Myers-Briggs Personality Inventory

[Lovely]

This particular system is one of my biggest interests. To me, it makes for a really good starting point for self-analysis and for predicting how certain people may act or react. There are a few tests online. Here's one of them.



Here's some background information:



[indent]Katherine Briggs and Isabel Myers were a mother and daughter who invented a system of classifying personalities. In the 1920s, they had invented a classification of personality types as an aid to writing fiction. When Carl Jung's book Psychological Types came out, they thought that Carl Jung had hit on essentially the same set of classifications, but more systematically laid out. They replaced their categories with Jung's: "Executives" became "Extraverted Thinking Types" and so on.



Briggs and Myers thought that Jung's system could have practical uses. If people knew their type, perhaps they could make better career choices, for example. If people knew other people's types, perhaps they could appreciate those people for what they are and not judge them for being different or try to "correct" them.[/indent][indent]The result of taking the MBTI is a four-letter code, which stands for your top two preferred function attitudes. The four-letter codes map to function attitudes as follows.

[indent]• The first letter is either E or I. It stands for whether your dominant function is Extraverted or Introverted.

• The second letter is either S or N. It stands for whether your preferred function attitude for perception--that is, your preferred "irrational function"--is Intuition (N) or Sensation (S).

• The third letter is either T or F. It stands for whether your preferred function attitude for making judgements--that is, your preferred "rational function"--is Thinking or Feeling.

• The fourth letter is either J or P. This is the only one that's a bit tricky. It stands for whether your preferred extraverted function is your preferred judging function or your preferred perceiving function.[/indent]For example, the letters ENFP mean: dominant function: Extraverted Intuition, auxiliary function: Introverted Feeling.[/indent]

(Source)



This web site has really good descriptions of the 16 personality archetypes -- follow the left column and scroll down a little. And this web site has an excellent introduction to E/I, S/N, T/F and J/P.

[Sugoi Sama]

ISTJ (Da nana na na Inspector Guardian)

Introverted - 33

Sensing - 1

Thinking - 31

Judging - 31





# moderately expressed introvert

# slightly expressed sensing personality

# moderately expressed thinking personality

# moderately expressed judging personality





"The one word that best describes Inspectors is superdependable. Whether at home or at work, Inspectors are extraordinarily persevering and dutiful, particularly when it comes to keeping an eye on the people and products they are responsible for. In their quiet way, Inspectors see to it that rules are followed, laws are respected, and standards are upheld. "



"Generally speaking, Inspectors are not comfortable with anything that gets too fancy. Their words tend to be plain and down-to-earth, not showy or high-flown; their clothes are often simple and conservative rather than of the latest fashion; and their home and work environments are usually neat, orderly, and traditional, rather than trendy or ostentatious."



Dependable, Caring, Simple and somewhat quiet. That's me alright. Although I wonder if that makes me come off as boring <img src='http://mm-bbs.org/public/style_emoticon ... #>/huh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':ph34r:' />......

[mizer_unmei]

I just posted about this in the other thread! Haha.



I'm an INFP. I think it's pretty accurate. But I also get ISFP as well. ^^

[Zounder]

INTJ (Mastermind)



Introverted 78

Intuitive 50

Thinking 38

Judging 11



# very expressed introvert

# moderately expressed intuitive personality

# moderately expressed thinking personality

# slightly expressed judging personality



"All Rationals are good at planning operations, but Masterminds are head and shoulders above all the rest in contingency planning. Complex operations involve many steps or stages, one following another in a necessary progression, and Masterminds are naturally able to grasp how each one leads to the next, and to prepare alternatives for difficulties that are likely to arise any step of the way. Trying to anticipate every contingency, Masterminds never set off on their current project without a Plan A firmly in mind, but they are always prepared to switch to Plan B or C or D if need be.



Masterminds are rare, comprising no more than, say, one percent of the population, and they are rarely encountered outside their office, factory, school, or laboratory. Although they are highly capable leaders, Masterminds are not at all eager to take command, preferring to stay in the background until others demonstrate their inability to lead. Once they take charge, however, they are thoroughgoing pragmatists. Masterminds are certain that efficiency is indispensable in a well-run organization, and if they encounter inefficiency-any waste of human and material resources-they are quick to realign operations and reassign personnel. Masterminds do not feel bound by established rules and procedures, and traditional authority does not impress them, nor do slogans or catchwords. Only ideas that make sense to them are adopted; those that don't, aren't, no matter who thought of them. Remember, their aim is always maximum efficiency."



Just like the other one, a mix of things that fit and don't fit for me. Interesting nonetheless!

[Melon]

[quote name='mizer_unmei' post='61388' date='Mar 2 2009, 10:26 PM']I just posted about this in the other thread! Haha.



I'm an INFP. I think it's pretty accurate.[/quote]



Me too. <img src='http://mm-bbs.org/public/style_emoticon ... iggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':ph34r:' />

[eri]

I took this some time ago and am an INFJ. My boyfriend is an INTJ. Both fit us a little too well. And as you might guess from our personality types, we are the most socially retarded couple ever.



http://personalitydesk.com/infj-type-description.php



This website presents the INFJ in a very positive light. I've read more detailed ones that pin point some of the more negative, destructive habits of INFJs - like, being too quick to judge others for perceived moral failings.

[Shoujo Q]

ISTP (Craftor~) Woot!

Introverted - 89

Sensing - 12

Thinking - 38

Perceiving - 22



# very expressed introvert

# slightly expressed sensing personality

# moderately expressed thinking personality

# slightly expressed perceiving personality



The nature of Crafters is most clearly seen in their masterful operation of tools, equipment, machines, and instruments of all kinds. Most us use tools in some capacity, of course, but Crafters (as much as ten percent of the population) are the true masters of tool work, with an innate ability to command tools and to become expert at all the crafts requiring tool skills. Even from an early age they are drawn to tools as to a magnet-tools fall into their hands demanding use, and they must work with them.



Like all the Artisans, Crafters are people who love action, and who know instinctively that their activities are more enjoyable, and more effective, if done impulsively, spontaneously, subject to no schedules or standards but their own. In a sense, Crafters do not work with their tools, but play with them when the urge strikes them. Crafters also seek fun and games on impulse, looking for any opportunity, and just because they feel like it, to play with their various toys: cars, motorcycles, boats, dune-buggies, hunting rifles, fishing tackle, scuba gear, and on and on. They thrive on excitement, particularly the rush of speed-racing, water-skiing, surfing. And Crafters are fearless in their play, exposing themselves to danger again and again, even despite frequent injury. Of all the types, Crafters are most likely to be risk takers, pitting themselves, or their technique, against chance or odds.



Crafters are hard to get to know. Perhaps this is because they tend to communicate through action, and show little interest in developing language skills. Their lack of expressiveness can isolate them at school and on the job, and even though they hang around with their own kind in play, they let their actions speak for them, and their actual conversation is sparse and brief.



Crafters can be wonderfully generous and loyal to their friends, teammates, and sidekicks, often giving up their evenings or weekends to help with building projects or mechanical repairs-house remodeling, for example, or working on cars or boats. On the other hand, they can be fiercely insubordinate to those in authority, seeing rules and regulations as unnecessarily confining. Crafters will not usually go against regulations openly, but will simply ignore them. More than anything, Crafters want to be free to do their own thing, and they are proud of their ability to do it with an artist's skill.

[Kago]

Not surprising, I'm an ENFP



# slightly expressed extravert

# distinctively expressed intuitive personality

# moderately expressed feeling personality

# distinctively expressed perceiving personality



Like the other Idealists, Champions are rather rare, say two or three percent of the population, but even more than the others they consider intense emotional experiences as being vital to a full life. Champions have a wide range and variety of emotions, and a great passion for novelty. They see life as an exciting drama, pregnant with possibilities for both good and evil, and they want to experience all the meaningful events and fascinating people in the world. The most outgoing of the Idealists, Champions often can't wait to tell others of their extraordinary experiences. Champions can be tireless in talking with others, like fountains that bubble and splash, spilling over their own words to get it all out. And usually this is not simple storytelling; Champions often speak (or write) in the hope of revealing some truth about human experience, or of motivating others with their powerful convictions. Their strong drive to speak out on issues and events, along with their boundless enthusiasm and natural talent with language, makes them the most vivacious and inspiring of all the types.



Fiercely individualistic, Champions strive toward a kind of personal authenticity, and this intention always to be themselves is usually quite attractive to others. Far more than the other Idealists, Champions are keen and probing observers of the people around them, and are capable of intense concentration on another individual. Their attention is rarely passive or casual. On the contrary, Champions tend to be extra sensitive and alert, always ready for emergencies, always on the lookout for what's possible.



Champions are good with people and usually have a wide range of personal relationships. They are warm and full of energy with their friends. They are good in public and on the telephone, and are so spontaneous and dramatic that others love to be in their company. Champions are positive, exuberant people, and often their confidence in the goodness of life and of human nature makes good things happen.



I seem to get either ENTP or ENFP, but ENFP seems to suit me more.

[jas]

INFJ with a strong Ti function.



I have been reading about the idea of cognitive processes, which is quite interesting IMO. It's kind of a separate theory, but depending on your MBTI your Jungian functions are used in different ways. Here's a test based on the development of said functions, see if it matches your result~ http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/assessme...evelop_old.html



There is a lot more info on the net about Jungian functions, but I recommend taking the test first and then reading about them.

[Lovely]

In many ways, I identify as an ESFP -- with the caveats that a) I'm very balanced in terms of cognitive preferences and <img src='http://mm-bbs.org/public/style_emoticon ... >/cool.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':ph34r:' /> it's a type not terribly prone to geekiness (I'm wearing a "Math Cheat Sheet" t-shirt and hiding out in the Engineering lounge as I write this). I read as an ESFP, an ENFP (plausible) or an ENTP (not nit-picky enough), depending on whose conclusions I'm drawing upon.



For example, one "S" thing that I do is that I tend to fall into the belief that a certain way of acting is universal, or accepted, or right, or that there is a certain (sometimes seemingly arbitrary) standard. An "N" person might be more perhaps oblivious to those societal standards, or uninterested, and try to judge each case individually - more by what they know about that particular person than by what they know of people in general and what's "acceptable." On the other hand, when I write a paper for school, I tend to leap from premise to conclusion ("N") rather than put a lot of detail into it ("S"), and only worry about filling in the blanks after I've established my destination.



@Jas: MBTI is based on the Jungian functions. For example, according to the theory, an INTJ relies preferentially on Introverted Intuition (pattern recognition) and Extraverted Thinking (starting with a conceptual framework and then trying to fit information into it). An ESFP, by contrast, prefers to think of the world in terms of Extraverted Sensing (a "gut reaction" to physical objects, colors, etc.) and Introverted Feeling (a personal value system).



Here's another good page introducing the cognitive processes: http://www.trytel.com/~jfalt/Ene-med/s-n.html

And how they interact (this one is one of my favorites): http://www.infjorinfp.com/docs/TandemProcessing.htm

And some alternative descriptions (this is another favorite): http://greenlightwiki.com/lenore-exegesis/Function_Attitude



One important thing to understand about the cognitive processes is that they can't be encompassed in any one definition; merely observed in their infinite positive and negative manifestations. For example: take Extraverted Feeling, the dominant judging process for ENFJs and INFJs. A negative manifestation of Extraverted Feeling may be caring too much about how others perceive you and being less than you can be as a result. A positive manifestation, however, might be an awareness of how your actions are interpreted by other people, so that you can decide whether or not it matters to you to change your behaviour.



Funny story: I've dated INTJs almost exclusively.

[BeForJess]

I hover between INFP and INFJ.... but it has been a while since I took one of these, so I think I'll take it again.



... And it's INFJ!



Qualitative analysis of your type formula



You are:



* moderately expressed introvert

* moderately expressed intuitive personality

* distinctively expressed feeling personality

* moderately expressed judging personality

[yuzuriha]

Your Type is

ENFJ (The teacher, funny considering my past two jobs)

Extraverted Intuitive Feeling Judging



11 12 50 33



# slightly expressed extravert

# slightly expressed intuitive personality

# moderately expressed feeling personality

# moderately expressed judging personality

[AEUGNewtype]

I remember taking this in college but I don't remember shit about it or the results.



Just like Zounder, I got:



INTJ (or Mastermind, as they call it)



Introverted Intuitive Thinking Judging

67 % 62% 62% 44%



The difference between he and I is that the description on the page that he posted the chunk from fits me to an absolute T, whereas he says its a mix of things that fit him and don't fit him. The only thing from the huge description that didn't fit me was "they verbalize the positive and avoid comments of a negative nature." I'm still a fairly negative thinker by nature, for better or worse, as its something I do as a protection mechanism from failure on high expectations. The more I read about descriptions of INTJ's, its like reading a very detailed description of myself. This was really interesting and so accurate its scary. Seriously, SCARY.

[Zounder]

The difference between he and I is that the description on the page that he posted the chunk from fits me to an absolute T, whereas he says its a mix of things that fit him and don't fit him. The only thing from the huge description that didn't fit me was "they verbalize the positive and avoid comments of a negative nature." I'm still a fairly negative thinker by nature, for better or worse, as its something I do as a protection mechanism from failure on high expectations. The more I read about descriptions of INTJ's, its like reading a very detailed description of myself. This was really interesting and so accurate its scary. Seriously, SCARY.

Yeah, for the most part it felt like a pretty good description of me. For example, the line:

Although they are highly capable leaders, Masterminds are not at all eager to take command, preferring to stay in the background until others demonstrate their inability to lead.

Describes me in every aspect of my life perfectly. Whereas lines like:

they are rarely encountered outside their office, factory, school, or laboratory

Don't really fit. I mean, I'm by no means a slacker but I don't enjoy slaving all day over work.



After re-examining the description, I feel like it actually fits me pretty well, just not quite all of it. I definitely enjoy the title of Mastermind. I also tend to think of things sequentially and orderly, which related to the decision-making, efficient traits of the Mastermind. And I guess being a Mathematics major is a result of this way of thinking.



I also feel special for being 1% of the population. <img src='http://mm-bbs.org/public/style_emoticon ... nceman.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />



EDIT: Just thoroughly read the link you posted, now THAT fits me. There are some philosophies in there that have just been acknowledging in life recently... As you said... Scary!

[Lovely]

INTJ

Agreed. You read very strongly as an INTJ.

"they verbalize the positive and avoid comments of a negative nature."

That's somewhat inaccurate; especially the second part. From my observations, functional INTJs will actively seek concrete criticism of their beliefs, but won't change them until they're fully satisfied with the data they've gathered; they take in information with a heavy BS filter. They can be picky with who they choose to listen to, and I suppose that could be interpreted as having an element of avoidance (i.e., sometimes, there's just so much trash in what a person is saying that it's just not worth trying to wade through to pull up relevant information). As for the first part, perhaps it would be more accurate to say that they tend to be tactful when verbalizing harsh criticism. My INTP friends are known for their caustic wit; INTJs tend to err on the side of caution when stating their opinion -- perhaps toning it down, but never fluffing it up.

[AEUGNewtype]

[quote name='Lovely' post='61538' date='Mar 5 2009, 11:54 AM']From my observations, functional INTJs will actively seek concrete criticism of their beliefs, but won't change them until they're fully satisfied with the data they've gathered; they take in information with a heavy BS filter. They can be picky with who they choose to listen to, and I suppose that could be interpreted as having an element of avoidance (i.e., sometimes, there's just so much trash in what a person is saying that it's just not worth trying to wade through to pull up relevant information). As for the first part, perhaps it would be more accurate to say that they tend to be tactful when verbalizing harsh criticism.[/quote]

Very, very true, in my case.

[Tsuki]

I took this and placed as an INFJ. It's fairly enough like me, but there are quite a number of people that I know who are also placing as INFJs, who I have always thought had quite distinct personalities from my own.



I don't know, this test seems like it can capture parts of your personality, but reading most descriptions I've seen, I can't really say I identify that strongly with what the profiles list. My highest was maybe a 65% for intuitive, the rest diminished greatly from there. I took it yesterday and can't remember what my scores were exactly though.

[Lovely]

[quote name='Tsuki' post='61575' date='Mar 6 2009, 03:35 PM']I don't know, this test seems like it can capture parts of your personality, but reading most descriptions I've seen, I can't really say I identify that strongly with what the profiles list. My highest was maybe a 65% for intuitive, the rest diminished greatly from there. I took it yesterday and can't remember what my scores were exactly though.[/quote]



1. The percentages, in this case, are a measure of accuracy: the test is 65% positive that you're an intuitive.



2. What you said about (not) identifying strongly with most of the profiles is a common criticism of personality tests such as this one. Yes, there are inaccuracies in the types, and yes, we take on the traits of other types. The point of the test isn't to put you or anyone else in a box. There's no test on the planet that will tell you who you are. It's a tool for understanding, not a constraint. Classifications exist to help with understanding and relaying information... not to stereotype. One big limitation of the test is that you can generalize from a group of individuals to a type, but that doesn't mean everyone in the group can be described perfectly by that type -- working in the other direction is much less realistic.



It's possible that you're too well-balanced to relate to any one "type," or that you're relating to commonalities shared by several different "types." (BestFitType.com has a section on "look-alikes," again, if you scroll down the left column.) So really, if you find something that describes you in terms of dominant functions, but it's not a "type" - if it works, go for it, think about it, use it. Or, if you really care, you could combine the information garnered from other systems, like Enneagram, to achieve a fuller picture of how you function.

[pamacii]

My Myers-Briggs tests don't always come up the same, usually I am INTP (like this time), although sometimes I score as a INTJ. <img src='http://mm-bbs.org/public/style_emoticon ... nfused.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':D' />

[mizer_unmei]

Here's a pretty cool website with adjectives or phrases for the different types:



http://similarminds.com/jung/infp.html



That kinda fits me perfectly. Especially: focus on fantasies, prone to lateness, can feel uncomfortable around others, hermit, likes the rain, can be submissive, frequently second guesses self, not punctual, not always prepared, and can be pessimistic.



Yeahhh. At least it helps me recognize and define what I do better, even if I can't really change it. Thanks personality tests!

[Kago]

My F function must be alarmingly weak because i identify with both ENTP and ENFP. But these are all spot on.



risk taker, easy going, outgoing, good at getting people to have fun, social, open, rule breaker, thrill seeker, life of the party, comfortable in unfamiliar situations, appreciates strangeness, disorganized, adventurous, talented at presentation, aggressive, attention seeking, experience junky, adaptable, not easily offended, messy, carefree, dangerous, fearless, careless, emotionally stable, spontaneous, improviser, always joking, unconventional, wild and crazy, prone to losing things, unprepared, dominant, acts without thinking, empathetic, dangerous, loving, prone to fantasy, not into organized religion, pro-weed legalization



420 smoke weed everyday.



Favored careers: dictator, computer consultant, international spy, tv producer, philosopher, comedian, music performer, it consultant, politician, diplomat, entertainer, freelance writer, creative director, strategist, news anchor, lecturer, college professor, assassin.



DICTATOR.



Disfavored careers: child care, home maker, clerical. <img src='http://mm-bbs.org/public/style_emoticon ... /laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':girlie:' />

[celedam]

Like others here, apparently, I bounce between INTP and INTJ depending on my mood when I take the test.



Mostly INTP, though. This description is so accurate, it's eerie.

[makky]

I've taken this test a few times before, and I always score either INTJ or INFJ, though I've gotten INTJ much more often.



Has anyone ever read the descriptions @ typelogic?

"they verbalize the positive and avoid comments of a negative nature."

That's somewhat inaccurate; especially the second part. From my observations, functional INTJs will actively seek concrete criticism of their beliefs, but won't change them until they're fully satisfied with the data they've gathered; they take in information with a heavy BS filter. They can be picky with who they choose to listen to, and I suppose that could be interpreted as having an element of avoidance (i.e., sometimes, there's just so much trash in what a person is saying that it's just not worth trying to wade through to pull up relevant information). As for the first part, perhaps it would be more accurate to say that they tend to be tactful when verbalizing harsh criticism. My INTP friends are known for their caustic wit; INTJs tend to err on the side of caution when stating their opinion -- perhaps toning it down, but never fluffing it up.

I think your statements here are a more accurate observation than that which you quoted. I feel as though I am prone to interact with others in the way which you described above.

This topic is rather interesting.

[Lovely]

I was dicking around the Lenore Wiki earlier today, and I found this great little article on why INTPs like to kick puppy dogs. (For serious, it has really good information for parsing apart the differences between INTJs and INTPs in terms of emotions processing, but that part made me giggle.)



--



Upon further retrospect -- and this is a perpetually ongoing thing -- I could be either ENFJ or ESFP. Darn those pretty little boxes that won't fit me.



--



I've been corresponding with a friend, who's brought up his own insights in conversation. The comments are in reference to me, but I hope that others will find them useful:



- People will see you differently- and at different accuracies- depending on what and how many "markers" they use for calculation. Example: Looking at your reactionary nature, you're definitely a P type. Looking at your social life, and how you manage people and circles, you're definitely a J type. In reality, you can do both of those things regardless of which one you are overall.



- F/T (like S/N) is an interesting preference set. T is simply crunching numbers, making decisions or using data. F does all of that, with the additional capacity of acquiring more information. Empathy aside, they're both "thinking;" and the preference is really whether you think within the confines of logic or within the confines of your moral code/emotional values.



- Seeing what's below the surface... seeing meaning without using your eyes... it's an "N" thing. Some people can look at something and see the meaning or pattern in an instant, others have to think about it for a few days.



- Reacting isnt' an "F" trait, it's a "P" trait. Reactionary decisions are impulsiveness. Considering the emotion and doing what's needed is being pro-active, a "J" trait. Both have their places and their merits. Being too proactive means that you end up overworked or bored. Being too impulsive means that end up not getting done what really needs to be done. Somewhere in there, there's a balance, and that balance is different for everyone and for everyone's current situation.

[Lovely]

Just for kicks, here's something that yet another a friend wrote to me about the distinction between Ne and Ni. For reference, she's an INTJ; Tamara is an ENTP.



[indent]Regarding Ni, in a class on information visualisation I started to formulate why so many definitions of Ni, Ne, the differences that have been thrown about of late have rubbed me a little the wrong way. Mostly it seems like what is said is just _not enough_ of a difference and I think I figured out why. One main difference is that Ne is out-put oriented and Ni is input-oriented, and also the necessary _timeframe_ involved is a highly significant difference in terms of orientation; it's not merely different ways of perceiving.

Bear with me. This may get long.



The thing about Ni, is that it is not a discrete perceptual event. It is, instead, a matter of continuously scanning, perceiving, and analysing one's environment, or the part of it one has come to designate as relevant, _with reference to_ a set of patterns on has, and is continuously augmenting and updating. (The environment, here, is defined mainly in terms of ideas one is exposed to and not sensory events) So each discrete piece of new information is compared to the relevant patterns. Those that accord to one's previous perceptions, fit into the pattern, they are simply noted as confirmation and are retained in and of themselves only by chance - the confirmation is what is remembered. Those that contradict or appear to contradict one's patterns and previous perceptions are selected for analysis, whenever it is most convenient.



Thus, one comes away with the awareness of patterns, insights, without necessarily recalling any of the supporting data. _But we know it exists_ or we would not have come to that insight, to that pattern. So it is hard to justify this to other people, but we _know_ it is true.



Ne, the way it has been described to me, seems more like perception in a flash. Seeing something as a totality. Like a picture being "worth a thousand words" you can get trend information instantly from a graph, but that doesn't mean you know the numbers or understand it, it's just all of a sudden there, you see it. And the more accurate data would be in the list of numbers, and knowing where they came from, who collected it, methods, etc.



This is probably related to how Tamara claims to know whether she'll like a person through seeing only their photograph and I don't get it, half think she's insane, and rant about confirmation bias and she thinks I'm being unfair - and how I don't feel like I know someone well enough to say if I like them until I actually, you know, know them, and she tells me that's a crazy double bind because I have to get to know them and let them know me, by advertising myself or something, to people who have not yet proved that they're relevant - and these irritating people always want this to happen within the context of a relationship, and not before. Honestly. And I just think that criticism is entirely irrelevant, because if someone's inadequate, why get to know them in the first place? And a nag or someone pushy is, by definition, inadequate.



So it's a difference, as I see it, not in terms only of what one sees, but whether it's a continual process or a set of discrete perceptions.



So essentially, although they both seem patterns, and different kinds of patterns, Ni is about continuous analysis of relevance, so much though so that nearly every decision, once it comes, can feel inevitable - it follows from data, it follows only from data. Often it builds off of previous analysis, so that decisions can be made quickly - nothing is a new event that needs to be treated on it's own - it all belongs to a pattern.

And where there is insufficient data, decisions are avoided. Like, a lot of things with 'personal preference' - I honestly cannot bring myself to care. There's no data. So I have nothing. Sorry.

It's honestly less about being selective about data intake, and more about how one's patterns give it a context that pushes some things to irrelevance.

I've spaced out before, similar to what you described, and it's not nearly the same as _using_ my Ni in a full, healthy way. True, the ability to entertain oneself despite one's surroundings is a valuable skill which more people need - but Ni is not just a relaxed escape and you cannot learn to inhabit it properly if you just see it as something like a playground.[/indent]

[freezingkiss]

ESFP



# slightly expressed extravert

# slightly expressed sensing personality

# distinctively expressed feeling personality

# slightly expressed perceiving personality



Extraverted - 1, Sensing - 1, Feeling - 62 (O_o), Perceiving - 11.



Favoured Careers - Art, Actress and Performance, Dressmaking and Design, Fashion Designer.



Sounds awesome. =D



Famous people of your type: Ringo Starr, Oprah Winfrey, Bill Cosby (with the hippin' and the hoppin' and the bippin' and the boppin'!)