Each Personality Views the Other Differently

I may very possibly title this Ti ramblings, cause that’s about what it feels like it’s gonna be… if I post it at all. I had an amusing conversation last week while talking with an ISFP friend. I asked her to compare herself to me, since Ryan and I have been slowly but steadily working on a Ti vs. Fi article this past week or so. She basically told me that she views my brain like a computer with efficient little wires and circuits. I just kind of blinked at this description, since that’s not at all how I view my brain. Perhaps other Ti users can relate? I’ve always seen my brain as more of a garbled mess that I’m constantly searching around in. (IE: The information is here if only I can find it… I know this makes sense somehow… probably. No? Oh. I guess it doesn’t. Nevermind. I take that back.) When attempting to come up with a metaphor of my brain, I was producing things like “a giant tangled knot of information that I’m constantly searching for hidden checkpoints in” or “a maze with a bunch of dead ends.” Of course, there’s always the jigsaw puzzle metaphor that I used in the blog’s Ti description. Although, at this point, I’d be tempted to amend it to a “giant 3D puzzle in which the entire thing loses structural integrity and collapses if one wrong piece is discovered.” Something along those lines anyway. Regardless, this got me thinking. The ISFP viewed my brain as efficient.

Later, when I was talking with Ryan (ISTJ), he mentioned that he thought I’d talk about untangling the spaghetti mess in my mind. The first words out of my mouth in response to that was.. “Uh, no. The mess is there by design.” Of course, that was the natural response a Te user might have. Bring order. Straighten the lines. It’s inefficient. However, I view it as a mess that I intentionally created. It all connects somehow, someway. Things can’t just be moved around. When I’m listening to something new, I’m trying to figure out if it fits somehow. I’m not really lost in the chaos, per say. But, this was what a high Te user expected when he heard me talking.

So why am I saying all of this?

Well. Don’t shoot me, cause I know this is going to be common sense, but the longer I talk to the different types and build my tower of typology information, the more I realize that each of the 16 types views each other differently. For instance, I think about the INTP vs. INTJ typing dilemma. It’s not common for an INTJ to mistype as an INTP. However, it’s ultra common for an INTP to mistype as an INTJ. Why? Well, because the average INTJ is orderly, structured, planned, and not spontaneous. The majority of the INTJs are going to read the INTP description and go “That’s not me.” However, the INTPs don’t necessarily view themselves as disorganized, or chaotic. We all have different standards, right? The INTPs have that low Si. They’re going to have a way they regiment themselves, or routinize certain things in their lives that they deem important. I’ve talked to INTPs like that, who seem very proud of this system. I would still never confuse that INTP as an INTJ though, but would that INTP confuse themselves as an INTJ? Perhaps. After all, the INTP may very well view themselves as structured, like a Te user. But if you put a real INTJ next them, that INTJ might scream chaos and run away. (Obviously, I’m being dramatic, but you get the point.)

It’s easy for someone to hear different people say different things about different types, and reject what they’re saying as incorrect. Sometimes it is correct to reject it. However, perhaps a question that should be asked before that rejection occurs is “could that just be how that type views me?” or “could that just be how that type views themselves?” Obviously, there are certain things that are just flat out inconsistent within the 16 types system, and I’m not saying otherwise. There are lines. There are boxes. To remove all such measures and make everyone an exception would make the system pointless. But, it may be worth considering what those absolute lines actually are. I make statements like “we are all affected by our past.” The high Ni users jump in with a statement about how the past is irrelevant to them. My response is that “you’re accessing your past experience whether you realize it or not.” I don’t view either statement as incorrect. They are not consciously accessing their past experience when making a decision, not typically anyway, but those past experience have still molded their decision making process. It’s created biases, preferences, and etc.

So, what could possibly be my point in saying all of this… Well, there’s a few potential takeaways here that are all centered around the one concept: We all view ourselves differently then people view us.

1. Sometimes we get a biased perspective of our own person or type.

We see an idealized form of ourselves, and assume everyone else sees that. If they don’t, it’s easy to just call someone ignorant and ignore what they’re saying. However, we should probably be a bit more open-minded when it comes accepting outside perspectives of ourselves. Maybe there’s a potential for growth.

2. People naturally judge each other by their own personal standards.

I don’t necessarily mean this in a negative sense. For instance, it’s natural for a Te user to assume that my goal as a Ti is to untangle the mess in my mind. Why wouldn’t a Te assume that? However, a Ti user doesn’t feel the same urges as a Te user. We are compelled by different things.

3. When typing, you need to keep in mind that what people are saying has to be taken in context with their type.

Meaning, someone stating that they’re efficient doesn’t make them a Te user. Someone stating that they don’t know themselves doesn’t make them not an Fi user. I’m not sure if Fi users actually view themselves as being highly in touch with their own person. Sometimes they might, but I think they see themselves as constantly getting to know themselves, searching for their inner purpose and meaning. To say that they know themselves… well, wouldn’t that mean that Fi had accomplished it’s task? That seems rather conclusive for an Fi dominant, who is going to be driven by that function for the rest of their life. Correct me if I’m wrong. This is literally me speculating over here. However, when I look at an Fi as a dominant Ti, I’m going to see them as far more in touch with themselves than I am. Ergo, in my mind, the high Fi users know themselves. Of course, as I type this, I realize I’m looping back to a previous point, but I’m gonna leave it cause I think it applies here to. Bottom line: We all aspire to certain things from a function standpoint, and it’s important to learn what the different types aspire to, because that will come up when they fill out that long type-me questionnaire. However, those aspirations are read wrong, they can easily lead to a mistype.

4. The lack of a cognitive function in our stack will not often drive us to talk about it in the negative sense.

The two Fi users I was talking to about the brain thing both mentioned seeing their brain as inefficient. That made sense to me because they had Te in their stack, albeit low. (Does that mean that their brain is actually inefficient? Not necessarily. It just means that they’re sensitive to that function’s drive. Our lower functions can really beat us up sometimes.) Of course, the high Te user viewed his brain as highly efficient. As a Ti user, efficiency never really crossed my mind. If someone is frequently speaking out against a certain characteristic that is associated with a specific cognitive function, then they have that function somewhere in their stack. They have to, because something is driving them to think about it. In my mind, there are really three categories of evidence: evidence for a specific function, lack of evidence for a specific function, and anti-function evidence. Anti-function evidence would basically be evidence being presented against a specific function, that actually indicates a sensitivity to said function, whether that’s the result of a personal bias or failure to live up to a perceived standard.

5. If you struggle with self-esteem or viewing yourself negatively, realize that this doesn’t mean other people view you that way.

We are not all judging each other by the same standard, as I stated earlier. Oftentimes, our standards for self are much higher than other peoples. Don’t sink into a pit of despair because you are not measuring up, or assume that other people are judging you as harshly as you’re judging yourself. After all, you may be far more adept at something then you realize. It’s much easier for people to state criticisms than to give any kind of positive affirmation. Most people don’t think to randomly tell another person that they’re impressed by a certain characteristic, or secretly jealous of a strength that they lack. Sometimes it just seems like common sense… or perhaps it’s too awkward to state out loud.

In conclusion…

Sorry for the rambling. I realize most of those points were bleeding together in some way or another. I hope there was something that someone could derive from this mess… somehow. 🙂