System Synthesis Triangulation (Myself as an Example)
Feb 28, 2018 16:18:19 GMT -5 by The Doctor
Auburn, Reckoner, and 4 more like this
Post by The Doctor on Feb 28, 2018 16:18:19 GMT -5
First and foremost, the various systems (Socionics, MBTI, Beebe, Thomson, CT, etc.) simply don't align perfectly. They address similar topics, but they overlap more than they converge. To reconcile this, I've been trying to find the middle ground and thus the one primary 'truth', as much as anything this subjective can hope for anyway.
It all started when I noticed that different self assessment tests would score me differently. I usually self assess as INFJ or ENFJ. Every now and then I would score ENFP or INTJ. I assumed that the variable was my mood or the questions. INFJ seems to be my blank mood. ENFJ is my healthy mood. ENFP is my high energy mood. INTJ is my so depressed I'm numb and detached mood. I always score highest on N, and always score borderline on the E/I axis. F is usually 'clear', as is J. If I do score T or P, it's barely so. My cognitive function scores tended toward Ni=Fe, Se=Ti, Ne, Fi, Te, Si, with only minor differences depending on which test I took. But, I noticed that even when I was in the same mood, different tests would score me differently, and I really couldn't decide if the INFJ descriptions or the ENFJ descriptions were more accurate for me. They both had merit, especially depending upon the author. I needed the one correct answer to my type, so I started asking people what they thought and sought out more methods to help litmus the truth of who I am.
My real life friends who know about this stuff were on the fence about me being an INFJ or ENFJ, with very few guessing me as anything else. For example, one guy thought I was an ISTP.
The various internet groups I consulted seemed to form a consensus opinion based more around the opinion of the more influential personalities than who I actually am. If a strong willed or charismatic member made a case for me being any given type, the other members usually agreed with them, even if that meant changing their original opinions. So, while I can't say there was ever a consensus per se, various clusters ended up typing me at ESFP (because my Se was clear and I'm obviously an F), INFJ (because I was the strong personality and persuaded them), ENFJ (because the INFJ group felt like I was too extroverted to be an INFJ, but otherwise seemed to fit), or ESTP (because the INFPs there got butthurt at my bluntness and decided I had to be their opposite).
At this point I came to the conclusion that the overlap point was either INFJ or ENFJ. This is where I started seeing the potential benefit of triangulation to both narrow down the options and to make sense of everything that didn't align. This is where I 'met' Nardi online, and we started talking a little. I helped him with his graphics, an he offered to give me a questionnaire and type me. My hope was that he'd be able to determine if I was an INFJ or ENFJ, and thus settle the debate for good, even though he wasn't actually scanning me... as my jobs leave me in a position where getting out to his 'brick and mortar' in California just hasn't been a possibility. His response to my scores threw me for a loop. He said ENFP. Well, actually, he said NF, probably E and P. He also said INFJ was a close runner up because it looks more like N dom than F dom because of weight in the visual centers over the audio centers, as well as the configuration of the executive centers. He did mention that INFP and ENFJ were less likely, but possible. Granted, this was all from a questionnaire, not a scan.
My takeaway was INFJ since it's the only type that fit the 'punch-card' approach I was applying.
And then I found CT. The community typed me as NiFe or SeTi (they literally tied), with FeNi a close second with several dozen votes. However, this wasn't official. @auburn was kind enough to type me when he got back from working on his book, and originally said SeTi. However, he and I both did an extensive reading, and our notes aligned quite well, and included the possibility of NeTi due to Ne signals, and FeNi due to strong Fe. Eventually, he changed his opinion to FeNi, once he saw a video of one of my 'Fe Rants'. The end result was that I wasn't ENFP or INFJ. This left me with only ENFJ / FeNi as an option for the 'punch-card' approach.
I then learned about Socionics, something I'd been resisting for a while due to some initial bad experiences with the community. It didn't matter what test I used, I consistently scored EIE-Ni and clearly Beta. There is a photo test where you pick faces of strangers that you're more drawn to. There is a system of measuring the proportions of your facial features. Literally everything scored EIE-Ni. It was surprising. In Socionics, EIE, which is equivalent to ENFJ or FeNi, is considered to have strong use of Ne and Fi as well as the standard Beta functions - Fe, Ni, Se, and Ti. EIE is considered to have poor use of Te and Si. This aligned almost perfectly with my cognitive function scores from self assessment tests.
And that brings me to my most recent assessment from the ever insightful Auburn. By re-examining my original videos as well as some new ones, he came to the conclusion that I might be FeNe, and made some compelling arguments for it. If nothing else, he firmly established that I'm an Fe lead. I've been percolating on this ever since, trying to figure out how this applies to my 'punch-card' approach, and I've realized that it actually fits quite neatly.
My self assessment includes ENFJ as my healthiest mood. It also includes a high N score.
My external assessments seem to center on Se and F. Again, this applies to ENFJ.
Nardi's assessment included the possibility of ENFJ, especially if it is N heavy.
Auburn's original assessment was a Beta type due to Fe and what was either Se or Ne, then FeNi.
Socionics types me at EIE, which is basically ENFJ, but also an Fe lead that has strong N and even Ne.
Auburn's new assessment types me at FeNe, which is essentially ENFJ if the axis are taken literally as preferences.
In other words, at first glance, all of the various types I've scored as or been guessed as seem to be a bit random with little semblance of consistent pattern. However, using the 'punch-card' approach to narrow everything down to one truth, we arrive at something that is pretty clearly uniform.
Therefore, I encourage you to take all of the typing measurements you've encountered into consideration, and then take a good look at where they align. This is probably the truth of your type, even if your measurements might seem to defy one another. They're likely all correct on some level, if you're being honest with yourself about who you are. CT is a very good method to triangulate, even if it comes up with a type that isn't necessarily what you'd assume to be the case.
It all started when I noticed that different self assessment tests would score me differently. I usually self assess as INFJ or ENFJ. Every now and then I would score ENFP or INTJ. I assumed that the variable was my mood or the questions. INFJ seems to be my blank mood. ENFJ is my healthy mood. ENFP is my high energy mood. INTJ is my so depressed I'm numb and detached mood. I always score highest on N, and always score borderline on the E/I axis. F is usually 'clear', as is J. If I do score T or P, it's barely so. My cognitive function scores tended toward Ni=Fe, Se=Ti, Ne, Fi, Te, Si, with only minor differences depending on which test I took. But, I noticed that even when I was in the same mood, different tests would score me differently, and I really couldn't decide if the INFJ descriptions or the ENFJ descriptions were more accurate for me. They both had merit, especially depending upon the author. I needed the one correct answer to my type, so I started asking people what they thought and sought out more methods to help litmus the truth of who I am.
My real life friends who know about this stuff were on the fence about me being an INFJ or ENFJ, with very few guessing me as anything else. For example, one guy thought I was an ISTP.
The various internet groups I consulted seemed to form a consensus opinion based more around the opinion of the more influential personalities than who I actually am. If a strong willed or charismatic member made a case for me being any given type, the other members usually agreed with them, even if that meant changing their original opinions. So, while I can't say there was ever a consensus per se, various clusters ended up typing me at ESFP (because my Se was clear and I'm obviously an F), INFJ (because I was the strong personality and persuaded them), ENFJ (because the INFJ group felt like I was too extroverted to be an INFJ, but otherwise seemed to fit), or ESTP (because the INFPs there got butthurt at my bluntness and decided I had to be their opposite).
At this point I came to the conclusion that the overlap point was either INFJ or ENFJ. This is where I started seeing the potential benefit of triangulation to both narrow down the options and to make sense of everything that didn't align. This is where I 'met' Nardi online, and we started talking a little. I helped him with his graphics, an he offered to give me a questionnaire and type me. My hope was that he'd be able to determine if I was an INFJ or ENFJ, and thus settle the debate for good, even though he wasn't actually scanning me... as my jobs leave me in a position where getting out to his 'brick and mortar' in California just hasn't been a possibility. His response to my scores threw me for a loop. He said ENFP. Well, actually, he said NF, probably E and P. He also said INFJ was a close runner up because it looks more like N dom than F dom because of weight in the visual centers over the audio centers, as well as the configuration of the executive centers. He did mention that INFP and ENFJ were less likely, but possible. Granted, this was all from a questionnaire, not a scan.
My takeaway was INFJ since it's the only type that fit the 'punch-card' approach I was applying.
And then I found CT. The community typed me as NiFe or SeTi (they literally tied), with FeNi a close second with several dozen votes. However, this wasn't official. @auburn was kind enough to type me when he got back from working on his book, and originally said SeTi. However, he and I both did an extensive reading, and our notes aligned quite well, and included the possibility of NeTi due to Ne signals, and FeNi due to strong Fe. Eventually, he changed his opinion to FeNi, once he saw a video of one of my 'Fe Rants'. The end result was that I wasn't ENFP or INFJ. This left me with only ENFJ / FeNi as an option for the 'punch-card' approach.
I then learned about Socionics, something I'd been resisting for a while due to some initial bad experiences with the community. It didn't matter what test I used, I consistently scored EIE-Ni and clearly Beta. There is a photo test where you pick faces of strangers that you're more drawn to. There is a system of measuring the proportions of your facial features. Literally everything scored EIE-Ni. It was surprising. In Socionics, EIE, which is equivalent to ENFJ or FeNi, is considered to have strong use of Ne and Fi as well as the standard Beta functions - Fe, Ni, Se, and Ti. EIE is considered to have poor use of Te and Si. This aligned almost perfectly with my cognitive function scores from self assessment tests.
And that brings me to my most recent assessment from the ever insightful Auburn. By re-examining my original videos as well as some new ones, he came to the conclusion that I might be FeNe, and made some compelling arguments for it. If nothing else, he firmly established that I'm an Fe lead. I've been percolating on this ever since, trying to figure out how this applies to my 'punch-card' approach, and I've realized that it actually fits quite neatly.
My self assessment includes ENFJ as my healthiest mood. It also includes a high N score.
My external assessments seem to center on Se and F. Again, this applies to ENFJ.
Nardi's assessment included the possibility of ENFJ, especially if it is N heavy.
Auburn's original assessment was a Beta type due to Fe and what was either Se or Ne, then FeNi.
Socionics types me at EIE, which is basically ENFJ, but also an Fe lead that has strong N and even Ne.
Auburn's new assessment types me at FeNe, which is essentially ENFJ if the axis are taken literally as preferences.
In other words, at first glance, all of the various types I've scored as or been guessed as seem to be a bit random with little semblance of consistent pattern. However, using the 'punch-card' approach to narrow everything down to one truth, we arrive at something that is pretty clearly uniform.
Therefore, I encourage you to take all of the typing measurements you've encountered into consideration, and then take a good look at where they align. This is probably the truth of your type, even if your measurements might seem to defy one another. They're likely all correct on some level, if you're being honest with yourself about who you are. CT is a very good method to triangulate, even if it comes up with a type that isn't necessarily what you'd assume to be the case.