life that I feel confident and secure in and trust will be ok.  Anyway, I have had some breakthrough with my personal growth…

so I have come to realization that I AM A VERY PASSIONATE PERSON!!!  I just didn’t notice how…  I am always sitting around trying to find out what I am passionate about and getting so angry or depressed when I can’t find anything… well, HELLO!!! Stop right there!  That’s a sign in itself.  I am an extremely emotional person and you can’t be extremely emotional without passion! Duh!  So I started thinking… why do i get so emotional?  What do I get emotional about?  As i continue to do that I know the answers will keep pouring in with God’s guidance.

Also, I decided to take a personality test again… it’s been a while and I am really trying to do whatever I can to spring myself fwd in my life right now…  Well, I took the Myers Briggs and it came out INFP- The Healer.  http://www.personalitypage.com/INFP.html

Upon reading the description I quickly realized why I struggle so much, lol.  With things like, “Their primary goal is to find out their meaning in life” and “INFPs have very high standards and are perfectionists” and “INFP is driven to help people and make the world a better place” listed there, you can see how I get trapped in these emotional places…

I have taken personality tests a million times, constantly trying to define myself (just like it says up there, lol) and this time I think I actually agree with so much of what it says and am beginning to understand myself better from it.  Thanks to my mentor for suggesting I try it again!  I did so with an open mind and am feeling a bit better now!  Not that it had all the answers or even the bulk of what I am looking for… but it is a start and I can go from there…

I am now smiling… it feels good to smile!

I really don’t like the label we have put on the Gen Y Generation.  In fact I actually feel sorry for them as they seem to get a heap of criticism for no reason.  The sorts of labels we hear from managers, HR experts and older working colleagues are that they are over confident, obsessively focused on work/life balance, want everything now including the big salary, and want to be pampered.   And there is a plethora of books and articles that are written about this group analysing who they are.

I think Gen Y is highly misjudged by people who try to heap them all, yes everyone of them, into the same personality type.  Gee, I would hate it if someone tried to label and box me into one “type”!

Yes there are some differences that managers need to be aware of in order to manage Gen Y and also awareness by parents of Gen Y’s.  However didn’t our parents have to manage us differently from their parents?  For instance our parents would have done what ever a senior person in an organisation wanted them to do or whatever a parent asked of them.  But in our generation we broke down the hierarchies and don’t accept that just because someone is more senior to us or older than us that they know better.

Barbara Moses, International Career Coach, through research at a recent conference in Vancouver found that -  “The Gen Y’s disliked being depicted as self-absorbed and unreliable just as much as the boomers recoiled at being called inflexible and technologically inept.”

Of course labels are easy for managers – easy to manage groups of people rather than individuals.  But managers can really miss out on understanding the differences and needs of individuals.  If a person is bored it might be easy to say that they are from the Gen Y generation so they must need lots of stimulation and heap this person as part of this group, rather than assist them at an individual level.

Let’s stop our labeling and understand people as individuals whose needs will be different from the next person.  And remember this generational stuff is fleeting.  Gen Y’s will soon have families, gather debt, and then complain about the next generation!!

Have fun with the Christmas shopping J

Friendly, enthusiastic, verbally engaging extroverts can be fun to interact with, but some extroverts can turn a conversation into a monologue. They are like the Energizer bunny, only they are gesticulating and maybe laughing, as they talk. Then, when you have had a chance to participate, they might interrupt in the middle of your thought, and they go on and on, much like this example I am giving. Yes, I am one of the guilty parties.

I have been administering the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator personality instrument for twenty five years. I have conducted team building sessions for groups, and I have conducted introductory and advanced applications workshops. It is my opinion and observation that it is easier to moderate energy and behavior that you already exhibit to an above average degree than it is to generate the energy and behavior when it exists to a mild degree. The one thing that we don’t seem to do readily is examine where and how we could improve certain behaviors so that we could be more interpersonally effective.

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator features four scales that reflect how we behave. The first scale is the Extraversion/Introversion scale; this one tells us how we use our energy- inner world or outer. The second scale reflects how we share and collect data: Sensing (here-and-now, facts) or iNtuition (future, ideas.) The third scale focuses on how we make decisions: Thinking or Feeling. The final scale reflects how we live our lives: Judging (structured, planful) or Perceptive (flexible, spontaneous).

We exhibit each of the four patterns to varying degrees, degrees that we find comfortable. It’s when our comfort and irritating behavior intrudes on other people that there is a problem. Forms F & G of the MBTI had numerical scores that were reflected in descriptive bands or score strengths as follows: mild, moderate, definite, strong, very strong, “nuclear” (my terminology). Individuals with very strong and higher scores require much more energy to moderate their behavior than, say, someone with a definite score strength.

Look at the two columns below. Select the column that describes some of your behaviors. Place a check-mark by the behavior that describes you to a moderate degree or higher. You might ask for feedback and validation from someone who knows you well.

Identify two behaviors for improvement and select and develop some strategies for improving in these areas. You might ask for help from a friend/partner who will help monitor your behaviors. Take a weekly inventory and list when you succeeded and fell short. Do this for several weeks until your new behavior “muscles” have developed. Hey, this is a process, so be patient with yourself as you proceed.

Myers Briggs test is based on 8 Core Jung functions, made up of 3 axis – Introverted/ Extraverted, Intuition/ Sensing and Thinking/ Feeling. The I/E label is attached to the other two sets of functions, creating 8 core functions.

Introverted/ Extraverted Thinking
Introverted/ Extraverted Feeling
Introverted/ Extraverted Intuition
Introverted/ Extraverted Sensing

I’ll briefly describe the 8 functions for my own benefit:

Introverted Thinking maintains internal logical consistency in thought.
Extraverted Thinking attempts to impose logical order in the external world.

Introverted Feeling obtains feeling (or vibes) from a person or event.
Extraverted Feeling responds to people and situations.

Introverted Intuition intuites of what might be in the future.
Extraverted Intuition sees many possible ways of intepretating the current.

Introverted Sensing compares current with past experiences.
Extraverted Sensing immerses itself in current experiences.

The test is supposed to “type” you according to your order of preference for these 8 functions. Usual profiles identity 1 doiminant, 1 secondary and 2 weaker functions. The idea is that once you chose your dominant function, your auxiliary functions will fall into place. This relies on 2 principles – 1. the I/E axis will be organized consecutively (I function followed by E function & vice versa), 2. the T/F axis and N/S axis will be organized consecutively – creating 4 major types T/N (NT), T/S, F/N (NF), F/S.

2 our of the 4 types correspond directly to Myers Briggs terminology – the NT Rationals and NF Idealists. Myers Briggs created an addtional category J/P which it uses to group Sensors (SJ/ SP). Their idea is that a dominant/ secondary Extraverted Thinking will result in a J, while a dominant/ secondary Extraverted Intuition will result in a P. This gets inverted in alternative typing e.g. Socionics, where a Myers INTP is classed as an INTJ – which I will bring up later.

INTP/ ISTP vs INTP/ INFP

I still stick to my guns that a single letter difference on MBTI disguises deeper differences in the order of function preferences i.e. structure of thought processes. Hence a one letter shift from the T-F scale is not likely to result in a “Type” shift as people like to believe in. Scoring higher on the F scale will not make a T person change “Type” due to an innate difference in functions.

INTP would be Ti, Ne, Si, Fe [Te, Ni, Se, Fi]
ISTP would be Ti, Se, Ni, Fe
INTJ would be Ni, Te, Fi, Se [Ne, Ti, Fe, Si]
INFP would be Fi, Ne, Si, Te [Fe, Ni, Se, Ti]

INTP and ISTP are both classed as “Introverted Thinkers”. They share a dominant function and their weakest function, but differs in their 2nd and 3rd functions – “Extraverted Intuition, Introverted Sensing” vs “Extraverted Sensing, Introverted Intuition”. This creates an INTP who internalises sensory experiences and theorises on how the world works, an ISTP who starts with a vision of a complete product and hammers their way to completion.

INTP and INFP shares their 2nd and 3rd functions, but differs radically in their Dominant and weakest function “Introverted Thinking, Extraverted Feeling” vs “Introverted Feeling, Extraverted Thinking”. This creates an INTP who is quite inept at reading social cues or conforming to social behavior and an INFP who is much more “intuitive” at picking up vibes from people and surroundings. Both of them however, can identify patterns of how the world functions and internalise their experiences.

Some people think of themselves as XNTP, IXTP, INXP or INTX, meaning that one or more of their functions are interchangeable. They believe that during the course of their lives, they might experience as shift on their T/F, N/S, P/J axis which would result in an overall Type shift. My counterpoint is that this is a superficial understanding of MBTI. A single letter can mask deeper underlying differences in function preferences.

To be an ISTP, an INTP would have to Extravert his Sensing i.e. engage in more sensory experiences and Introvert his Intuition, which in itself is difficult to develop, because an Introverted Intuition is more akin to having an inner vision of the future. To be an INFP, an INTP wpuld have to develop his weakest Fe function to become their dominant function and Extravert his Thinking. Undergoing Type change is more than changing your behavorial traits e.g. “feeling” more or experiencing (sensing) more, but requires extensive development of your weak or hidden functions.

Out of the 2 Jung axis T/F, N/S, I guess that the N/S preference is harder to alter or develop. iNtuition is the ability to conceptualize or envision, the ability to connect random points in non-sequential order to form a picture. It is like the ability to paint an abstract pcture. This could be why there are supposedly less NTs and NFs than Sensors.