Surprisingly

Given the J's need for scheduals, planning, and organization, and their general uncomfortablity with the spontaneous, one would expect them to dislike surprises. This is probably true, for the most part. Yet surprisingly, my mother, who is an SJ, likes things like surprise birthday parties. While, unsurprisingly, she gets very flustered when things don't go according to her plan and must struggle to switch gears, when it's a special occasion different rules seem to apply.

I think I may have an idea as to why a J, particularly an SJ, could actually like surprises under certain circumstances. My mother, in true SJ form, turns everything into a duty in her mind. She likes to plan out everything that needs to be done, and then duely worry about getting it done untill it's finnished. Her daily list or schedual acts as an invisible taskmaster nagging her when things are not crossed off and patting her on the back once they are. She feels a sense of satisfaction when everything is finnished that she has determined needs to get done. Even if it was something "frivolous" like walking down to Dairy Queen for a cone, she approaches it more like work than play, and seems to be just as satisfied by marking it off the list as she was by the actual activity.

And this is where surprises come in. I think someone like my mother can like surprises because they don't have to do any of the planning and worrying. Thus the activity feels more like play.

SJs have a hard time approaching things in a carefree or playful way, and they usually feel guilty about planning things they enjoy for themselves. They have an incredible sense of duty toward others, and may do a lot to make sure others are happy, but don't feel comfortable spending time on things that aren't in some way an obligation. The fact is that they need others to plan their fun for them in order to really be able to enjoy it. The minute they get their hands on the planning, they have issues with needing to rationalize the fun, with worrying about everything going smoothly, with trying to make sure everyone else involved is taken care of even moreso than themselves, and turning the whole thing into a chore or obligation in their minds. Some of them may feel bad about accepting the kind intentions of others, but they are much more likely to let go and enjoy things when they realise that this time someone else is looking out for them. SJs are used to feeling like they have to do all the work while other people play and procrastinate, so planning a fun surprise for an SJ will remind them that people do remember and appreciate them. And if they just can't get past the need for a sense of duty, they can always feel obligated to have a good time so that everyone else's efforts won't be in vain.

An important detail to note is that in the event of a surprise party or outing planned for them, a J person can still rest assured that there is a plan, that someone knows what's going on and how it's all going to work. This helps them a great deal, and they can usually abdicate their need to keep controll of their life to the person who has kindly planned this event for them. They trust this other person to see that everything runs smoothly. They may also have, in a sense, planned for someone to surprise them if they know a special date is coming up, and thus may not be totally thrown off guard.

Introversion, Shyness, and Wierdness

A very important distinction to undestand in regards to personality is that Introversion and Shyness are actually two different things, although they may look very similar in action. Both Introverts and Extroverts can be shy.

First, Let's Take a Look at What it Means to Be Shy:
Shy people are afraid of interacting socially, even when they really want to. They will stand on the edge of a conversation trying to work up the nerve to interject, but feel too nervous or intimidated to do so. They have a deep conviction that people do not (or will not) like them. If they have been picked on, which often is the case, they seem to accept the superiority complex of bullies as being legitimate. They seem to view and approach others as if everyone else is better than them and expect to be looked down upon and barely tollerated in every encounter. They feel like they don't matter to other people while at the same time those people's reactions to them mean a great deal to them. Think about meeting some famous person or historic figure you really admire - that's how meeting just any Joe off the street feels to someone who is shy.

Nearly everyone seems intimidating to a Shy person and they both fear and expect the displeasure of others. They long to connect with them but feel unable to, and especially if they are extroverts, may spend a lot of their time following in the wake of people they would like to get to know, hungrily observing them, but never able to sieze the chance to join in. When presented with a chance to be introduced or to join in an activity they may squirm and stutter and avoid eyecontact. Their awkwardness often causes them to embarrase themselves, or at least to immagine that they have done so, and they often quickly dash for cover after the humiliating encounter. This of course confirms in thier minds their inadiquacy and makes them even more wary of social situations.

Shy people crave a sense of camraderie and acceptance, but expect themselves to be seen as unacceptible. Often their expectations are not wholly ungrounded, not because they are unworthy, but because they have had significant experience with people who have belittled them in one way or another - whether outright ridicule, or being too busy to give them attention. The trouble is understanding someone's rejection as the other person's problem rather than an inherent problem with oneself. It's not that you are unimportant, but that they are being inconsiderate. However, without a countering perspective from people who do appreciate the shy person it is easy for the negative experiences to form their entire understanding of their relationship to others.

Now a Shy person isn't necessarily always shy, it may be limited to certain social settings. They may feel accepted and respected by family, by people of a certain age-set (often not their peers), by people in a certain social status or group, etc., but in other social arenas they have not met with the same success and have therefore learned to expect rejection. Shyness has to do with confidence and one's perceived social acceptance. Shyness occurs when one feels out of his league, and thus intimidated by others. Shyness may be amplified by larger groups, but is none-the-less debilitating in a one on one scenario because it is diven mostly by the type of person encountered, and less by the number present. A group of shy people may still find themselves completely intimidated by a single person whom they see as beyond their leage.

Now Let's Take a Look at What it Means to Be Introverted:
In contrast to the Shy person, while an Introvert may feel intimidated or overwhelmed by a large number of people, given the chance to be one on one with any of them, he is likely to be quite comfortable. An Introvert avoids people in general not because he fears their displeasure, but because he finds them tidious and draining. This isn't to say that Introverts don't like other people, they just don't really like personally interacting with the majority of them, and definately not all at once. Even if he may think someone is nice, an Introvert may decide not to persue conversation or friendship because he doesn't want to invest more time in social interaction, perhaps feeling a bit overwhelmed with the friendships he already has. Introverts need and like having time alone, and being around a lot of people wears them out quickly. They do not find meeting new people and chit-chatting to be very energizing, and thus avoid it in favor of doing things alone or with one or two close friends. They may not approach others, not because they are afriad of them, but simply becuase they have no interest in conversing or going through the superficial topics often covered when making new aquaintances. Introverts seem to like to think more deeply and converse longer about things, and like to cultivate deeper longer lasting relationships with just a few people.

Introverts also tend to dislike being the center of attention, actually prefering to stand on the sidlelines to watch others. They don't long to be part of the group as the Shy person does. They may seem awkward when meeting new people or being put on the spot if they haven't been able to prepare before hand, finding it difficult to think quickly with the distraction of others staring at them and the pressure of people waiting for them to speak.

They hang back from conversations because they don't like to interrupt and because they are usually busy processing what they are hearing. Introverts take more time to think before responding and can easily be passed over by extroverts who want to keep the conversation rolling at a quicker pace. It's not necessarily that they are too nervous to speak, but simply that they can't seem to get a word in edgewise before the topic has already moved on past what they were about to say. The Introvert is often left with the choice of cutting in and awkwardly dragging the conversation back to an earlier point, or just keeping their mouth shut and thinking to themselves while others talk. In fact, they often prefer to just think to themselves, feeling little desire to share their thoughts with many others.

However, when an Introvert does want to talk with someone they are usually perfectly capable of doing so and may even appear outgoing or 'in command' of the situation, quite unlike the cowering Shy person. Introverts don't seem to desire a good rapport with many people nor general social acceptance, which may in some cases actually make them impervious to the slights that would cause the group oriented Extrovert to develop Shyness. On the other hand their tendancy to be overlooked because of their unobtrusive ways and the ridicule incured from a societal preference for Extroversion may make Introverts more prone to becoming Shy.

And Now to Look at Something Which May Factor into Both Introversion and Shyness: Wierdness.

The Shy Wierdo:
It's easy to immagine how people who do not share the common interests of others may be slighted or made fun of because of their unpopular preferences. While Shy people are by no means always odd, it seems much more likely for unusual people to develop Shyness because of the social ostricizing they often endure. Yet, those who are 'wierd' may not care if people who are different from them reject them because they had no desire to be like them in the first place. Their sense of aloneness may not come from specific people rejecting them, but from an overall sense of not belonging anywhere in society. They may give up on expecting anyone to identify with them or understand them. Thus even if they do not feel that they are less worthy than others, their confidence may be worne down by constantly finding themsleves alone. This is likely to cause them to expect rejection rather than acceptance and approach others warily or simply avoid them. In a sense, the Unusual are forced to be shy through the lack of opportunity to be supported. Some of them do not actually succumb to shyness, though they dream of finding at least a few people like themselves and feel dismayed at times by the relentless ridicule of others. Some of them respond with defiance and bitterness, rather than becoming meek and sullen around others.

The Introverted Wierdo:
People who are unusual in their interests and tastes may find themselves forced to develope their Introverted side, whether or not this is their natural preference. If a person has very little in common with most of the people around him, he is likely to find himself unable to make conversation with others even if he may want to for a lack of common references and topics. Simply because of having little in common with others, the unusual person who is not willing to give up his wierdness in favor of copying the crowd will naturally find himself spending more time on his own and sitting on the sidelines of conversations. He may have a much smaller set of friends than a typical extrovert (or even introvert) simply because there is a smaller pool of potential friends that share his interests. Also, because of their rarity, he may develope a tighter bond and strive to hang onto them longer than those whose interests are more typical and therefore find potential friends to be a dime a dozen. 'Wierd' Introverts may appear much more introverted than others because they have both their preference for solitude and their unpopular interests limiting their interactions with others. Likewise 'Wierd' Extraverts may appear more introverted than more 'Normal' people because they are unable to find a large group of people who share their interests and may not share the common knowlege that others enjoy when conversing with strangers. An Extavert may be more likely to develope a more popular range of interests because of spending time with others and seeking to identify with them, keeping his unusual tastes in the background untill he happens to come across someone who shares them.

Environmental Change

I was thinking today about how some people seem to like to change their environment frequently, while others do not. This may be seen in different ways.

Those who like to change their surroundings may have a tendancy to move a project they're working on to different rooms, or even outside, rather than setting up a fixed work station. Or they may feel a need to get out and about and go places each day so that they are not in the same old place all day long. They may even feel a need to make a drastic change such as moving to a new state or changing jobs not because they have to, but because they are feeling too numb in the same routine. They are likely to vacation in different places each year. They generally do not become 'regulars' at any restaraunt or hang out for long, prefering a change of menue, activity, and scenery fairly often. They may prefer school or work environments that require moving around between buildings and campuses over the convenience of everything being compact and close at hand. They may have a tendancy to shift things around in their personal spaces, re-organizing their desks, reorienting their furniture, redecorating from time to time, and generally giving a familiar place a new look and feel. They may frequently give themselves a new look, cutting or dyeing their hair, different glasses, wearing different style clothing from day to day. They feel uneasy and fidgity when things become too familiar, no matter how much they may actually like a place, and may even experience a sense of fear of loosing themselves, feeling somehow less vital in the absense of change.

Those who don't like to change their surroundings seem to have a drive to 'settle down'. They seem to be much more concerned with finding 'the' place they really want to be, with persuing a long term career, with finding and establishing 'their place' in the world. They may be happy to make a drastic change in environment only when they feel like it will place them where they really want to be for the rest of their life (or for a good portion of it), and try to avoid intermediate steps toward their goals as much as possible. They may take longer to settle into a place because they want everythig to be just right so they won't need to change anything after the initial move-in. They feel much more comfortable when they are on familiar ground. They enjoy being a 'regular' at a particular restaraunt, and may prefer to vacation at the same place each year. They feel satisfied when they have several classes in the same room, or when they have their own office which they can make themselves at home in. Once they have arranged things in their personal space they rarely desire to change or move them. They may add new things, but they don't tend to make any big changes. They often hang the same decorations in the same place each holiday, enjoying heightened nostalgia when everything looks just like it was on other occasions. They like a level of predictablility in their surroundings which would enable them, essentially, to manuever and find things in the dark. It's not that they become blind to their surroundings, but in the same way that one may enjoy re-watching movies or re-reading books, they enjoy sitting in the same chair with the same view over and over. It would seem that they make a kind of connection with their surroundings, as though their room, office, or home is an extention of themselves, and to change it constitutes trying to overhaul their identity. In light of this, the changes they do make are often of particular significance. They cannot comprehend changing something just because it has been that way for a while. When a change in environment is a necessity, they usually feel as though a part of themselves has been forever lost, or left behind in the old place. Even redecorating and changing the furniture can make them feel as though the old room, even though it's location is the same, has been lost. When familiar things which are not under their control change, they may feel unnerved and upset, experiencing a sense of fear and insecurity.

I'm not sure which personality traits these two preferences may be related to.
On the one hand it looks a bit like a J/P thing, with the Ps being open to new possibilities or opportunities and the Js liking to have things already figured out and set. Yet, that can't be all there is to it because I consistantly test as a P and recognize many P traits in myself, yet fall definately under the preference for familiar surroundings. I tend to have a deep emotional reaction, mostly negative, when something in my space is changed, or even something as removed as a familiar house that I pass being painted. Yet, I can be flexible in other realms, tend to postpone making definate conclusions about things, and resist schedualing. I have also noticed in some other people a deep emotional need for changes to be made, particularly in their personal surroundings, though I am not sure if these same people feel a need for consistancy in other areas of their life.

Another speculation on the root of this preference is that the desire for change in one's physical environment could be related to the S/N traits. A sensing person who is more tuned into his surroundings may feel more quickly bored by them because he has already taken them in fully. This certainly seems to make sense with the feeling of loosing one's vitality when there is nothing new to experience or take in - it would give the sense of living in a repeating loop rather than moving forward. When one's main mode of living is through experience of the outer world, it makes sense that a life with more places, more vistas, more variety in one's surroundings would seem richer and more engaging. Whereas an N, who's primary life experience takes place in the mind, may easily encounter all the new ideas he likes by experiencing other worlds of thought through books, newspapers, websites, conversations, or television programs while remaining in a familiar external atmosphere. Indeed unfamiliar surroundings may more easily distract him from his inner thoughts, and require more attention, while a consistant setting allows him to interact with the outer world largely on 'auto-pilot'. His familiar environment may act as an anchor for him in the physical world, a place to come home to from the adventures of his mind, rather than being the stage for his adventures itself. In addition, the things around him may act more as symbols which excite his immagination or conjure particular ideas. Thus since the thing itself is hardly ever the true focus of his attention it is less likely to outlive its interest and become dull to his eyes.

Still another reason for prefering familiar surroundings could be related to T and F, though perhaps less directly. If a T is primarily interested in the practical purpose of things, he is likely to make a change whenever he thinks something else will work better. He will probably remove things that nolonger have a purpose, and change any arrangement or system to better serve his current purposes. Of course if something is perfectly functional, a T is likely to be content keeping it the same. An F, on the other hand, who makes sentimental connections with not only people, but places and things, is much more likely to retain a familiar atmosphere because of the memories and feelings it conjurs up. It doesn't matter so much that a different arrangement might be more efficient, if there are any particularly good feelings attached to the way things currently are, the F will prefer to keep them that way. Of course, on the other hand, an F will likely make changes very quickly to things that affect his feelings negatively.

E/I could have some relation to the desire for change or familiarity. An E's enjoyment of meeting new people, is likely to make him more open to putting himself in new environments which will bring him in contact with others. A change in scenery may bring new opportunities to meet people, which is often more exciting to an E than maintaining the same circle of aquaintances. The Es' openess to others and general desire for community, may make them more receptive to changes to their environment made by others. They are likely to enjoy a sense of shared space, and thus feel less bothered by other people's effects on that space. An I, on the otherhand, tends to feel a little more comfortable engaging others on his own territory or in a comfortable, familiar setting - which seems to give him a little boost of power or confidence. This may cause him to desire to remain in the same place where he has developed his own personal space, rather than putting himself in new places where he feels more exposed to the general public. He is also likely to dislike drastic changes such as moving or a new job because they force him to meet new people and go through the awkward stage of getting to know others. An introvert much prefers to maintain a few long term deep relationships over the superficial interactions with new aquaintances, and is thus unlikely to desire to move away from the people he is already familiar with. In his desire for solitary persuits he may find it easier to retreat to the same place all the time where he can be certain he won't be interrupted. I am not sure if the Introvert's need to have personal space disposes him to become more attached to, or invested in one place and one arrangement of things therein, or if he may relish new places as long as they are his and allow him solitude. Yet it seems quite plausible that an Introvert's personal space becomes like an extension of himself, making any changes to it become a much more personal matter with greater impact on him.

By this reasoning an INFJ would be the least likely to welcome changes in his surroundings, and an ESTP would be the most likely to feel a need for environmental changes. I'm not sure if this conclusion carries out in actuallity, so if there are any INFJs or ESTPs out there who would like to provide their input that would be most appreciated!

As far as my limited observations of others, I found that myself an INFP and my mother an ISFJ seemed to be on the same page with regards to keeping the house looking familiar and eating at the same places. While it seemed easy for my mom to get into a routine of going to the same places, she also seemed to have a value of experiencing different things for vacation each year - a preference I also shared.

Thus I rather wonder if NTs and SPs may prefer changes in environment overall, more than SJs and NFs. I really couldn't say. Although the 'absent minded proffessor' stereotype of the INTP doesn't seem to depict a person who itches for a new location. So, I don't know.

Fantasy vs. Reality

There is a key difference between people which the major personality theories neglect to include in their list of traits. That is, a person’s interest in and love of Fantasy or Science-Fiction. Or to put it in perhaps better terms, a person’s longing for and identification with immaginary Other-worlds or perhaps legendary Other-times. The common mistake is to consider this preference to belong to the realm of tastes and interests, which is a different level of personality which seems to be not so deep, nor so basic, because specific interests are defined to a great extent by what is available in any given culture for one to be interested in. For example, in a culture which has only experienced one kind of music, musical tastes cannot provide a great deal of insight into what a person is like or whether or not he will get along with someone else, at least not to the extent that they do in our society where the genres of music to choose from seem veritably endless. I do believe that tastes are affected by the deeper personality traits, which will predispose people to like or dislike various kinds of things, or various aspects of different things. Concerning my theory on the interest in Fantasy, I must admit that I am going wholly on my own reasonings and observations within the culture familiar to me and realise that Fantasy as I know it is not available to people of all cultures. However, I venture to guess that the heart of the love of Fantasy, or indeed Fantasy in some form or other, can be found in any culture. At the core, I think this proposed new aspect of personality is a longing for and fascination with something Other, something that is Not Reality.

People seem to be drawn to two different types of stories.

Some people are totally captivated by true-life, or realistic stories which could have actually happened. They seem particularly pleased when they learn that something they have watched or read is something that actually did happen, or which was based on real events, and will often enthusiastically mention this to others as a kind of reccommendation. They are fascinated by the real world that is around them. Whether it be nature or society which they enjoy most, they like to know how things really are and find great satisfaction in being ‘up on’ real life people, places, events, and issues. These are the people who hate to miss the news, who pour time into research, who know what’s in fashion, who keep tabs on celebrities, who read biographies and nature guides and history books, who are, in a word, Savvy when it comes to the real world and dealing with life in it. They are excited by all there is to know and experience in the real world, and they feel good about themselves because of their understanding of real life and competance in it. They have a sense of being part of the world, know that they live in it, and have a kind of duty or commitment to it. They care about what’s going on around them and feel that others ought to be aware of the world and care about it as well. They have little patience for people who waste their time on things that don’t exist and couldn’t exist, seeing their indiference to the real world as ireesponcible, and even in a way taking it as a personal affront. The world matters, and they can’t understand people who waste the life they actually have on silly fantasies that will never be real. The very strong Reality lovers may not even understand reading realistic fiction because it too is not actual, but most Reality lovers do enjoy entertainment which takes place in realistic, familiar, or believable settings. The more unfamiliar the territory or unbelievable the events the less comfortable they become with it. Among these Reality lovers there seem to be all types of personalities; those who like to observe the world, and those who like to organize and schedual it, those who like hand’s on interaction, and those who like to contemplate and reflect on it, those who approach it objectively, and those who approach it subjectively, those who focus on people and those who prefer solitude.

Then there are the people who are drawn to stories of other places and other times. They are attracted by, and long for things that are Different from the way things actually are. They don’t have a great deal of interest in the actual world around them, and frequently find it boring in comparison to places that they or others have immagined. They find themselves irresistably drawn to immaginary worlds and immerse themselves in Fantasy or Science-fiction books, movies, and games, frequently ignoring ‘real life’ as much as they possibly can. It is in these other worlds that they feel most alive, and they often feel like zombies going through the motions when dealing with ‘Real-life’ situations, such as school or work. Their immaginations are usually very active, and long past child-hood they may secretly enjoy pretending they are in a diferent setting in order to make ordinary tasks more interesting (A trip to the grocery store is much more exciting when turned into a quest for magical ingredients). They often care very little about popular culture or current events, and maintain a more periferal awareness of real-life issues and necessities. In their intense persuit of the Immaginary, they often do whatever they can to make real life more like the Other-worlds of which they are so fond. Many of them learn outdated crafts, or the use of old-time weaponry, play Role Playing Games, dress in costumes, decorate their homes oddly, and learn endless facts about entirely Fictional worlds. They spend much of their free time in the creation or development of Immaginary places and stories, often through drawing and art, or through writing and RPGs. They are totally captivated by alternative realities and fascinated by unfamiliar, unreal, unbelievable things. They enjoy the sense of mystery about things that could exist but haven’t been confirmed or discovered yet. They love legends, myths, and speculations about the future. Unlike the Realists who have trouble connecting with the improbable, they are quite comfortable ‘suspending disbeliefe’ in order to enjoy a book or movie that takes place in an unrealistic setting. They like to picture all the options of how things could be, freely re-mixing familiar things to create something new. They revel in the creation of diferent species, different landscapes, different natural laws, different societies, different fashion, different life-styles. They love exploring the possibilities of how things could have been and feel no particular commitment to how things are. In fact, they usually have a deep yearning for a different life than their own, and feel as though they don’t actually belong here. They often have a sense of being from a different time and different place, aliens and misfits among, what they see as, all these mundane humans. They often scorn being content with life as it is, and pity those who don’t appreciate looking past reality into other possibilities. Although they know that much of what they love so dearly does not exist here and now, many of them maintain a secret beliefe that anything is possible and often hope against hope that some shred of the immaginary worlds, in which they feel so at home, may turn out to be true after all.

The importance of Fantasy or Reailty is a topic which I think evokes some pretty dramatic responces from people, and which frequently drives a wedge between them. Although Fantasy and Science-Fiction films and books have gained some popularity and general acceptance in more recent years, particularly with the long running Star Trek TV series, movies like Star Wars and the Lord of the Rings, and book series like Harry Potter. Yet in spite of the large fan communities such things have generated, there is still a sense that those who truely love Fantasy are in the minority. Most Fantasy lovers will agree that they have felt at some point in their life, if not for most of it, totally surrounded by people who have little interest or respect for Fantasy. While plenty of people may mildly enjoy a Fantasy film now and then, many of them feel no particular attraction toward Fantasy and Sci-fi over any other modern-day or historical fictional story. When it comes down to it people who are most interested in Reality tend to be very criticle of the Fantasy lovers, who they see as being irresponcible, impractical, and incomprehensible. When it comes to interacting with real life situations they often feel very strongly that Fantasy lovers’ focus on the unreal is simply not right or acceptible. Fantasy and Sci-fi enthusiasts can be quite criticle in their turn toward the Reality devotees, considering them boring, mundane, and unable to think outside the box, and they may see themselves as a kind of higher being than those ‘pitiful mortals’. I don’t believe it is a simple matter of differing tastes which causes people to feel such a sense of alienation from eachother. Instead, I propose that it is in fact a fundemental difference in personality, a disposition either toward Reality or toward the Not-Real (which for the sake of an easy term I have called Fantasy).


---- A Look at Kiersey’s Sensing and INtuition ----
When first reading Please Understand Me, Kiersey’s description of the Sensing/Intuitive traits sounded very much to me as though they were the key to whether one likes Fantasy or not. The description of the Sensing person says: “He might be described as earth-bound, as grounded firmly in reality, anchored to earth -- a terrestrial.” It goes on to say they are much more concerned with what actually is than with possibilities and that they “tollerate no nonsense” in regards to getting things done. Another key line in the description says the Sensing person “wants facts, trusts facts, and remembers facts.” This sounds very much like the kind of person who cannot understand people’s interest in Fantasy, the sort who feel that immaginary worlds are a waste of time, the sort who like to be aware of what’s going on in the “Real World” whether it be popular culture, business, or politics.

In contrast that book described the intuitive person as one who daydreams and reads fantasy or fiction. It claims “The intuitive acts as though he is an extra-terrestrial, a space traveler engaged in explorations beyond the realities of the present and the past. The possible is always in front of him, pulling on his immagination like a magnet.” It also describes the intuitive as having his head often in the clouds, focusing on immagination, and as not being interested in reality: “They seem somewhat bothered by reality, constantly looking toward possibilities of changing or improving the actual.” It mentions they are quick to see how things could be different than they are. This all points to the person who loves Fantasy and yearns for the places that one can only immagine.

Three of the questions pertaining to these two traits also strongly suggest that Sensing people would not like Fantasy and that Intuitive people would.

children often:
a) do not make themselves usefull enough
b) daydream enough

you prize most in yourself
a) a good sense of reality
b) a good immagination

you have more fun with
a) hands-on experience
b) blue-sky fantasy

There are, however, other aspects to both of these traits which do not necessarily imply a preference for Fantasy or Reality, and which I believe are the true core of the S/N personality difference. Kiersey describes the differences between INtuitive and Sensing people as mostly having to do with prefering abstract thought or ‘concrete’ experiences, forming concepts or making acurate observations. The INtuitive person likes to analyse, while the Sensing person likes to act. As the names suggest, the basic difference in question with these two traits is whether one is tuned in more to one’s physical senses or to one’s intuition. Intuition is defined as knowing or understanding something without the need of conscious reasoning. Kiersey describes this phenomenon as ideas coming to someone as a whole, rather than step by step, and suggests that Intuitives are able to grasp ‘the big picture’ easily without paying attention to the details of individual cases - their minds quickly make connections and work out logical results without thinking about the data involved. In contrast he describes Sensing people as having sharp senses, picking up on details in their surroundings and coming to conclusions through experience or experimentation, prefering hands-on action to theorizing and philosophizing.

It is my belief that the Jung/Myers-briggs/Kiersey theory has taken the basic traits of S and N a little too far in concluding that people who like experience and are tuned into their senses do not have an interest in Fantasy (on the grounds that it is not real and therefore not readily experiencable) and that people who prefer contemplation and abstract thought do like Fantasy (because they like unseen possibilities). While it may appear to be a fairly logical conclusion, my experience tells me otherwise. I believe these two traits can predict how a person who likes Fantasy will persue that interest, but not whether he will have that interest or not. It is possible, that what makes a difference here is how strongly one prefers Sensing or Intuition, or how well one has developed his weaker trait. I am not entirely convinced by this theory, feeling as though I have observed people with strong and weak preferences for either trait who still do or do not like Fantasy. While I don’t have conclusive case studies, and admit this is worth further consideration, my experience does not seem to back up the strength theory.

What first brought the Sensing = No Fantasy assumption into question for me was the description later on in the book Please Understand Me of the SP (Sensing Perceiving) person as being the Artisan. Now, the word Artisan in that book is used to mean more than the traditional artist, it is meant to encompas most physical activities in which the doer is constantly refining his skill - it refers to Craftsmen, Musicians, Athletes, and Entertainers as well as Artists. Yet in Entertainment, Art and Craftwork there are definately examples of Artisans devoted to Fantasy, Immagination, and the Unreal Possibilities, those who show us visions of Variations on Reality. Futhermore, the typical picture of the Artist is of someone who is not very ‘grounded in reality,’ nor very ‘practical,’ but rather, someone who tends to live eccentrically, as if insisting upon creating his own reality rather than submitting to live “inside the box.” An artist can surely experience and appreciate intensely his sensations, being greatly moved by color or shape, texture or flavor, while at the same time prefering an immaginative, rather than “factual,” approach to life.

Furthermore the description of the NT (Intuitive Thinking) as the Rational or the Scientist doesn’t imply a fascination with Fantasy. Kiersey explains them as desiring “To be able to understand, control, predict, and explain realities.” The emphasis of this temperament is aquiring knowledge, and being competant. This desire for knowlege and understanding, this obsession with having all his facts right and all his logic flawless certainly brings to mind the Scholar and in particular the Scientist, two roles which do not have much of a connection with Fantasy or an obsession with worlds that do not actually exist (and therefore cannot be tested and experimented with, nor studied to a great degree - I should think one would be hard-pressed to find any Proffessors of Narnian History nor any Scientific Periodicals on the biochemistry of Vulcans.) While I do personally know a number of NTs who are fans of Fantasy and Science-Fiction, I feel it is very safe to assume that there are also many who have little interest in such things. As a further note, I would like to point out that abstract thinking encompasses a great deal more than immagining Fantasy, and is necessary in many fields seeking to understand reality. The intangible is not synonimous with the unreal, therefore it can hardly be assumed that one who enjoys intangible thought must enjoy things which do not actually exist. An N’s oppenness to seeing possibilities may yet easily be kept within the realm of actual possibilities, rather than necessarily extending beyond to the physically impossible.

After having noticed these discrepancies in trait and temperament decriptions in the book, this idea that a love of Fantasy cannot be tied to Intuition has brooded in the back of my mind for many years. During this time, I feel that my observations of people have confirmed my suspicion that creativity in the form of Fantasy is not only the N’s realm. I am uncertain whether there are certain personality types who almost uniformly embrace or disdain Fantasy, but my inclination is to say that all the 16 personality types may be found amongst both the Fantasy and the Reality camps. As my own interest is planted very firmly on the side of Fantsy, I find myself aquainted mainly with a social group which shares this interest, yet I feel that amongst the various people I have encountered in places such as the Star Wars Club at school there has been a good mixture of personality types who deomonstrate their love of Fantasy in unique ways.

It has been my involvement on deviantART, an online art community, which I think finally provoked me to seriously question, once again, the apparent theory in the Kiersey books that Sensing is related to Reality loveing people and Intuition is related to Fantasy lovers. While browsing and searching on the deviantART site, I have found a great deal of excellent art and craftwork which is centered around the concept of Fantasy or Scienc-Fiction. There are many tallented artists who paint picture after picture of immaginary landscapes and fantastical creatures, not merely illustrating some other N’s ideas, but soley of their own creation. While some of them are also writers and contemplaters, many of them do not evidence N-like tendancies, and show marked ability in the hands-on realm, which at least I as an N do not feel capable of achieving. There are many tallented craftsmen who turn out elaborate clothing, armor, jewelry, wands, swords, books, figurines etc. all with a Fantasy or Sci-fi theme. These are clearly great artisans who are also obsessed with Fantasy, and who turn their acute senses, ability to work with physical tools and media, and their love of experience toward making the Immaginary come to life; exploring, visualizing, and enjoying the Not-Reality in their own hands-on style. While they will never be able to sprout wings and fly in this life, they still create wings for themselves in whatever their preferred medium may be. The Intuitive’s preference for thinking and immagination (in-mind creativity), for writing and analysing does not seem to explain the profuse Fantasy-based physical creations I see and experience on deviantART or in the overall Fantasy/Sci-fi community. The number of booths at Renaissance Faires or other Conventions, and websites offering things like finely crafted lightsabers and magic wands, cloaks and wings, I think is ample evidence of the complimentary coupling of a love for Fantasy and an orientation towards the tangible. While the Intuitive who loves Fantasy will be good at seeing the possibilities of other worlds in his mind, I believe the Sensing person who loves Fantasy will be good at crafting such other-worldly possibilites so that they can be more vividly experienced than just in the mind.

In my own experience of drawing or sewing I find that the action and the immagination are one. I do not so much immagine an idea completely and then make it after a dutifull drone-like fashion. The vision happens and shifts in the doing itself. The concept of a fairy becomes as it is drawn. The doing is not separate from the immagining, even though the strong N who is not often caught up in action may feel inclined to believe that. The question to me, seems to be whether someone prefers mostly to immagine abstractly through words and mental immages, or to immagine concretely through crafting and action.

Further proof of this idea comes from taking note of the differences and similarities between myself and my husband Mark. We both have a love of fantasy, and are not content with or committed to the world As It Is. We like to come up with new and different ideas and visions of how things could be. However, we tend to approach our passion for fantastical immaginings in quite different ways. Mark demonstrates very SP-like tendancies. He persues new experiences and loves to keep himself busy with activities (without the stimulation of something to be working on he falls asleep easily). He loves tools and is very good at making use of them. He prefers to listen to books on tape while working on projects with his hands, rather than just sitting and reading. He is concerned with how things function and is good at figuring out how to make things work. In spite of all this S-ness, he does not think that Fantasy is a waste of time or see it as impractical. He loves to make unusual clothing for himself which is unlike anything seen on the streets. He draws designs of other-wordly clothes, makes leather hats that look like they came out of a fantasy film, and makes elaborate maps of entiely made up lands. He enjoys watching Fantasy and Science-fiction movies, and prefers imagining such settings to keeping up on Real World places and events. He envisions a future that is more in line with life in a Fantasy setting than life as we know it here and now. He plots how to dig a Hobbit Hole and researches the construction of tree-house dwellings. He’s always busy finding a way to bring his ideas and visions into existance. In contrast to Mark’s hands-on approach to creating fantasy, being an NF, I tend to mostly enjoy Fantsy by immagining scenes and stories in my head, and in writing them down and describing them, or in reading about them in books. I do enjoy making clothes and things which create a more Fantasy styled atmosphere for myself, but the primary field for my immagination as well as my non-fantasy related interests, is thought. In true N style I love to contemplate, reflect, discuss, theorize, analyse, and philosophize more often than I like to get my hands on things (other than my keyboard). While Mark prefers a day in which he made something, I prefer a day in which I thought and wrote about something. Yet I do not experience in him the “down-to-earth, no-nonsense” type of person who prefers Reality to Possibility and has no time for Fantasy, as the orriginal descripion of the S would imply should accompany his focus on tangible experience. He strikes me very much as an S in his approach to life, yet is definately a Fantasy/Sci-fi enthusiast.


---- Considering J and P ----
At one time I thought that perhaps the enjoyment of Fantasy might be linked to the P trait in opposition to the J trait, though I don’t think it is a very good correlation. My theory was that J people tend to be more work and duty oriented, predisposing them to disaprove of things which seem too flighty and time wasting - under which unreal Fantasy would fall. However, I believe this theory made sense to me only because my experience of people with strong J leanings happened to be comprised of people who were also not interested in Fantasy. I don’t think that prefering structure and closure nesessarily results in disliking Fantasy, though I am not certain of any specific examples for or against this among people I know.

---- What about T and F? ----
An F person might be inclined to think that someone who values logic so much wouldn’t relish all the illogic found in Fantasy stories filled with magic, nor with Sci-fi stories wich are often a bit fuzzy when it comes to actual scientific explainations of all the amazing technology portrayed in them. Yet, I know from first-hand experience that there are numerous NTs in the Fantasy/Sci-fi community, so that possibility is definately ruled out. I might venture a guess, however, that Ts might possibly be more inclined toward Science-Fiction while Fs might possibly be more inclined toward Fantasy. I have no proof of this, merely an intuitive ‘feeling’ and vague memories of experiencing more Sci-fi books with particularly T-like characters and a more detached narrative voice, while it feels like more attention is payed to feelings in many of the Fantasy books I’ve read.

I think there is no need to bring Introversion and Extraversion into question on this because it seems quite obvious that there are both Es and Is who prefer Fantasy or Reality.


---- Final Thoughts ----
In my personal face to face experience it seems I have encountered a majority of Is Ns and Ps in the Fantasy/Sci-fi community, but I don’t feel I can truely link any one of these traits to being the cause of loving Fantasy, and would guess that this majority is partly due to simply gravitating toward people like myself. I do not think that the love of Fantasy even comes down to a particular combination of the traits S/N T/F and J/P because it seems as though I can easily picture a person of any of the combinations who doesn’t have an interest in Fantasy. I have no proof that this is so, of course, but that is what it feels like.

Even if there is some correlation between certain traits and a predisposition to likeing Fantasy or Reality, I still feel that this is a separate fundamental difference in personality which, although it may be affected by other traits, is not explained entirely by any of them. It is my oppinion that the S and N descriptions should not include the connotations of being interested in Reality and Fantasy respecitvely, but that personality typing would benefit greatly by adding another set of traits to the list of basic preferences which would adress the orientation toward the Real World or Immagined Worlds as separate from a preference for concrete or abstract experience. I’m not sure what letters could best be used to represent these preferences. While R would work fine for the Reality focused people, F has already been taken by Feeling, and therefore it would seem a different word is needed to stand for the Fantasy focused people. Immaginary doesn’t work because of course I has already been taken twice. I suppose that in the pecident of INtuition M might be adopted, but that has too close an association with the word Magic and would perhaps be misconstrued. After the same pattern, we could use A instead of F, but I will grant that Fantasy may also seem too disctinct a word to encompass Science-Fiction which I mean for it to also cover. Thus for now, I will leave you with the question of what word might suite the opposite of Reality best.

The Psychology of a Messy Room

There are various factors which contribute to messy rooms

pack-rat-ism - the accumulation of many objects
oblivion -being unaware of surroundings or tuning out the environment
busy-ness - rushing off in the middle of things and not having time to clean up later
distraction - being drawn away from a task, then starting to clean and being distracted again
convenience - liking to have everything close at hand
multi-tasking - starting many projects at once and working on them simultaneously
stickynotes - leaving things out to remind you to finish them

The traits most likely to be correlated to messy rooms are F, P, and N.

Fs are more likely to accumulate useless sentimental items, things they simply liked though they don't know what to do with them. They value the presence of many items, and the overall feel of the room based not on what is functional and efficient, but what conjurs good feelings. This allows some things which may seem to just add clutter to not be considered 'in the way' by the F because it's mere presence is its purpose. They are also likely to choose to spend their time doing things they feel like doing, which may not be mundane attention to clean up. However, if they realise that having a clean room will make someone else feel better, they are likely to bite-the-bullet and take care of it.

Ps have no problem leaving things open-ended, and thus have a tendancy to start many projects and work on them off and on depending on their mood, time, and supplies. Because none of the projects are actually finnished, they don't want to put them away because that would be unessessary bother, and would make it even less likely for them to get back to it and actually finish it. They don't tend to divide projects into distinct steps which they work on in planned segments of time, like Js do, and so the 'finished-clean-up' bell never rings for them. They also don't have a high value of order or structure and probably don't have a specific place where they feel each item belongs, thus wherever it is is where it should be, especially if where it is is within convenient reach. They like to let thoughts and ideas brew for a long time before actually choosing what to do, and leaving the things out that they're thinking about aids in this process of slow-brewing. This slowness to finalize, also means that their projects are in the works for much longer than a Js would typically be. They are less likely to care about social expectations to keep things orderly as well, so they don't feel pressured to get things out of the way in order to maintain their reputation.

Finally, the N's inward focus on thoughts makes them prone to ignoring their physical surroundings. An N is likely to be so absorbed in the world of ideas that he simply doesn't notice what is immediately arround him, shutting off his 5 senses to better tune into his 6th. Even if an N is aware that things are getting messy he is unlikely to place such a boring, and fairly meaningless, task high on his priorities, allowing himself to remain focused on thinking rather than shifting into the realm of action. Concerned with contemplating deeper meaning in life he freely procrastinates doing everyday tasks which seem so unimportant in the large scheme of things, and which are certainly less fullfilling to him.

Perception of Openness

This is again, just throwing around my own theories. There are some people that are perceived in our society to be "Open" and others who are generally considered "closed-minded." Here is my theory on which traits make a person appear more "Open" in our culture.

Open
Extraverts - to people
Intuition - to ideas and unseen possibilities
Sensing - to experience
Feeling - to emotion
Perceiving - to options

Closed
Introverts - to people
Sensing - to ideas and unseen possibilities
Intuition - to experience
Thinking - to emotion
Judging - to options

Obviously, Etraverted people are open to interacting with other people. They are open to meeting new people, open to working with people, open to talking with people, open to sharing their thoughts and feelings with people, open to sharing experiences with other people. And in contrast Introverted people more often try not to meet new people, avoid talking with them, dislike working with them, reserve their thoughts and feelings for a select few, and prefer solitary rather than shared experiences.

The next highest factor in being seen as open or closed is found in the J/P traits. Judgers like to plan things out, stick to scheduals, and follow instructions. They tend to believe there is a right and wrong way to go about things, and like to form their oppinions of what view is right or wrong on any given topic. They do not welcome unexpected changes in plans, and have difficulty accepting other people's oppinions that do not line up with their own. Thus, Js are frequently seen as "closed-minded" or too stuck in their routines to make progress. Perceivers on the other hand tend to be spontaneous and do not feel any particular need to stick to plans. They like to take in as much information as possible, considering many options and many sides of an issue before making any conclusions about it, and even then they prefer tentative statements and are open to exceptions. Thus they are seen as open-minded, able to hear and consider other viewpoints, willing to adapt to change, take life as it comes rather than how they planned it, and able to blaze new trails and see new options.

Feeling people are frequently seen as being open to others, because they are able to sense others emotions and willing to share in them. They are also more likely to be demonstrative of their own feelings. Thinking people, on the otherhand, are generally less in tune with others feelings, and not very interested in sharing their own. They are generally more open to criticism and more open to participating in debate or conflict situations, but these things are not as valued by society as social tact, keeping harmony, and entering into the spirit of the moment with other people. Those who are in tune with feelings are seen as open-hearted, while those who prefer 'cold' logic are seen as shutting people out or hiding their true feelings.

Lastly, notice N and S are both perceived as open in different ways. I would venture to say, however, that overall our culture seems to expect people to be more open to experiences than to imagination. My reasoning is that people who aren't willing to try new experiences, such as eating new foods, learning new skills, or participating in events they haven't been to before, are often ridiculed as boring, spoil-sports, scaredy-cats, stubborn, and self-limiting. However, people who don't posses great immaginations, or who don't easily infer possibilities that aren't right in front of them, usually do not recieve much ridicule. Instead they are often respected for their practicality and 'down-to-earth'ness. An S gathers data through experiences, and thus is more willing to taste new foods before deciding if he likes them. An S focuses more on the outer world of experiences and is thus more likely to get involved in doing different things. Therefore an S is likely to be see as generally 'open' in society. An N who is good at coming up with new ideas will often be praised for 'thinking outside the box'. Yet if this 'open mind' is coupled with a less open approach to activites and experiences, the openness of the N is likely to be overlooked, or may even be overshaddowed by criticisms of his less open approch to activity. The N who is too involved in thinking to do anything with his ideas can often be seen as someone who closes himself off from life, living in a thin immaginary world of thought.

Thus the personality type which I think is most likely to be seen as "Open" by society is the ESFP and the type which is most likely to be seen as "Closed" by society is the INTJ. For further example, an ESFJ may be seen as more closed than an ENFP. Of coure it doesn't necessarily follow that those perceptions of society are actually true.

Trying to understand Sensing vs. Intution

This Kiersy personality aspect often seems hard for people to grasp and understand, I know it has been for me......I think I've got it down now a bit better.

An example of the difference between sensing and intuition:

iNtuitives stand back and look at a situation, and then comment on it - theorizing why it is the way it is, how it came to be that way, whether it is good or bad, how it affects other things, how it is related to other things, how it could be changed, why it won’t be changed, how it will continue to develope, and what other people may think about it and why they may think as they do. - They enjoy theoretical and analytical discussion and mental exploration of things and are satisfied when they feel they have fully understood something.

A Sensing person will most likely be in the thick of the action to begin with, but when they do stand back and look at a situation they'll say "This is how it is" and are content to leave the conversation at that. If they do any analysis they are likely to focus on discussing exactly how to impliment certain tactics and then get right back into action. Analysis in and of itself is of no use or interest to them - it must result in application. They believe that something cannot be understood untill the idea has been tested. Thus their analysis takes the form of experimentation. They do not think one can 'know' without physical experience of the conclusion. Becoming adept at something is a driving motivation for them, and the point of theorizing is to further their ability to do whatever it is well. They feel satisfied when they feel they have mastered some action.

The book states that this trait divides people more than any other. While I don't think I've had as many arguments or personality clashes with people because of this as I have because of Thinking/Feeling or Judging/Percieving, I think this is a trait that naturally separates people as they interact with others. INtuitives are much more likely to talk about abstract ideas and theories, and thus will more often find themselves talking with other people who also like ideas and theories. Sensing people are much more likely to be involved in activities and to talk about things they have done rather than the intagible or things they have not experienced, thus they will more often find themselves doing things with other people who prefer action to contemplation, and talking with people about experiences rather than theories. So just by a kind of 'natural selection' if you'll excuse my stealing the term, people will tend to find they are friends with other people of the same type in this regard.

It is this trait that most greatly affects what you do and what you talk about, which naturally affects who you meet and who you connect best with.

This is not to be confused with Extraversion and Introversion, which it often can be.

A Sensing person who is extraverted will seek activities with other people over solitary activities.
A Sensing person who is introverted will seek activities that can be done alone over social activities.
An iNtutitive person who is extraverted will seek discussion of theories and ideas with other people.
An iNtuitive person who is an introvert will contemplate or write down ideas and theories on their own, and choose to read books for extra insight rather than talking with others to gain more insight.

Furthermore
A Sensing person who is Judging will be active fullfilling duties
A Sensing person who is Perceiving will be active playing or honing skills
An iNtuitive person who is Judging will apply his thought to making conclusions about the world
An iNtuitive person who is Perceiving will use his 6th sense to find all the possibilities

Interactions and Relationships of Traits

These are my own thoughts:
Intuition: primarily concerned with the inner or immaterial world of thoughts and emotion. Their action is mental/spiritual action. Their tools logic and emotions.
Thus it follows Intuition is more related to Thinking and Feeling which are inner methods of dealing with the world.

Sensing: primarily concerned with the outer world of physical sensations. Their primary action is in the world of the body, not the mind. Their body is their tool to observe and act upon the world around them.
Thus it follows that Sensing is more related to Judging and Percieving which are also concerned with how you act in the world.

If a person is more focused on the immaterial world, he will be constantly interacting with thoughts and feelings, and thus these traits will augment eachother. I would guess that an Intuitive's preference for thinking or feeling would appear more dominant to people than their judging or percieving trait. I would also guess that an Intuitive would be more likely to develope the less perfered half of the Thinking/Feeling pair than he would be to develope the less perfered half of the Judging/Perceiving pair.
If a person is more focused on the material world and acting in it, he will be constantly using his faculties of observation and organization to interact with that world. Thus I would guess that a Senser's preference for Perceiving or Judging would appear more dominant than his preference for Thinking or Feeling. He would be more likely to develope the less perfered half of the Judging/Perceiving pair, than he would the less prefered of the Thinking/Feeling pair.

While Extraversion and Introversion deal primarily with one's social style and energy source, some correlation can be made between Extraversion which demands attention to the outer world, because that is where people are, and Sensing. And some correlation can be made between Introversion, which directs attention inward, and Intuition which focuses on inner knowledge and experience.

While these things are not the same, it would seem likely that a Senseing Extraverted person might be slightly better at connecting with people becuase they will be more aware of their surroundings and thus opportunities to talk with other people. The more a person is engaged in action out in the world, the more likely he will be to cross paths with other people. And an Intuitive Extravert will be more likely to find himself either absorbed in thought, or 'doing' things inside, in a more fixed place and thus less likely to notice or cross paths with other people. Likewise, the Sensing Introvert will be more likely to make observations of people and at least be aware of them as he is focused on the outer world, even if he is not generally driven to talk with the people he sees. On the other hand the Intuitive Introvert is most likely to be totally unaware of other people, not only because he is not seeking interaction, but because his mind is perpetually turning inwards to the realm of ideas and thus not taking in his surroundings.

Now The Feeling trait disposes people to be more 'friendly' in that they feel natural empathy for people, wether or not they like to spend a lot of time with them. Thus the Feeling trait may lessen the Introverted trait, or may augment the Extraversion trait. Likewise the Thinking trait may augment the Introverted trait because it lends to viewing people objectively, more as separat entities, not emotionally entangled with oneself. The impact of relationships on a Thinking person may be slightly less strong because he does not get emotionally involved, and will be less likely to be moved by the appeals of others for attention.

So my idea is basically that traits will augment or weaken other traits, making certain traits much stronger in some people than in others. It also may happen that certain trait combinations will make for overall stronger identification with their type, vs having a more Middle of the Road personality. Additionally one Type may greatly favor one trait, while another Type only mildly favors one trait over the others.

Allong with my thoughts on how traits interact, there is also the 'official' correlation of Judging(organizing) augmenting Thinking and Feeling because these two are used in making decisions. And Perceiving(observing) augmenting Sensing and Intuition because these two are used in making observations. The 'official' dominance theory also includes the E/I bearing on what the dominant trait is, making the Introvert's dominant trait opposite of it's J/P preference.

Following I have spelled out the 16 types granting each a value of 1 to begin with, and then adding + or - 1 for each trait's augmenting or diminishing influence on the others. Some of the traits influence two ways, and some only influence one direction I think. When I mention (ballance) in parentheses I'm refering to the difference between the lowest number and highest number on the different traits and whether or not preference seems to be weighted in one trait, or more evenly distributed between all four. Traits that come up with a 0 ot -1 value do not indicate actually being the opposite trait, the preference for them is simply much weaker, and may allow for the opposite trait to be more easily developed.

so the example goes
Extraversion +1 from Sensing. +1 from Feeling.
Sensing +1 from Extraversion.
Feeling +1 from Extraversion.
Judging +1 from Sensing.

E+1+1 S+1 F+1 J+1 : E=3 S=2 F=2 J=2 :9 ESFJ Dominant E (even ballance)
E+1+1 S+1+1 F P+1 : E=3 S=3 F=1 P=2 :9 ESFP Dominant E & S (medium ballance)
I+1+1 N+1+1 T+1 J : I=3 N=3 T=2 J=1 :9 INTJ Dominant I & N (medium ballance)
I+1+1 N+1 T+1+1 P : I=3 N=2 T=3 P=1 :9 INTP Dominant I &T (medium ballance)

E-1+1 S+1 T+1 J+1 : E=1 S=2 T=2 J=2 :7 ESTJ Prominant S T J (even ballance)
E-1+1 S+1+1 T P+1 : E=1 S=3 T=1 P=2 :7 ESTP Dominant S (medium ballance)
I+1-1 N+1+1 F+1 J : I=1 N=3 F=2 J=1 :7 INFJ Dominant N Prominant F (medium ballance)
I+1-1 N+1 F+1+1 P : I=1 N=2 F=3 P=1 :7 INFP Dominant F Prominent N (medium ballance)

E-1+1 N+1 F+1 P : E=1 N=2 F=2 P=1 :6 ENFP Prominant N & F (even ballance)
E-1+1 N F+1+1 J : E=1 N=1 F=3 J=1 :6 ENFJ Dominant F (medium)
I-1+1 S-1+1 T J+1 : I=1 S=1 T=1 J=2 :5 ISTJ Prominant J (even ballance)
I-1+1 S-1 T+1 P+1 : I=1 S=0 T=2 P=2 :5 ISTP Prominant T & P (medium ballance)

E-1-1 N-1 T+1+1 J : E=-1 N=0 T=3 J=1 :3 ENTJ Dominant T (most unballance)
E-1-1 N-1+1 T+1 P : E=-1 N=1 T=2 P=1 : 3 ENTP Prominant T (medium ballance)
I-1-1 S-1+1 F J+1 : I=-1 S=1 F=1 J=2 :3 ISFJ Prominant J (medium ballance)
I-1-1 S-1 F+1 P+1 : I=-1 S=0 F=2 P=2 :3 ISFP Prominant F & P (medium ballance)

The proposition, which I have no evidence at this point to confirm or deny, is that because of the augmenting or ballanceing interaction of the various traits, some Personality Types are more likely to identify strongly with their type's profile, while others are more likely to feel 'in between' types, agreeing only to a certain extent with the description of their type. Or perhaps this relates more to other people's perceptions of someone, than their own identification with their type.

This may be a totally bogus idea, and people from all types may equally feel strongly associated with their type or only midly so. I do believe that whatever the case, it will be further affected by the strength of one's preference for each of the traits. Here I am assuming that the person answered 100% for each of the letters in his type (which rarely happens in real life), so we may say that this is comparing strong ISFPs with stong ESFJs (for example) and saying that a strong ESFJ will still Identify more with his profile than a strong ISFP will identify with his. Or it may indicate, rather, that it may be easier to pinpoint an ESFJ than it is to determine if someone is an ISFP.

Here are the 'official' Dominant Traits compared with this evaluation of them. My conclusions are in parentheses when different from the official answer. (&_) represents that these traits tied in my evaluation system and (+_) indicates that my system rated these seecond in the hierarchy but close in strength to the dominant.

ESFJ = F --- (E) related to F
ESFP = S (&E)
INTJ = N (&I)
INTP = T (&I)

ESTJ = T (&SJ)
ESTP = S
INFJ = N (+F)
INFP = F (+N)

ENFJ = F
ENFP = N (&F)
ISTJ = S ---- (J +IST) so, somewhat related
ISTP = T (&P)

ENTJ = T
ENTP = N ----- (T) related
ISFJ = S ---- (J +SF) so, somewhat related
ISFP = F (&P)

Kiersey/Meyers-Briggs Traits in a Nutshell

Extroverion/Introversion = With Whom.
Others, Community vs. Self, Individuality

Sensing/Intuition = What.
Action, Experience, Skill vs. Contemplation, Analysis, Understanding

Thinking/Feeling = Why.
Logic, Efficiency, Data vs. Emotion, Whim, Harmony

Judging/Percieving = How.
Control, Conclusions, Order, Duty vs. Discovery, Exploration, Spontinaeity, Play

The "Short" Keirsey/Myers-Briggs Theory

As this is the theory I am most familiar with, and most fond of, it will probably be the topic of most of my posts. Thus, I figure it would be helpful for those who aren’t familiar with it to offer a “brief” summary here in my own words as a reference. I'm not the official word on this, of course, and I've gathered my understanding of this theory from a variety of sources, though primarily from Keirsey's Please Understand Me books.

The Basics
E/I S/N T/F J/P
There are Four Trait Scales, each with two opposite preferences, which form the basis of this Personality Theory. A combination of 4 letters, out of the 8 possibilities, representing one’s preferences on the four scales make up the “name” for each type. Thus there are 16 different Types. It is also recognized that someone may be close enough to the center of one of the scales to be considered a combination of both traits then represented by an X. However most people exhibit some traits from both sides while clearly favoring one or the other.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1. Extraversion and Introversion - represented by E and I
This is primarily concerned with where we get our energy, from people or personal time. Our desire for Interaction or Introspection is determined by which drains and which energizes us.

Extraverted people feel most energized and alive when they are with other people. Whenever they are alone they seek to find a chance to interact with others. Their personal pursuits usually take second place to spending time with friends or family. They welcome interruptions from others and when working alone will take frequent breaks to go talk to someone in order to keep their energy up. They prefer group work and like a sense of camaraderie. They hate feeling left out, and may feel bad about themselves when they can't find someone to talk to. They enjoy meeting people, talk easily with strangers, and have many friends. They are driven to seek interaction.
- - - - Extraverts are often uncomfortable alone and tend to feel bored and unmotivated when they are by themselves. They may even feel a little scared of having to keep themselves company, preferring the distraction of others to introspection. It’s not that most Extraverts don’t know themselves or have an individual identity, but they derive a lot of their sense of self from their interactions with others. As they value relationships over personal interests, who they are is more easily shaped by those they spend time with, as is their sense of confidence and satisfaction with life. They will often take up the interests and activities of their friends so that they can enjoy doing them together. They also like to draw people into their interests. They can't stand staying home when they know their friends are out doing something together, and are likely to drop everything to go join them. They don’t really like thinking to themselves or doing things on their own, finding everything to be more rewarding when done in company. The more the merrier is their motto.
- - - - Extraverts tend to approach everyone as friends and openly share their thoughts and feelings with whomever happens to be around. They often think out loud and like to talk through things with others, incorporating their input as part of their own thoughts. They usually don’t mind attracting attention to themselves or being in the spotlight. They make new friends wherever they go, always able to find something to talk about with people. They love finding out about people’s interests or personal lives, love hearing their stories and sharing their own. They are aware of societal groups and tend to be savvy concerning the knowledge interests and trends among their peers. They people watch and speculate about others lives and are highly aware of all the people around them. They tend to feel energized in a crowd and enjoy entering into the group mentality, whether it be as an audience at a movie, dancing at a club, or playing on a team. Shared experiences bring a light to their eye and enthusiasm to their actions.
- - - - Extraverts like being out and about with people, and enjoy being in social places. They like malls, bars, amusement parks, fairs, conventions, parties and all kinds of social events. They keep their doors or windows open, inviting people to come in, and find ways to bring personal activities out to places like coffee shops or parks. When they are by themselves they seek interaction and if they can’t call up a friend, are likely to choose to sit in public places where they have the possibility of striking up conversation, or simply absorbing the energy of the people around them. They place themselves in the path of new people all the time. While they usually have a steady group of friends they see often, they won’t stick just with them when there are other people around. They will introduce themselves or invite people to join them whenever they can and are excited by making new acquaintances. They greet people on the street, talk with people in lines, make comments to strangers in stores, and get to know the checkers at their grocery store. They hardly ever seek seclusion and don’t find the presence of other people too distracting. They are likely to feel the urge to talk to people who are near them and will rarely ignore people.
- - - - Shyness from low self-esteem can be devastating to Extraverts who crave the acceptance and company of others. Longing to connect, yet too afraid to do so leaves them feeling unfulfilled and lost. On the other hand, some extraverts can be quite overbearing, assuming everyone wants to hear them. Their identity may be so wrapped up in those around them that they expect others to do as they do and may manipulate them into their own image rather than giving them some personal space.
- - - - In conversation, Extraverts are forthcoming and engaging. They are usually friendly and speak easily with strangers as well as friends. They jump in and add their two cents, sometimes interrupting or cutting others off. They have a tendency to speak loudly, and don’t mind if people beyond their group happen to hear them. They listen in on other’s conversations and don’t feel shy to contribute if they have something to add. If they hear people asking a question to someone else they are likely to offer any information they have. They tend to assume people want to talk if they look alone or unoccupied, and readily initiate or draw people into their conversations. Their business is everyone’s and everyone’s business is theirs. They like to talk about other people, and may be prone to gossip.

Introverts are most energized by spending time in personal pursuits and introspection. They do not feel a strong need to interact, even with their close friends, and will more often choose to do something on their own than with others. They enjoy keeping themselves company and are perfectly capable of entertaining themselves. They don't often feel lonely, and are often more relieved than offended by being 'left out' of other people's social plans or conversations. They don't feel like something is wrong with them because they don't have a lot of friends, and an empty callander doesn't make them feel like they are missing out on life. They are more likely to feel bored and lonely in a crowd than on their own. They thrive on time spent pursuing their personal Interests which they usually choose over relating with others.
- - - - Introverts are drained by interaction with others, even when they are with people they like, and need to spend time alone after social events to recuperate. It is not unusual for an Introvert to leave a party early because he is tired, only to find himself feeling quite alert after a half hour at home. Knowing their social-energy is limited, they spend it wisely. They do not like to waste interaction with people who don’t mean something to them, and thus tend to keep acquaintances and strangers at a distance. They don’t go looking to make new friends, being content, and sometimes even overwhelmed, with those they already have. Often even when they are lonely, Introverts will wait to be discovered by potential friends rather than seeking them out and introducing themselves. They prefer to maintain a few deep relationships and keep superficial interaction to a minimum. As they need little social interaction they can maintain a sense of close friendship with relatively little interaction. They seem to handle long distance relationships well, and may not seek new friends even if their old friends no longer live near them. With family members they may share space, but maintain their concentration on private endeavors. They do not feel the need to interact with someone just because they are nearby and often maintain mental private space even when in a crowd.
- - - - Introverts tend to dislike small talk and superficial, unimportant conversations, and thus do all they can to avoid having to talk to acquaintances with whom they do not wish to cultivate a close relationship. They are likely to ignore strangers entirely, and in public places will focus only on their friends, or bury their nose in a book. They don’t like to invite attention or interruptions from people they don’t know, and don’t assume that strangers would want to talk with them. They often feel awkward meeting new people and have trouble finding things to talk about, since their preferred topics tend to be things which require more depth of relationship or specialized knowledge. They may not always be up on popular culture or common knowledge and thus feel lost when people attempt to make conversation with them. They are frequently absorbed in thir own thoughts or tasks and may find it jarring and unpleasantly distracting when people interrupt them, making it difficult for them to think of how to respond.
- - - - Introverts seek out privacy and prefer to spend time in their own homes, or secluded places. They may prefer getting take-out to eating in restaurants, or invite friends back to their place rather than hanging out at the pub or the mall. They feel more comfortable engaging with people on their own territory, and also like to cut down on the amount of strangers in the vicinity. Introverts are perfectly happy to do things by themselves, even things which others consider social activities. They will go to movies, shopping, or the beach alone and have a very good time of it. True introverts do not feel sorry for themselves when they are alone.
- - - - Their sense of self and personal energy is found mainly in the development of their Interests. They usually invest a lot more time and energy in their field of interest than Extraverts do, and find great fulfillment in furthering their knowledge and honing their skills. They are willing to put a great deal of time into study and practice while extraverts would grow bored of such solitary pursuits and go find someone to talk with. Introverts often meet their friends through their common interests and enjoy discussing their interests with them, although they will still tend to pursue them more often alone. They do not have a need for general social approval, which allows them freedom to pursue less popular interests without worrying about displeasing their peers. They may find it annoying when peers pester them about being different and can’t seem to just leave them alone, but they don’t feel any genuine regret for being different or not being part of the “in crowd.” As long as they have a few people who like them for who they are, Introverts can feel confident in themselves and content, even in the face of persecution from others. They inwardly laugh at other’s attempts to make them feel ostracized from a group they never desired to join in the first place.
- - - - Introverts prefer deep relationships to shallow ones, but also prefer those deep relationships to be few. Thus they may show two very different faces to the world. With their inner circle of friends and family they may be very open and expressive, even loud and dramatic, but to the world at large they present a closed or distant expression. They do not encourage others to engage them in conversation. They do not readily share their thoughts or opinions with outer-circle people, and feel that their emotions are none of their business. They usually wait to be asked before sharing their input, and wait to be introduced before talking to someone at all. In groups they tend to stand back and observe others, rather than participate, and do not like to be put in the spotlight. They may comment quietly to someone next to them, but don’t have the knack for interrupting when they have something to say, and so often the moment passes and they are overlooked. Within their 'inner-circle' of friends and family, however, they value the ability to be open, and want those people to understand and know them very well. They enjoy sharing their passions with their friends, and enjoy the sense of being part of a small tight-knitt group. Loyalty is important to them, and when they do let someone into their inner-circle they like to know it is going to be a long lasting relationship. They greatly value their true friends and do not desire to move on and find new friends when they move to a new town, or change jobs or schools. They like to engage in deep, meaningfull conversations which are often a continuation of past conversations. They enjoy the consistancy of knowing the people they spend time with, knowing what they like, their background and oppinions, what kinds of things they will say, how they will react, etc.
- - - - Not all Introverts are shy, even though they may be perceived as such. Shy Introverts don’t suffer as badly as shy Extraverts because they don’t watch social groups with longing. They try to connect with people less frequently, and thus suffer less often from their inability to do so. They still have their primary source of identity available to them, their personal Interests, even if they may wish they had someone to share them with. On the otherhand, Introverts naturally find themselves in fewer circumstances where they can meet others, and thus sometimes tragically waste the few opportunities they do have to make friends if they are too shy to make the initial connection.
- - - - In conversation, Introverts prefer to talk about their Interests more than about other people. They take more time to collect their thoughts before speaking and may pause before answering a question. They do not interrupt or jump into other people’s conversations. They may sit close and listen if they want to be a part of it, but will not speak unless they know they are welcome. In a large group they will speak quietly to one or two other people nearby rather than raising their voice to be heard by everyone. Among extraverts and outer-circle people they will usually stick to observation and withhold their thoughts and feelings. Among fellow Introverts they tend find it easier talk about things, and easier to find a chance to get a word in edgewise. With eachother they are able to recognize when others have something to say and tactfully finnish their piece and hand the conversation off to the next person. When they don’t feel overpowered they can enjoy mutual respect and easily fall into lengthy conversation. With their inner-circle they are comfortable sharing their inner thoughts and feelings, are more willing to speak up, interrupt, or take center-stage and may even appear extraverted.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2. Sensing and INtuition - represented by S and N
This is how we gather information and take in the world. It indicates what arena we most focus on or “live” in.

Sensing people rely on their 5 senses to tell them about the world. Thus their primary focus is on the physical outer world. They value experience and action, and feel alive in their sensations. They are most aware of and concerned with What IS, How Things ARE. They pay attention to Who, What, When, Where, and How. They are good at taking in details about the world around them. Some may be so attuned to their senses that they appear prophetical in their ability to know the truth about people or situations just like the famous Sherlock Holms on whom even the smallest detail is never lost.
- - - - Practical application is very important to them and they don’t like to waste their time on theories they can’t put into action, or information that has no relevance or practical use in their lives. They tend to be experiential learners and may find concepts and instruction dry or incomprehensible until they see it in action - in the doing they grasp and master it. They are more likely to act than to contemplate and move quickly from the point of Idea to Implementation. They like to develop their skills and are concerned with the practicality of method. Sensing people like to keep themselves busy or entertained, immersed in their experiences. They don’t like wasting time in inactivity and contemplation - thought demands action. They engage the world with their hands, their eyes, their ears, their mouths, and like working with objects and tools. They focus on what’s going on now, rather than possibilities or deeper meaning.
- - - - An easy place to take note of this preference is in conversation. Sensing people most enjoy talking about their experiences. They tell about their day, describe things they’ve seen, explain how to do something. They don’t engage for long in abstract theorizing, and often want concrete examples in order to keep their minds from wandering during a discussion of ideas. Ss will often talk about what they are doing together at the moment, or are likely to move from discussion into activity before long. Ss may feel confused by Ns long involved theoretical discussions and feel frustrated by the Ns tendency to get “sidetracked” into them.

Intuitive people rely on their intuition to tell them about the world. Their minds are geared for making connections, detecting patterns, and seeing possibilities. They often understand or know things without having to have them explained in detail, or without doing much research. The mere mention of an idea can give them an understanding of the whole, as their minds quickly work out all the implications and related facets. In essence, they can see without seeing and experience without actually experimenting - this is Intuition. They are concerned with Understanding Why much more than knowing facts. They are not content to merely observe how things are, but find themselves automatically analyzing Why things are the way they are, how they got to be that way, how they affect other things, the future possibilities, their significance in the grand scheme of things, etc. And by “things” I don’t mean physical objects so much as underlying principles, ideas, beliefs, systems; “things” such as society, the nature of consciousness, literary archetypes, the meaning of life.
- - - - Their primary focus is on the inner immaterial world of ideas. They live much more in their minds than in their physical bodies. They relish intellect and emotion and feel most alive when working mentally with ideas, as opposed to physically with their hands. Their drive is more to Understand than to Do and they may dwell much longer on thinking about something before acting on it, or may never get past imagining and planning to implementation. They may feel rather detached from the world around them, and can seem unaware of their environment or miss noticing details. They usually thrive in academic situations and don’t need a lot of action to keep themselves alert or focused. Their minds are always engaged, while keeping their bodies active seems optional. Thinking is their primary mode of action. They engage the world with their Minds and relish imagination and contemplation.
- - - - In conversation an INtuitive will quickly move from the discussion of events and objects to the theoretical. The N’s mind is likely to wander during accounts of everyday things once an idea is triggered. Their focus is constantly drawn to the workings of their minds rather than input from outside, making it harder for them to be attentive. Ns like to talk about their theories and ideas, things they imagine, feelings, or future possibilities. Ns will sit and philosophize with eachother for long periods of time, but may find it difficult to hold a conversation with an S about more concrete things.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
3. Thinking and Feeling - represented by T and F
This is how we make decisions and value judgments. It indicates whether we prefer looking at things Objectively or Subjectively.

Thinking people value logic, facts, and practicality. They like things to make sense and are quick to notice faulty reasoning. Information is their realm and they don’t have much patience for the “airy-fairy” feelings and whims of their Feeling counterparts who strike them as inconsistent and illogical. They tend to distrust emotion, or consider it irrelevant, a mere side-note. The preference for Thinking doesn’t mean they are without feelings, but that when it comes down to it they will make the logical choice regardless of how they or others may feel about it. They tend to downplay their own feelings and are more comfortable with people telling them “that’s just how it is” or “snap out of it” than they are with sympathy. They don’t take things personally, and can usually take criticism well, being willing to consider what is said without letting feelings of hurt or defensiveness overpower them. They don’t find emotions to be very useful in solving problems, and thus set them aside. They are comfortable being impersonal and are likely to favor justice over mercy. They don’t mind competition or opposition and often enjoy debate, feeling that they think more accurately when faced with counter-arguments. They are able to disengage their personal feelings during such discussions and maintain cool logical thinking. They don’t get easily riled up nor easily depressed. They are not easily aware of feelings, their own or others’, and do not put much effort into trying to influence or understand their emotional landscape.
- - - - They may notice underlying emotions lending colour to life, but they don’t feel a great need to express these openly. They often feel uncomfortable with other people’s display of emotion, not really knowing how to respond. They do not naturally identify with others, and while they may understand a person feels bad and want to help them, they do not necessarily experience the feeling with them. Their practical minds often find it hard to just listen to another person’s troubles without wanting to jump in with a solution or plan. They prefer to deal with their own feelings privately, and when they do share them are likely to maintain a calm detached air. Their communication of affection, or dislike, is usually not direct but implied. They often feel awkward saying things like “I love you” and are not often in tune enough with how others feel or what they like or dislike to know when/if someone would like to be sent roses or given a hug, etc. Being uncomfortable with “sot” romantic expressions, it is sometimes actually through jibes and arguing that they show their affection. They may even find the excitement of opposition so attractive that they form relationships with people they can maintain a merry war with. Some Thinker’s may feel strong affection in spite of their difficulty in expressing it, while others may not make sentimental attachments, but form close relationships based more on mutual respect and practical support. Thinkers like to be independent and resourceful, and value being respected.
- - - - They tend more towards economy and practicality than extravagance, indulgence, or frivolous things. They keep things that are useful and tend to get rid of things that just collect dust. They don’t form sentimental attachment to possessions, and may not feel a need to orchestrate attractive surroundings. As long as it serves it’s function it makes little difference if it looks pretty. In fact, Thinkers may often find ornamentation annoyingly frivolous and unnecessary. This is not to say that none of them appreciate aesthetics, but that function comes first. Their style tends to be more sleek and minimalistic. They can be rather disgusted by the soft, the fluffy, the sentimental, the cute, the sweet, the abundance of extra, pretty, useless stuff that other people accumulate and enjoy. Usefulness is more important than looks, and too much attention to looks is illogical and wasteful. They are more oriented to knowing and mastering and being competent, than they are toward seeking comfort and enjoyment. They may seem to take life just a little more seriously, yet they do enjoy humor. Theirs is more often humor of wit or sarcasm, however, and they are not likely to entertain others with silly antics or stupid jokes. In their ability to remain emotionally detached from problems, they often find the difficult situations in life to be ironically amusing.
- - - - In conversation, Thinkers are uncomfortable talking about feelings, and are much more likely to talk about things or ideas than how they feel about them. They like to maintain a more objective scholarly approach to topics, rather than applying strong opinions and feelings. They relish debate and may play the devil’s advocate during a discussion. They don’t mind offering criticism, and do not tailor their comments to please others. They may choose to counter the opinions expressed by others, especially when they feel the conversation has turned too emotional, in an attempt to bring it back to the realm of logical discussion rather than emotional gushing. Even when they are amused or excited about something, they tend to tone down their feelings of exuberance or eagerness, and tend toward Understatement rather than overstatement. They may find feeling questions such as “How are you doing?” to be annoying and are less likely to respond with the expected good or bad assessment as with stating what they are doing or thinking about, or perhaps a snippy “How am I doing what?”

Feeling people value empathy, emotion, and expression. Straightforward facts hold little charm for them. Everything they experience is coloured with an emotion, whether slight or strong. They are highly aware of likes and dislikes and approach things subjectively, valuing their tastes and opinions. At any given time they are aware of how they are feeling, and are likely to mention it or display it in some way. They tend to enjoy expressing their emotions and will appear more excited about things than their Thinking counterparts (whom they often see as boring or inhuman). Feelings are something to be experienced, expressed, understood, shared, and cherished.
- - - - The importance of emotion in their lives doesn’t mean that all Fs are moody, depressed, angry, or unpredictable. Many Fs are happy stable people who simply take a warmer more expressive approach to life. Feelers have an instinct for empathy and want to be identified with themselves. They find it hard to connect with people who do not share and participate in their feelings of joy or sadness. The Thinker’s subdued expression and lack of identifying makes Feelers feel distant from them and not understood by them. Feelers dislike conflict and seek harmony and cooperation, usually emphasizing similarities and agreements. They see themselves as part of an emotional landscape, influencing others and being influenced by them. Feeling people are comfortable dealing with others’ emotions and are usually in tune with the emotional climate of those they are with. Maintaining good feelings between people and within themselves is important to them, so they try to understand people and value being tactful and considerate, particularly in the realm of how people may feel about something. Unless severely and personally hurt, they are willing to give people the benefit of the doubt and prefer mercy over justice. However, when they do feel wronged they are more likely to desire vengeance than the more detached Thinker.
- - - - Their feelings can affect their energy and focus, either giving them a surprising burst of energy or immobilizing them. They must express their feelings and deal with them in order to get past them and deal with the more rational aspects of a situation. Sometimes merely expressing a negative feeling will seem to solve half the problem for them, after which they are able to focus and regain hope or reason. Feelers like to be listened to and have their feelings affirmed, but aren’t necessarily asking for advice when they share their problems.
Preferring Feeling to Thinking doesn’t mean that they are illogical, but that when it comes down to it the feelings of others or themselves are a more weighty factor than convenience or practicality. Feelers are not very comfortable with objectivity or detachment and dislike the Impersonal. To feelers everything is Personal in one way or another, and they feel that people (or companies and administrations) ought to take the needs and assets of individuals into consideration. They are likely to take up the cause of another person with as much vehemence as if it was their own. They know how emotions affect things and think it is important to take them into account.
- - - - Feelers are more likely to be idealistic than they are willing to accept the uncomfortable “way it is.” They seek happiness and comfort in life, often buying or doing things simply because they like them. It’s convenient if something is useful, but it only needs to be beautiful for them to want it. Surrounding himself with things he finds attractive, does in fact serve a purpose to the Feeling person, though this may not seem apparent to a Thinker, for a pleasant environment disposes him to pleasant feelings which boosts his energy and enables him to act and focus more effectively (and more happily). Feelers form sentimental attachments with people and things. Their relationships are important to them, as are the things which remind them of those relationships. Feelers find it important to feel close and understood by others. Warmth and affection are natural to them, and they are good at communicating their care for others. They tend to be romantic, and enjoy thinking fondly of others and planning how express that feeling.
- - - - In conversation, Feelers often share their feelings and willingly listen to others’. They mirror the emotions of others, entering into their happiness, intensity, or subdued expressions of feeling. They like to know how others feel and like to be asked how they feel. Unwillingness to share and explain feelings, especially for extraverts, feels like a personal affront, and seems untrusting and secretive. Even when not talking about feelings in particular, they openly share their opinions on the topic at hand. They are excitable and will express their opinions with vigor. They often have a dramatic flair and may tend toward Overstatement. They are not interested in opening debates on their tastes or opinions, preferring to agree with others or change the topic. They guard their right to individual tastes and feelings, and usually recognize that others have that right too. They try their best to steer conversation away from conflict and smooth things over between people. Attempts to open debate, or trying to counter or disregard their emotions is seen as hostile, or at least insensitive, and may be met with anger, whining, or abruptly ending the conversation.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
4. Judging and Perceiving - represented by J and P
This describes our approach to dealing with the world, whether we are more interested in organizing, making decisions and coming to conclusions about things, or more interested in observing, discovering, and spontaneity.

Judging people have a need for order and conclusion. They like things to be certain, and prefer to look at them as black and white rather than grey. They feel strongly that there is a right and a wrong way to go about things, and are concerned with seeing that the right way is adhered to. They tend to like systems, regulations, rules, and instructions because these give them a sense of structure and closure - things aren’t up for debate, actions and results have already been decided. They respect rules and don’t like going against them. They feel comfortable operating within systems because it gives them a sense of security. Js like to have a feeling of being on top of everything, and dislike the uncertainty and instability of not feeling in control of what’s going on. They love to plan things out ahead of time, make lists and schedules, and feel satisfied when they can stick to them until completion. They don’t like to leave things half-finished and usually tie up all the loose ends before moving on to something new. They like things to happen in the “proper” sequence and they like objects to have a “proper” place. They strive for order in their physical surroundings as well as in their activities. They like things to be predictable, always in the same place, always occurring at the same time. They set up routines for themselves, fill in calendars, and pay attention to the clock.
- - - - Js tend to approach life with a sense of Duty, focusing on work rather than play. It’s not that they don’t like to have fun, but they can’t properly enjoy recreation until all the work is finished, their obligations met. They can have a tendency to make extra work for themselves and even turn pleasurable events into obligations in their minds. They are always concerned with planning and executing those plans, making sure everything runs smoothly. They seem to always be on the alert for jobs that need to be done, and can’t rest till they’re taken care of. They believe in taking their work seriously, and don’t believe that everything ought to be fun. They don’t resist putting up with discomfort in order to get the job done. They take a kind of martyr’s pride and satisfaction in being the one who accomplishes all the hard work that needs to be done. They are dependable and often take on a great deal of responsibility.
- - - - Js are very reliable and are good at both serving people and at directing them. They see themselves as part of a larger social structure, and take comfort in this. They honor hierarchy and defer to authority figures. They feel more comfortable knowing that someone is in charge rather than in blazing their own trail. They read instructions before acting, and don’t like to jump into action without a game-plan. While they enjoy organizing things themselves, they also feel a particular satisfaction in following an established or widely accepted plan, knowing that this is the Right way, not just my way. They do not really enjoy experimentation or “making it up as they go.” When things don’t go as planned Js have difficulty adjusting. They feel unprepared and insecure when their plan fails, and may become immobilized. Thinking on the spot is not usually their forté.
- - - - They like to make decisions and get things settled. They feel frustrated with indecisiveness, and may make choices prematurely just to satisfy their need to have things settled. Indeed, they feel unsettled before a decision is made, and comfortable afterwards. They highly value sticking to choices once they are made and may not be willing to change course even when they realize they made the wrong choice. They don’t like to have to think about a plan once it’s been set in motion, and thus may continue operating on autopilot rather than discarding their precious plan and coming up with a new one in the middle of things.
- - - - In conversation, Js push for conclusions to be made about things. They are not very interested in probing all the different aspects of an idea, nor finding out all the possibilities. They make positive, conclusive statements, rather than tentative ones. They like to Know rather than to guess or suppose or wonder. In their need to feel like they have a handle on things, they can be unopen to other ideas or information once they have made up their minds, and may come across as closed-minded or too sure of themselves. As they like to be organized, they usually plan how to tell something in a clear orderly fashion. They don’t like making tentative plans, but push for commitment to a plan. They can become exasperated by people who feel too wishy-washy to them, those who won’t commit to a plan or specific opinion. They have a hard time understanding people who like to look at things from different perspectives and thus seem to contradict their own conclusions about things. For a J you either think this or don’t think this.

Perceiving people like to make observations but prefer to withhold judgment. They are focused on taking in the world around them. They like discovering new things and are usually open to new experiences, ideas, or methods. They try to look at things from several different points of view, striving to understand different perspectives. They are often reluctant to take a strong stand for their opinions or beliefs, preferring to take a middle ground between different views because they can honestly understand more than one side of an issue. They are open to people disagreeing with them because they recognize that people have different values and perspectives. Perceivers are also reluctant to state their theories or discoveries as fact because they have a feeling that there is always more information out there. Because Ps do take a long time to make decisions and gather a great deal of information before coming to them, when the finally do come to a conclusion they are likely to be right, and may believe very firmly in their choice. Yet even on things he feels pretty certain about, a P is usually willing to concede the possibility that he is wrong and that there is much he does not yet know.
- - - - Perceivers like to experiment and find things out for themselves rather than follow instructions, and often disregard policy and rules, feeling that they are unnecessary and confining. As they are more interested in observing the world than directing it, they tend to dislike being in places of authority as well as being under authority. They are free spirits who tend to keep out of the way of those wielding plans and regulations on a mission to change the world. There is no one way things ought to be as far as they are concerned, and they appreciate all the variety there is to be found in the world. They often flout social norms in favor of whatever seems to work best for them at the time. They are more interested in how something Can be done than how other’s think it should be done. Thus it is often Perceivers who come up with new methods, discover new uses for things, and create new inventions. They are masters at thinking outside the box. They look at things not as they are, but as their potential. They see possibilities everywhere and usually have an open optimistic view of the world.
- - - - Ps take a playful approach to life, guiltlessly enjoying dessert before dinner, play before work. In fact, they do their best to turn work into play. The believe life ought to be enjoyed. They may procrastinate their duties and don’t feel particularly satisfied for having done them. They avoid extra responsibilities and often think their Judging friends need to relax more. They are easy-going and don’t usually get uptight about things. They don’t place a high priority on schedules or things happening “on time.” Rather, they approach life with spontaneity and a sense of wonder. They do what they feel like doing in the moment, relying more on inspiration to motivate them rather than a sense of duty. Indeed it is inspiration and seizing the moment that makes a P feel most alive, he lives for acting in his spontaneous urges. When he tries to work without inspiration everything feels flat and forced and no longer fun or interesting.
- - - - Perceivers resist making choices or commitments until the last minute because they never know when a better option or new information might come along. After a decision has been made, a P may feel unsettled, questioning whether he was really right, or if perhaps it was made prematurely. A P does not like to feel locked into a plan or statement. Not only does he feel uncertain that his choice or opinion is right, but he has a kind of rebellious spirit that resents confinement and makes him want to say “maybe not after all” just to keep from feeling like things are set in stone. Once he feels compelled from the outside to stick with something he looses his sense of autonomy and inspiration. Thus, Ps usually make tentative plans, leaving room to cancel or revise it if they want to do something else when the time comes. They usually leave the details to be determined in the moment, and just agree to a general plan. They deal with situations as they arise and are good at making things up as they go and thinking on the spot. A P thrives on creative ad-hoc solutions, while feeling dead and bored when fulfilling routine duties. Ps may despise the boring and unoriginal, seeing adherence to common practices or preset instructions as a cop-out, a sign that people have turned off their brains and disengaged from life. They encourage mixing things up, trying something different, doing the unexpected.
- - - - Order is not necessary to their sanity, and Ps can usually put up with a messy or chaotic environment. Because they don’t need closure, it is easy for them to have several projects going at once in various stages of completion, some of which they may never get back to. They will leave things out that they are working on indefinitely, perhaps coming back to finish it or clean up the remnants months later. There is no “proper” place for things - wherever is currently convenient is where it should be. There is no “proper” sequence for things to be completed in either. A Perceiver may approach a project from several different angles, start in the middle, or work on bits and pieces all at once. He may also gain new inspiration when halfway done and throw it all out to start anew. For a Perceiver it’s never too late to change your mind.
- - - - In conversation Ps may get sidetracked and jump to new topics and then come back to something they were saying earlier. They don’t necessarily convey their thoughts in an organized linear way, which may confuse their listeners. Because they are good at understanding different sides of things, they may at first seem to agree with one view, and then to be agreeing with another. In reality, they may not be trying to say they agree with either of them, but merely discussing different aspects of a given topic. They are usually open to, and interested in, hearing what others have to say. They may stir up conversation on a topic but feel no need to reach a conclusion or agreement. They generally don’t like passing judgments and don’t really enjoy listening to people who are too insistent upon being right. Ps like to acknowledge all the possibilities and may be good facilitators of discussions. They may not like feeling pushed to defend one side or the other more than they agree with, though their ability to see both sides may allow them to argue a cause they don’t actually believe in. Ps are likely to talk about things they’ve recently discovered, or are discovering, whether a new ice-cream flavor they tried, a new dance they’re learning, a new person they’ve met, a new idea they’re developing, a new insight they’ve had, a new book they’re reading. They like to share their observations about the world, which naturally does include some level of drawing conclusions, but they enjoy discussing these in an open way with people who may deepen their insight and broaden their knowledge. Ps can be annoyed by people who pester them to make choices quickly, or are unwilling to listen to more than one side of an issue. When someone belligerently keeps stating his own view without giving others a chance, a P is likely to become disgusted and leave the conversation.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dominant Traits
The descriptions of the 8 different preferences is enough to give a useful understanding of the different types of people. However, this Theory further notes that either S, N, T, or F will be a person’s Dominant Trait. This is determined by the other four traits E, I, J, and P.

S and N are related to Perceiving because they are how we perceive our world.
T and F are related to Judging because they are how we make decisions.

J and P represent our preferred style for interacting with the Outer World, either Observing it or Ordering it. Thus a person who prefers to Order the world will tend to use the T/F trait most, and someone who prefers to Observe the world will tend to use his S/N trait most.

However, whether one is Extraverted or Introverted also has a bearing on this trait dominance.
The Dominant Trait of Extraverts lines up with his Outer World preference with a straightforward correlation as explained above, because his main focus is on the Outer World.
Introverts primarily focus their energy and attention on the Inner World, which means their Outer World preference is actually Secondary (Auxiliary), making the other trait set the source of their preferred Inner World Dominant Trait.

Thus an Introvert who prefers to Observe the Outer World will favor the T/F trait for his Dominant Inner World focus, and an Introvert who prefers to Order the Outer World will prefer the S/N trait for his Dominant Inner World focus.

For Example
ISTP Dominant (Inner) Thinking, Auxiliary (Outer) Sensing
ISTJ Dominant (Inner) Sensing, Auxiliary (Outer) Thinking
ESTP Dominant (Outer) Sensing, Auxiliary (Inner) Thinking
ESTJ Dominant (Outer) Thinking, Auxiliary (Inner) Sensing