The problem is, I have no interest (or skill) in science and technology! I prefer the humanities - art, history, literature, music, religion, etc.

No worries on this angle!

I think the suggestions about interests are probably the least helpful thing in terms of typing in the Myers-Briggs. Certain ways of thinking may seem to naturally fit one particular field, but it's not always the case. For example, I'm an INTJ, and while I love science and technology, my heart's in the humanities. And in those, I can tell that I do approach things a little differently than my cohorts. I'm much more logical and thorough, and my intuitive leaps often come from different starting points as opposed to my friends. However, it's that difference that helps me to make connections and ideas that others wouldn't, just like they can come up with ideas that I wouldn't.

So basically, never fear if your type doesn't necessarily match up with your preferred pastime.

Rose-Tree: I thought INTP fit me pretty well. I just don't like the website's non-religious and political overtones.

Would you say that INTP fits you better than INTJ? (Even though you scored quite high on Judging in the original test, there's a lot of nuance when we're talking about introverted judgers and perceivers, and it's easy to mistype on.)

If I find any other good websites for detailed descriptions, I'll let you know.

Based on your cognitive functions, your type is most likely:
Most Likely: INFP
or Second Possibility: INTJ
or Third Possibility: ENFP

Your cognitive functions are, in order of development:
Fi - Ni - Ne - Ti - Se - Si - Te - Fe

Hmmm! Maybe you should take a look at INFP as well and see if that resonates with you.

I think the suggestions about interests are probably the least helpful thing in terms of typing in the Myers-Briggs. Certain ways of thinking may seem to naturally fit one particular field, but it's not always the case. For example, I'm an INTJ, and while I love science and technology, my heart's in the humanities.

Also, isn't C.S. Lewis frequently typed as an INTJ? And he himself admitted that he wasn't much of an expert on science, if I'm not mistaken. Of course, I can't say that I know enough about the man to type him accurately. I need to remedy this! If Lewis is an INTJ, then that may partly explain why he's such a successful apologist: like you and your group of friends, he offers insights/ideas and makes connections that are missed by many people in the realm of theology.

Speaking of C.S. Lewis's personality type, I saw something today that I found interesting. I stumbled across a blog article about why writing may be difficult for INFJs (fitting with NaNo right around the corner, eh? ), and one paragraph in it reminded me strongly of a quote by C.S. Lewis about how the Narnia books came to be.

When I got to the end of writing my second novel, I kept seeing images in my mind of a giant bull, and then a harpy, and then a lace shawl. These images came on very strongly, and repeated themselves in a cycle. When I was younger, and had less experience with myself and with writing, I dismissed these “mind-pictures” as strange or irrelevant. But in this instance, I sat down and wrote, letting the images take me where they would. It turned out that my story ended with the villain transforming into a monstrous creature that was half Minotaur and half Harpy. And guess what this monster was wearing when the hero took it down? A blood-spattered lace shawl. Weird, yes. But definitely creative.

And we have these passages from C.S. Lewis's short essay, "It All Began with a Picture"...

All my seven Narnian books, and my three science fiction books, began with seeing pictures in my head. At first they were not a story, just pictures. The Lion all began with a picture of a Faun carrying an umbrella and parcels in a snowy wood. This picture had been in my mind since I was about sixteen. Then one day, when I was about forty, I said to myself: 'Let's try to make a story about it.'

At first I had very little idea how the story would go. But then suddenly Aslan came bounding into it. I think I had been having a good many dreams of lions about that time. Apart from that, I don't know where the Lion came from or why He came. But once He was there He pulled the whole story together, and soon he pulled the six other Narnian stories in after Him.

See the similarities there? That's not at all to say that Lewis was an INFJ; most people type him as an INTJ. Based on my general knowledge of the man, that seems to be accurate.

The interesting thing, though, is that INFJs and INTJs both have the same dominant function: introverted intuition. Mysterious and often working in the subconscious, introverted intuition (or Ni) is related to symbols, visions and metaphors, among many other things. (Ni is often considered to be the most difficult function to describe, but this article does a very good job for those interested in learning more.)

The entirety of "It All Began with a Picture" is, in and of itself, a rather excellent description of someone using Ni, so I am not at all surprised that people type him as INTJ. Seems to be right on the mark!

What? So far the only ISFP? Oh well.

Since a fellow Narniawebber introduced me to Myers-Briggs a few years ago, I've been pretty interested. Most of my siblings are pretty cynical of the idea; "How can you categorize everyone into just 16 categories?" but... I think it's fairly consistent from what I've seen so far. Obviously I would say your personality/type could change and merge, etc. over time.

A few fun articles I've found recently:

What Job is Best for Your Personality?
http://www.bustle.com/articles/42982-what-job-is-best-for-your-personality-this-chart-might-tell-you

and Decorating for Your Personality
http://mrsfancee.com/decorating-personality/

I wouldn't say these are spot on, but they're interesting/amusing if nothing else.

I also found the book "The Art of Speedreading People" to be helpful in understanding the whole system and be able to maybe figure out what family/friends are as well. Anyone else read it?

Hey Queen Susan! I think we've got a few more ISFPs around here, but it doesn't look like they've posted. Thanks for sharing the links!

What Job is Best for Your Personality?
http://www.bustle.com/articles/42982-what-job-is-best-for-your-personality-this-chart-might-tell-you

Lol, as soon as the author starts talking about switching from INFP to INFJ, I find myself wanting to contact her and send her a link about the differences between the two. They look so similar on paper and I used to be really confused about which one was my type, so I feel for her. It's easy to get caught up on the differences between J and P, but when you start digging into the cognitive functions, you find that it goes much deeper than that. That's how I was finally able to banish my confusion on that, and it was a happy day because I love finally figuring things out.

That aside... those career suggestions are really interesting! Out of the suggestions for INFJ, organizational development consultant is especially interesting to me. I'm pretty good at organizing things (especially where people are involved) and figuring out an efficient/productive way forward, and I like helping people develop ideas and talking them through whatever snag they're trying to unravel. Anyway, it's an intriguing avenue that I hadn't thought of before. MBTI is so cool that way; it can introduce a lot of insight and possibilities that you wouldn't have encountered otherwise.

Decorating for Your Personality
http://mrsfancee.com/decorating-personality/

Ooh, I loved her page on INFJs! That is so neat. I especially liked her suggestions about orderly chaos, as I'm always trying to find a balance between creativity and organization.

I also found the book "The Art of Speedreading People" to be helpful in understanding the whole system and be able to maybe figure out what family/friends are as well. Anyone else read it?

I have not, but I'll have to be on the lookout for it! I'm rather hit and miss when it comes to guessing a person's MBTI type... I might get a hunch, but I never have any certainty. Usually I feel like I need to have the other person's cooperation and interest first before I can definitively type them. I always want to pick their brains and ask a bunch of questions. Not too long ago, I finally realized that my brother is an ISTP after I'd been thinking he was an INTJ for a while... and before that, I thought he was an INTP. Sigh. It's a learning process. So yes, I'll be keeping an eye peeled for that book.

The entirety of "It All Began with a Picture" is, in and of itself, a rather excellent description of someone using Ni, so I am not at all surprised that people type him as INTJ. Seems to be right on the mark!

Interestingly, Lewis's descriptions of how his Narnia books came to be exactly match the ways my books come to be. My stories always begin with a picture, and then I decide to write a story about the picture, just like Lewis. However, I'm an INTP, and I don't have Ni.

~Riella

Interestingly, Lewis's descriptions of how his Narnia books came to be exactly match the ways my books come to be. My stories always begin with a picture, and then I decide to write a story about the picture, just like Lewis. However, I'm an INTP, and I don't have Ni.

I think just about everyone draws inspiration from images... just look at how many writers there are on Pinterest. Of course, one might want to distinguish between pictures/symbols that randomly pop into a person's head and actual pictures/scenes that you physically encounter. (I'm not sure which is the case with you.) With Lewis, he's talking about pictures that popped into his head out of nowhere, but that in and of itself is not the reason why what he is saying is evocative of Ni.

The reason why the blogger's thoughts and Lewis's essay are good examples of how Ni works depends on how the pictures turn into a story. For both of them, it is largely an unconscious act. It just happened. The blogger didn't know how the pictures were going to work into her story until she let them take her where they would in the midst of actual writing. Lewis couldn't tell you exactly how he wrote his stories; it was as if they grew on their own from the pictures in his head and his dreams of lions. In a sense, he felt as though he was just "along for the ride", and this is very resonant with the concept of Ni. Because Ni frequently works behind the scenes in the subconscious, Ni-users often feel more like recipients of ideas than actual creators.

From what I've observed of your methods for writing, you're quite different from this. You are very deliberate when it comes to planning out a novel. You linger on the details of details, spending a lot of time world building and writing up in-depth character profiles and chapter outlines before you begin to write. In general, the way that you write seems to be much more like J.R.R. Tolkien, and from what I have read, he was almost certainly an INTP.

I think a good analogy might be something along the lines of this: an INTJ is someone who can build a building while sleepwalking, and an INTP is someone who meticulously lays every brick. The INTJ is more interested in what the building stands for than they are in its structural integrity. The INTP, on the other hand, is going to be more focused on the details.

In general, I think this is why you see such complex world building in Tolkien's Middle Earth universe, whereas in the world of Narnia, Lewis seemed to be mostly concerned with overarching themes and ideas. For instance, Lewis didn't care about having a crazy mishmash of mythologies in his books because it served his purposes, but apparently this element of CoN bugged Tolkien to no end. (From what I've read, anyway.)

Does that make any sense?

Of course, one might want to distinguish between pictures/symbols that randomly pop into a person's head and actual pictures/scenes that you physically encounter. (I'm not sure which is the case with you.)

The former.

The reason why the blogger's thoughts and Lewis's essay are good examples of how Ni works depends on how the pictures turn into a story. For both of them, it is largely an unconscious act. It just happened. The blogger didn't know how the pictures were going to work into her story until she let them take her where they would in the midst of actual writing. Lewis couldn't tell you exactly how he wrote his stories; it was as if they grew on their own from the pictures in his head and his dreams of lions. In a sense, he felt as though he was just "along for the ride", and this is very resonant with the concept of Ni. Because Ni frequently works behind the scenes in the subconscious, Ni-users often feel more like recipients of ideas than actual creators.

This is how it happens to me as well. I've often said that I don't feel like the author of my books, because all the characters, plot twists, etc. came to me naturally, out of nowhere. An example I often use to show what it's like is that it feels like someone has slipped a DVD into my head, and I'm sitting there watching the movie play inside my brain, not knowing what's going to happen next, and just enjoying the show. After I've watched the whole thing, I write down what I saw in my notes, organize the notes, and turn it into a book.

From what I've observed of your methods for writing, you're quite different from this. You are very deliberate when it comes to planning out a novel. You linger on the details of details, spending a lot of time world building and writing up in-depth character profiles and chapter outlines before you begin to write.

That's my method of organizing my notes. Before I make outlines and character profiles, I've already watched the whole "movie" in my head. But making those outlines and profiles helps me to remember what I saw in the "movie", so I don't forget it. Just like a dream does after waking, the "movie" I see fades and the events and characters get jumbled up the more time goes on. Organizing the story on paper helps me to keep a clear vision of it in my mind so I can write it as a novel later.

A good example might be a messy room that needs cleaning. Imagine my habit of making outlines and profiles to be my cleaning method. The cleaning method helps clean the room, putting all the objects in their proper place so that they're easy to see and easy to use. However, the cleaning method did not put those objects in the room to start with. It only cleaned them up. Similarly, outlines and profiles help me organize my ideas, but they did not create the ideas.

In general, the way that you write seems to be much more like J.R.R. Tolkien, and from what I have read, he was almost certainly an INTP.

I always heard that Tolkien was an INFP.

~Riella

Just finished my personality module at uni. Socio-cognitive approach seems to be a well regarded theory of personality. Here is a link to this gist of the theory https://explorable.com/social-cognitive ... ersonality

what do you all think?

This is how it happens to me as well. I've often said that I don't feel like the author of my books, because all the characters, plot twists, etc. came to me naturally, out of nowhere. An example I often use to show what it's like is that it feels like someone has slipped a DVD into my head, and I'm sitting there watching the movie play inside my brain, not knowing what's going to happen next, and just enjoying the show. After I've watched the whole thing, I write down what I saw in my notes, organize the notes, and turn it into a book.

Ah, I think I see where you're coming from, then. The sense of involuntarily receiving ideas is the common ground here. Beyond that, though, I don't think what you're describing is the same as what Lewis described, or is a description of how Ni works. That's not necessarily your fault, though, because I feel like I may be inadvertently throwing you off with some of my own descriptions. Like I said in a previous post, Ni is notoriously difficult to put into words.

For Lewis, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe wasn't like a movie that downloaded into his brain; it began with a single picture (one that had been in his mind for over thirty years) and one day, he decided that he would try to write a story about it. He tells us that initially, he didn't know how the story was going to go, but then the unifying character of Aslan appeared and, like pieces in a puzzle, the rest of the story fell into place. Similar to how the mental picture of the faun carrying an umbrella in a snowy wood didn't become a story until decades later, Lewis tried and failed to write The Magician's Nephew for a number of years after publishing LWW. He finally made a breakthrough in 1953 and then wrote MN in short order, completing it early in 1954.

This is very similar to how I, an INFJ, develop stories: it begins with a vague idea or series of ideas that I may sit on for quite some time before experiencing the sudden epiphany that crystallizes them into a unified story. When this happens, it's as if all of the pieces of the story, which once seemed disconnected, are clicking seamlessly together like magic. It can sometimes feel a little bit like I've already figured out the story while I was asleep and am only just remembering it now that I'm awake.

Your description of a fully-formed, richly-detailed story that you consciously observe playing out in your mind seems quite different from this to me. The sheer amount of detail you come away with is also extremely indicative of extroverted intuition, or Ne, which is your secondary function as an INTP. I have seen Ne described as an explosion of ideas not unlike a supernova, whereas Ni is a black hole drawing in information and zeroing in on just a few overarching concepts.

Basically, Ne multiplies and divides, while Ni distills and unifies. If that makes any sense.

I always heard that Tolkien was an INFP.

I've seen that on some celebrity types websites and have encountered individuals arguing that on the internet, but I've also seen a number of people type him as an INTP and give pretty good reasoning for doing so. Based on what I do know about him and his writing, it seems like a really good fit, but if I'm being honest, I don't know enough to speculate intelligently. If he is an INFP, though, I think he would need to have a really well-developed inferior function.

Just finished my personality module at uni. Socio-cognitive approach seems to be a well regarded theory of personality. Here is a link to this gist of the theory https://explorable.com/social-cognitive /a> ... ersonality

what do you all think?

That's really interesting, IlF! The part at the end that states "personality per se does not exist, and that our traits are merely cognitive strategies or things that we do for us to obtain the kind of reward we want" is especially intriguing. I'll have to look into it and give it some thought. Thanks for sharing!

I do a whole unit on personality and mental sets in 3rd year. That should be interesting. My main areas of interest however are with memory, perception(which i get to do a whole unit on next year) and psychological disorders.

What? So far the only ISFP? Oh well.

I am an ISFP too, Queen Susan!

SnowAngel

I'm an INFP. I've probably taken the test over a dozen times and always gotten INFP. Now, I know that's not all there is to it (the tests are usually only a guide), but the type description always fits me extremely well. It's almost scary how alike it is to me.

The only time I've gotten anything other than an INFP was when I took a cognitive functions test, in which my initial result was actually INFJ. The funny thing is, whenever I look at the cognitive functions and how they work, INFP is still more accurate. I'm an extreme Fi and Ne user.

I'm curious if there's a table which would display which personality type you would be least likely to get along with, or a few that you might consider to be close friends. Anything like that out there?