xkcd

by **SlyReaper** » Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:07 am UTC

I recently had to take one of these for a training course at work and turned out to be an INTP. Which is interesting because I was an INTJ when I took the online test a couple of years ago.

by **Yakk** » Wed Feb 10, 2010 3:23 pm UTC

SlyReaper wrote:I recently had to take one of these for a training course at work and turned out to be an INTP. Which is interesting because I was an INTJ when I took the online test a couple of years ago.

Do you think it is interesting, or do you think the test is wrong?

by **Vieto** » Wed Feb 10, 2010 3:47 pm UTC

well, to be fair, there are higher quality tests on the web for this.

by **SlyReaper** » Wed Feb 10, 2010 4:18 pm UTC

Yakk wrote:
SlyReaper wrote:I recently had to take one of these for a training course at work and turned out to be an INTP. Which is interesting because I was an INTJ when I took the online test a couple of years ago.

Do you think it is interesting, or do you think the test is wrong?

I don't think the test is wrong, I just think maybe my personality has changed in those two years.

by **Fume Troll** » Wed Feb 10, 2010 4:26 pm UTC

I'm not surprised by the landslide of INTJs. We once did this as part of a team building event: Twelve engineers, ten INTJs.

by **SlyReaper** » Wed Feb 10, 2010 5:37 pm UTC

Fume Troll wrote:I'm not surprised by the landslide of INTJs. We once did this as part of a team building event: Twelve engineers, ten INTJs.

Yes, INTJs were most common at this thing I did at work. Also an engineering company. 5 INTJs out of the group of 14. I was one of three INTPs.

by **Antimony-120** » Fri Feb 12, 2010 4:48 am UTC

ENTP

89 75 75 56

That is pretty much me to a (EN)T(P) (pardon the pun).

may I just note "we got Feynman!"

Although as a physcisist I definitely take some distinct INTP traits when working. If I'm in work mode, do not bother me for 8-10 hours, and then only to remind me to eat.

by **Vieto** » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:08 am UTC

Antimony-120 wrote:may I just note "we got Feynman!"

while we are in "famous people of our personality type" wars...

"we got Einstein!"

And Jung... and Darwin... and Newton...

by **Josephine** » Fri Feb 12, 2010 6:40 am UTC

and Jefferson

by **Kurushimi** » Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:08 am UTC

Vieto wrote:
Antimony-120 wrote:may I just note "we got Feynman!"

while we are in "famous people of our personality type" wars...

"we got Einstein!"
And Jung... and Darwin... and Newton...

Wait, I don't think so. Newton is an INTJ and Einstein is an INTP. Well, at least according to Wikipedia. I actually don't really know.

by **Vieto** » Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:46 pm UTC

Kurushimi wrote:
Vieto wrote:
Antimony-120 wrote:may I just note "we got Feynman!"

while we are in "famous people of our personality type" wars...

"we got Einstein!"
And Jung... and Darwin... and Newton...

Wait, I don't think so. Newton is an INTJ and Einstein is an INTP. Well, at least according to Wikipedia. I actually don't really know.

my source says otherwise

(I'm INTP)

by **EmilyR** » Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:57 pm UTC

ESFP, although S and F are very borderline

by **Josephine** » Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:06 pm UTC

Einstein was definitely an INTP.

by **Vieto** » Sat Feb 13, 2010 12:05 am UTC

nbonaparte wrote:Einstein was definitely an INTP.

I was referring to Newton

by **Philflipsnor** » Sat May 01, 2010 8:46 pm UTC

What's the difference between ENFJ and ESFJ? Every time I take the test, my results fluctuate between the two.

by **Fat Zombie** » Sat May 01, 2010 8:49 pm UTC

According to captain wikipedia, ESFJ means Extraversion, Sensing, Feeling, Judgment; ENFJ means Extraversion, iNtuition, Feeling, Judgment.

Not quite sure what the difference is there.

by **Philflipsnor** » Sat May 01, 2010 8:51 pm UTC

I know what S and N mean. I just want to know what the difference between the personalities of an ENFJ and an ESFJ are.

by **Aaeriele** » Sat May 01, 2010 8:55 pm UTC

Why not look at them for yourself?

http://www.capt.org/mbti-assessment/typ ... ptions.htm

ESFJ

For ESFJs the dominant quality in their lives is an active and intense caring about people and a strong desire to bring harmony into their relationships. ESFJs bring an aura of warmth to all that they do, and they naturally move into action to help others, to organize the world around them, and to get things done. Sensing orients their feeling to current facts and realities, and thus gives their feeling a hands-on pragmatic quality. ESFJs take their work seriously and believe others should as well.

ENFJ

For ENFJs the dominant quality in their lives is an active and intense caring about people and a strong desire to bring harmony into their relationships. ENFJs are openly expressive and empathic people who bring an aura of warmth to all that they do. Intuition orients their feeling to the new and to the possible, thus ENFJs often enjoy working to manifest a humanitarian vision, or helping others develop their potential. ENFJs naturally and conscientiously move into action to care for others, to organize the world around them, and to get things done.

by **modularblues** » Sun May 02, 2010 8:16 pm UTC

I think there's a more general thread about MBTI somewhere on this forum, but the S/N basically reflects whether one prefers to gather information through external observation or internal visualization/imagination.

by **UniqueScreenname** » Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:17 pm UTC

I am an ISTJ, but recently I have been testing as an INTJ, which is odd, because the mindsets are supposed to be totally opposite. SJs are supposed to be all about adhering to traditions and laws and rules, and NTs are about testing what is right and then acting on their findings, like true scientists. I must say the N describes me better here, especially concerning traffic laws. Just because I'm supposed to go 45 doesn't mean 60 is wrong.

Anyway...at the moment I'm confused because S-s are supposed to process information based on external observations, and Ns are supposed to process information based on internal beliefs, ideas, opinions. I would say at the moment I am basing my actions on my beliefs, but my beliefs are based on external observations. My point in saying all this is:

I HAVE NO IDEA WHO I AM ANYMORE!!!!!

Edit: I just took it again and got INTJ: 33 12 75 67. In the past I have been pretty much 100% on all of them (except it being an S instead of an N), so it's really interesting to see how I've changed.

by **Argency** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:16 am UTC

Holy WOW, look at that those modes. It's the twin towers up in here. ENFP here, we got Doctor Seuss!

by **existential_squirrrel** » Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:54 am UTC

INTP hiding about in my little corner of the scientific universe!

by **Wolby** » Tue Nov 01, 2011 6:21 pm UTC

ENTP. I'm embarrassed about my interest in MBTI; it's like horoscopes, only perhaps with a greater potential for accuracy.

Then again, to my total astonishment, my mom is also an ENTP. We are VERY different: she's a slightly workaholic Human Resources Manager with a gift for languages and I'm... well, a math major who likes tinkering with things and the hard sciences, and has a severe procrastination problem (that's a very strong P). Since my dad and I are very similar, other than the fact that he's rather shy, I always figured he was an INT*. Turns out my mom has always figured him for an ISTJ. I guess I've got to defer to her on this one.

I love the skew here, although I wouldn't have expected it to be quite so strong! I used to test as INTP, but I think I was always a closeted, socially awkward extrovert.

by **gorcee** » Tue Nov 01, 2011 7:02 pm UTC

I hate these tests and these questions.

"Do you often think about [blah]?"

What? No, but sometimes I do. Often in terms of what? Multiple times a week? In the top 5% of "things I think about" in a month? More often than the average person? Also, if I say no, then that equates "not thinking about [blah] ever" with "thinking about [blah] occasionally", which aren't even the same things, at all.

by **UniqueScreenname** » Wed Nov 02, 2011 10:12 am UTC

gorcee wrote:I hate these tests and these questions.

"Do you often think about [blah]?"

What? No, but sometimes I do. Often in terms of what? Multiple times a week? In the top 5% of "things I think about" in a month? More often than the average person? Also, if I say no, then that equates "not thinking about [blah] ever" with "thinking about [blah] occasionally", which aren't even the same things, at all.

The only question that I really hated was, "Do you think the scientific approach is the best approach? To me, this completely depends on the context. And also, I hate hypothesizing, because it tends to a) bias the results and b) give me a pretty good chance of being wrong, and I HATE BEING WRONG. (If I just don't guess, and admit that there can be many possible outcomes, I'm never wrong.) So I just said yes to that one, but I'm really not sure if I even believe that.

by **gorcee** » Wed Nov 02, 2011 5:26 pm UTC

UniqueScreenname wrote:
gorcee wrote:I hate these tests and these questions.

"Do you often think about [blah]?"

What? No, but sometimes I do. Often in terms of what? Multiple times a week? In the top 5% of "things I think about" in a month? More often than the average person? Also, if I say no, then that equates "not thinking about [blah] ever" with "thinking about [blah] occasionally", which aren't even the same things, at all.

The only question that I really hated was, "Do you think the scientific approach is the best approach? To me, this completely depends on the context. And also, I hate hypothesizing, because it tends to a) bias the results and b) give me a pretty good chance of being wrong, and I HATE BEING WRONG. (If I just don't guess, and admit that there can be many possible outcomes, I'm never wrong.) So I just said yes to that one, but I'm really not sure if I even believe that.

I personally think the scientific approach is the best approach to everything.

I perform a regression analysis and multivariate ANOVA every morning to decide which socks to wear. It takes me seven hours to get dressed.

by **Vieto** » Wed Nov 02, 2011 5:40 pm UTC

gorcee wrote:
UniqueScreenname wrote:
gorcee wrote:I hate these tests and these questions.

"Do you often think about [blah]?"

What? No, but sometimes I do. Often in terms of what? Multiple times a week? In the top 5% of "things I think about" in a month? More often than the average person? Also, if I say no, then that equates "not thinking about [blah] ever" with "thinking about [blah] occasionally", which aren't even the same things, at all.

The only question that I really hated was, "Do you think the scientific approach is the best approach? To me, this completely depends on the context. And also, I hate hypothesizing, because it tends to a) bias the results and b) give me a pretty good chance of being wrong, and I HATE BEING WRONG. (If I just don't guess, and admit that there can be many possible outcomes, I'm never wrong.) So I just said yes to that one, but I'm really not sure if I even believe that.

I personally think the scientific approach is the best approach to everything.

I perform a regression analysis and multivariate ANOVA every morning to decide which socks to wear. It takes me seven hours to get dressed.

My computer does that automatically. The cereal-selection algorithm needs work though.

by **Koyaanisqatsi** » Sun Nov 06, 2011 11:22 pm UTC

You know, I don't think this applies to me. I think it operates under the assumption that I'm sane.

by **omgryebread** » Mon Nov 07, 2011 1:54 am UTC

Koyaanisqatsi wrote:You know, I don't think this applies to me. I think it operates under the assumption that I'm sane.

It doesn't operate under any such assumption. Sane/insane is a legal classification, anyway.

If you're actually talking about professionally recognized mental illness, it applies to you just as much as anyone. I took it (INFP, if anyone's curious) at my psychiatrist's office, despite having moderate schizoaffective disorder.

I mostly took it for fun, she didn't care about the result at all. It's not useful in psychiatry, but people with mental illnesses still have a personality.

by **stevey_frac** » Mon Nov 07, 2011 3:48 am UTC

Your Type is
INTJ
Introverted Intuitive Thinking Judging
Strength of the preferences %
50 88 25 67

We got Isaac Newton, and Niels Bohr!

by **flickering_candle** » Mon Nov 07, 2011 4:23 am UTC

UniqueScreenname wrote:I am an ISTJ, but recently I have been testing as an INTJ, which is odd, because the mindsets are supposed to be totally opposite. .

When I was in high school I tested as ISTJ, but when taking a psychology of personality course in my last year of undergrad I tested as INTJ. According to the person administering the test, it is not uncommon for people who are INTJ to present as ISTJ in school because the more common methods of teaching tend to cater to the ISTJs. INTJs apparently have little difficulty mimicing ISTJ, but the other way around is supposed to be much more difficult.

by **UniqueScreenname** » Mon Nov 07, 2011 6:02 am UTC

flickering_candle wrote:
UniqueScreenname wrote:I am an ISTJ, but recently I have been testing as an INTJ, which is odd, because the mindsets are supposed to be totally opposite. .

When I was in high school I tested as ISTJ, but when taking a psychology of personality course in my last year of undergrad I tested as INTJ. According to the person administering the test, it is not uncommon for people who are INTJ to present as ISTJ in school because the more common methods of teaching tend to cater to the ISTJs. INTJs apparently have little difficulty mimicing ISTJ, but the other way around is supposed to be much more difficult.

Upon further reflection, I am accepting that I am an ISTJ, because I'm horrible at strategy, and my authentic INTJ friend makes me think that Ns can see any possible outcome to a situation, and I can only see the ones that make sense. Maybe I'm wrong on that though. I'm not sure. Since everyone on this site is an N, maybe someone can clarify it for me.

But yeah, It's funny, because once my same INTJ friend said, "Sometimes I just like to sit and observe and I find lots of little details in things." I was like, it's because you're one letter off from an Inspector. That's all I know how to do.

by **Koyaanisqatsi** » Mon Nov 07, 2011 7:31 am UTC

omgryebread wrote:
Koyaanisqatsi wrote:You know, I don't think this applies to me. I think it operates under the assumption that I'm sane.
It doesn't operate under any such assumption. Sane/insane is a legal classification, anyway.

If you're actually talking about professionally recognized mental illness, it applies to you just as much as anyone. I took it (INFP, if anyone's curious) at my psychiatrist's office, despite having moderate schizoaffective disorder.

I mostly took it for fun, she didn't care about the result at all. It's not useful in psychiatry, but people with mental illnesses still have a personality.

That's not the sense that I meant it in at all.

by **gmalivuk** » Mon Nov 07, 2011 3:27 pm UTC

Then why not go ahead and explain what sense you *did* mean it in?

by **Steax** » Mon Nov 07, 2011 4:16 pm UTC

Wow, never noticed this thread. I always guessed that xkcd would be full of INTP and INTJs. I mean, it's over half the votes. I'm INTP myself, and has consistently been so.

It's funny how ESFJ, which is supposed to account for over 10%, is lacking.

I enjoy this classification because it's actually quite sane - it's just codifying a person's personality. It might be codifying the wrong parameters, but it's still a valid way of telling people apart. Asking someone to take the test tells me a lot about them.

by **UniqueScreenname** » Mon Nov 07, 2011 6:05 pm UTC

Steax wrote:
It's funny how ESFJ, which is supposed to account for over 10%, is lacking.

I actually would expect nothing less. ESFJs are the complete opposite of the INT-whatevers. My mom is an ESFJ and I know this website would make her think too hard.

Spoiler:

by **Thtb** » Tue Nov 08, 2011 7:13 am UTC

Well, seems the forum attracts people who heavly invested in there IN(T) score.

But yeah, INTJ which is supposed to be like 5% or less is around 35% ish

by **SecondTalon** » Tue Nov 08, 2011 1:21 pm UTC

UniqueScreenname wrote:
Steax wrote:
It's funny how ESFJ, which is supposed to account for over 10%, is lacking.

I actually would expect nothing less. ESFJs are the complete opposite of the INT-whatevers. My mom is an ESFJ and I know this website would make her think too hard.

Spoiler:
I find it hard to get her to think at all.

I missed the part of the exam where intelligence had fuck all to do with anything. Perhaps I skimmed that part.

by **UniqueScreenname** » Tue Nov 08, 2011 5:54 pm UTC

SexyTalon wrote:
UniqueScreenname wrote:
Steax wrote:
It's funny how ESFJ, which is supposed to account for over 10%, is lacking.

I actually would expect nothing less. ESFJs are the complete opposite of the INT-whatevers. My mom is an ESFJ and I know this website would make her think too hard.

Spoiler:
I find it hard to get her to think at all.
I missed the part of the exam where intelligence had fuck all to do with anything. Perhaps I skimmed that part.

It doesn't. However, Thinkers reason with their minds. Feelers reason with their hearts. On a website such as this, where the only way to get the humor is to be able to think it out (minus the romance/love comics), she wouldn't do well. And that is not based on knowledge of the subject matter, cuz my knowledge of coding and calculus doesn't go past high school, no knowledge of physics, and I can still figure out what is going on, at least if I try. Never said anything about intelligence, I believe. Just checked, yup, never did.

by **gmalivuk** » Tue Nov 08, 2011 6:17 pm UTC

UniqueScreenname wrote:Thinkers reason with their minds. Feelers reason with their hearts.

I use mine to pump blood. How about, if you want to show us how much of a reasonable, thinking person you are, you express this in terms that make sense?

What does the Myers-Briggs typology label you as?

Who is online