Top products from r/mbti

[2 of 4]

• How curious are you? Do you have more ideas then you can execute? What are your curiosities about? What are your ideas about - is it environmental or conceptual, and can you please elaborate?
  
  • I think this is something I struggle with on a daily basis. I like many things, or so I like to believe. Like I feel that everything’s interesting and everything is connected somehow through symbols. I like thinking about these symbols and connections constantly. So my ideas are about concepts mostly. I can’t remember facts if I can’t attach them to concepts that make sense to me.
    
  • This has been my latest conflict I have to say. I started a career in EE, and then I shifted to computer science. I’ve wanted since I was an undergrad to start a research path, but I’ve been struggling to find something I really really love. I am not good at taking decisions, but an academic path looks now like my best bet for not working in a desk never again (I like having my own desk at home, though).
    
  • I’m confident everything will be good at the end, and I am confident I can do almost anything. Not trying to be cocky, is just that I know I’m physically and mentally capable of learning anything (in the realm of normal stuff, of course I won’t build a heavy falcon myself), so unless that does not change, I’m good. On the other hand, being so certain about that backfires at me, filling my head with “what ifs”
    
  • I have this bad habit of reading (and most of the time not finishing) books in parallel, now I’m reading about
    
    • Carl Jung (https://www.amazon.com/Jung-Short-Introduction-Anthony-Stevens/dp/0192854585 mostly motivated by understanding this mbti thingy)
      
    • About network science (https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/complex-network-analysis/9781680505399/ and https://www.amazon.com/Networks-Introduction-Mark-Newman/dp/0199206651 because network analysis can be applied to almost anything)
      
    • Machine Learning (http://shop.oreilly.com/product/0636920052289.do) because is what the cool kids do in IT now or so I’ve learned, I’m more into software architecture though, and
      
    • EGB (https://www.amazon.com/G%C3%B6del-Escher-Bach-Eternal-Golden/dp/0465026567) which is a beast and I wanted to get my feet wet about cognitive science and semiotic. I am at about 40% of all of them,
      
  • I pick a chapter until I finish it, and then I move on to the next book, when I have time. I’ve lost interest in reading fiction, I get that from reading graphic novels and manga, mostly. If it matters something, currently ongoing mangas I like are Hajime no Ippo, One Piece, Vinland Saga and The Promised Neverland.
    
• Would you enjoy taking on a leadership position? Do you think you would be good at it? What would your leadership style be?
  
  • I’m not very good at getting stuff done so I would probably suck as a leader of anything. But hey, I am good listening to people and helping them improve. I also don’t think I’m a good teamplayer. I’m bad at following instructions if I don’t trust them. During college I was the guy that ended redoing the work of others during group assignments, because I either I was not satisfied with their work or I was not good at giving instructions. I didn’t know at that moment I was being a dick and I know now, and it’s not something I’m proud of. I'm working on it.
    
• Are you coordinated? Why do you feel as if you are or are not? Do you enjoy working with your hands in some form? Describe your activity?
  
  • I used to draw more when I was younger, and did a bit of woodwork also. I had plants. I like to cook, and have strong opinions on food. I like creating stuff with my hands, I consider myself a creative person. In short, I am coordinated, but not so with team activities like team sports.
    
• Are you artistic? If yes, describe your art? If you are not particular artistic but can appreciate art please likewise describe what forums of art you enjoy. Please explain your answer.
  
  • It’s hard to pin down what kind of art I like, I just know I like something after I’ve seen it or told about, with no particular topic. I don’t understand sculpture, and I vaguely get poetry. Regarding drawing, I appreciate the flow and light in shapes. I was into human figure for some years, and I did a lot of drawings that were good.
    
  • I know a bit of guitar and ukulele, but I never played for others than girls I like. I am too shy of my voice, my singing and technique, I know it needs improving. I took singing classes once but with only the gist of it I got it’s something that requires more discipline and time than what I’m willing to spend.
    
• What's your opinion about the past, present, and future? How do you deal with them?
  
  • uhm, now I strive to live a life that maximises happiness and minimizes regret. At my age I think I know enough about the things I can control, and play along with that hand, always with the best intentions, and I am optimist about the future.
    
  • Sometimes I regret not being like this in the past, however, and I see myself revisiting things I would have done better, like studying more, eating better, loved more.
    
• How do you act when others request your help to do something (anything)? If you would decide to help them, why would you do so?
  
  • I always help, I believe in karma as a thing (I mean, not religiously) and that life has been really good to me. I don’t help when I know I can’t help, or when I’m being ordered to or asked in a bad way i.e. makes me feel bad. I have trouble noticing these situations though.

There is a book, [Nurture by Nature] (http://www.amazon.com/Nurture-Nature-Understand-Childs-Personality/dp/0316845132) that is basically a picture of what each MBTI child is like. It has descriptions for toddler years, elementary and teen years for each type. I found it to be interesting, but of course rather broad in scope. Could be an interesting read for you though, if you want to read about other types as well as ENTP.

I have an interest in the MBTI types of children as well, and while I can't type my son yet, I'm pretty confident my daughter is an ESFJ.

There is another book, but it's usually not in print so you have to get it from a used bookstore or online. It's called [One of A Kind: Making the Most of Your Child's Uniqueness] (http://www.amazon.com/One-Kind-Making-Childs-Uniqueness/dp/0935652205/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1411666642&sr=1-1&keywords=most+of+your+child%27s+uniqueness). I found this one to be more helpful in some ways. This author says that you shouldn't type your child confidently, because it does take awhile for a personality to mature, and your child will "try on" all of the functions in order to find which one they are most comfortable with. But then she goes on to help you try and type your child. :) It is a Christian book publisher, but the references to God are minimal, and the content is pretty good.

There is one last book, called [Motherstyles] (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0738210455/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_dp_ss_3?pf_rd_p=1535523722&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=0316845132&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=1KD13GNRH6C5PASDNDR5) that I have been wanting to get but just haven't yet. If you are having fun investigating your child, you may enjoy this book too, as parenting interactions based on our types can be kind of revealing. It has helped me, as an NT, learn to allow my very "F" daughter to express herself as needed, and to understand that her emotions are as important to her as my logic is to me. It also helped me to learn that Feelings are considered a rational function, and that's how she processes.

Kudos to you for seeking out how to let your kid be who he is, rather than a mini version of mom and dad. :)

INFJ here.
Extroverts outnumber introverts already, and with the pressure for introverts to pretend they are extroverted to fit in, the apparent number of introverted people goes way down as far as extroverts can tell.

Someone who is well versed in MBTI theory will be able to spot even well-socialized introverts and treat them appropriately, but an extrovert who doesn't see reality in terms of I's and E's being equally acceptable will come to the natural conclusion that I's are the different minority and thus weird. After all, the extroverted worldview is based on integrating oneself into a community. At best, when they see someone not integrating themselves, they see someone who is different, or just might be feeling bad at the time. At worst, they might see someone who is a threat to good and upright social behavior; they don't realize that not everyone is wired to extrovert themselves, especially when they think most people are wired that way and should be wired that way.

Unfortunately, I feel this puts the burden on introverts to make their viewpoint known to extroverts--in essence, to stand up for themselves and to defend their worldview. My reasons for this belief are complicated for me to explain so bear with me:

The seen majority aren't just going to up and recognize the silent minority. Now, this makes it sound like an "us vs them" scenario where E's are oppressing I's and don't give a shit about us. And sometimes (especially when you are young and surrounded by childish assholes) it feels like that. But it's really not. The more mature your peers are, the easier it will be for I's. Most E's just want I's to fit in because, to them, fitting in makes them happy. And they think, why wouldn't everyone want to be happy? The introverted perspective is literally invisible to many inexperienced extroverts. And I'll explain why.

I'm not sure how well versed you are in MBTI. It was a long time before I went beyond the four letters in one's type (EI, SN, TF, JP) So I'll give a crash course.

There are eight cognitive functions:

Extroverted Sensing
Introverted Sensing
Extroverted Intuition
Introverted Intuition
Extroverted Feeling
Introverted Feeling
Extroverted Thinking
Introverted Thinking

Every type has a primary function and a secondary function. The primary function is relied upon the most and the secondary function is a supporting function.

The first four functions in the list are called Perceiving functions and the last four are called Judging functions. This is where we get the J/P distinction. A J's extroverted function will be a judging function. A P's extroverted function will be a perceiving function.

INFJ doesn't simply mean an introvert who is an intuiter, feeler, and judger. It means that my primary function is Introverted iNtuition and my secondary is Extroverted Feeling.

How do we derive what my primary and secondary functions are? Since I am INFJ, my main function will be introverted. Because I am a J, my extroverted function will be a judging function. So that means Extroverted Feeling. But because I am an I, my primary will be an Introverted function. Since we already know my secondary is Extroverted Feeling, that means that Introverted iNtuition is my primary. I know it's confusing. Google "8 cognitive functions mbti" if you need a better explanation (because mine's a little unorganized).

Anyway..

The extroverted functions let people deal with the outside world of people and things and the introverted functions let people deal with the inner world of thoughts, beliefs, personal reflection, and other things like that. Introverts' primary function is an introverted one meaning they spend a lot of time in their heads. They are essentially forced to develop their secondary extroverted functions when dealing with people and things, even if they mostly rely on their introverted function more because it is their primary.

Extroverts rely primarily on their extroverted functions. Because society (and all it's entailed cooperation and social interaction) creates situations more suited to the easy use of extroverted functions, extroverts usually aren't forced to develop their secondary introverted functions until later in their development. (Some extroverts develop it early enough in their teens, but I know some who didn't start developing their introverted selves until their early-mid 30's).

Introverts are well aware of the two halves of their personality because they are forced to develop an extroverted secondary function alongside their introverted primary. They sense that their have two selves: one for their inner life and one for their outer life. Society makes it easier for extroverts to rely only on their primary function so their introverted perspective doesn't become apparent to them. They develop their inner self later (and in some cases, a lot later). This is how the introverted perspective may be literally unperceived (invisible) to undeveloped extroverts. This is how some of them simply can't understand that shyness and being alone can be preferable to acting extroverted. In fact, because their secondary introverted functions are less developed, the introverted perspective can be a source of stress for these kinds of extroverts until they're life experience grows. No wonder they can't understand how people could prefer to stay in their own heads.

Because undeveloped extroverts don't grasp both halves of a whole personality and introverts have more experience with both halves, introverts are the most capable of bridging the gap between E's and I's. We have to be confident in our introversion and let E's know that our introversion is okay with us and should be okay with them too.

And don't get me wrong, not all undeveloped E's are unaccepting of introverts. Just as how there are even some developed E's that still think there is something wrong with introverts. It depends a lot the attitudes of their families and peers. After all, that's what extroverted people do: they integrate into themselves the attitudes of the group. That mid-thirties extrovert that I mentioned earlier (who had an undeveloped introverted perspective)... she came from a family of introverts and didn't have a problem with the introverted lifestyle at all. She just didn't subscribe to the lifestyle. I know it's hard for us, but I's just need to be upfront about their Introversion so that it registers on extroverts radar.

And please, don't hate E's for it. Group assimilation is as natural to them as being a loner is for us. They can't help the way they are. But they can control how courteous they are to introverts and how they treat them. So I's need to set up a precedent for how they want to be treated. I know societal norms are stacked against us, but it really does get easier. Given the social nature of humanity, it's something we have to do because if we don't, it wont get done.

Edit: Most of my info on this matter is paraphrased from this very informative book

My late best friend was an INFP male.

In my experience (and also that of A.J. Drenth), INFP males are pretty similar to INTP males, because their Te is pretty more developed / mature than that of an INFP female. However, compared to INTPs, they do tend to be a lot more prone to what I call "manic episodes", which is when they have some feeling that is so strong they need to follow it and they pretty much lose all capacity for reason.

Compared with INTPs, INFPs also have very little impulse control and tend to be more prone to psychotic behavior. My best friend had been to prison on charges of "terrorism", he'd been to a mental institution once or twice because of psychotic episodes and he'd been in rehab for amphetamine addiction. Eventually, he died in a car crash because he's taken too many pain killers to alleviate his back pain, which he got from excessive weightlifting.

I'm not sure if I know any INFP females (maybe one of my INFP friend's ex-wives?), but my current best friend is an INTJ, and the love of his life was an INFP female. He told me this is a good example of an INFP female. He also told me that the love of his live had to go to a mental institution multiple times and had problems with drug addition, just like my male INFP friend.

So when I think of INFP people of either gender, I tend to think of people who are constantly flirting with the border between sanity and insanity, and who are very prone to addiction and impulsive behavior. However, I also think of people who live life to the fullest and who are 100% their own eccentric selves. I think of people who are both very intense and very pure, which IMO makes them very likable in spite (or maybe because?) of all the craziness and impulsivity. As an INTP, I most definitely love to get dragged along by an INFP when he/she is exploring the world.

If I'm to consider Björk as a good example of INFP females, they do come off as a lot more "floaty" / "dreamy" than male INFPs, which makes sense, I suppose, considering they have a less developed Te than male INFPs, and - like male INFPs - they have Fi as their primary function. Eric Thor refers to INFPs as the "fairy empath" type, and, based on the references that I've got, that description definitely fits, especially for females.

A bit late to the party, but here's a book you might be interested in:

Nurture by Nature: Understand Your Child's Personality Type - And Become a Better Parent

As an ENFP with ESTJ and ISTP parents who wished their daughter would be something more along the likes of ESFJ or ISFJ, it was quite difficult for me. I read this book to learn more about myself and I wished they have read something like this too. It wasn't that they weren't good, caring parents, nor was I a particularly difficult to raise child. It's just that I don't understand why I can't be accepted for who I am, and they couldn't understand why I acted certain ways. Our values were different. Their knowledge on this would have saved me from so much pain I had growing up.

My INTJ sister had an easier time growing up. She knows what her values are and she's not afraid to stand for her values, whereas for me, I had a difficult time deciding between what I wanted and what I had to do in order to not displease my parents.

My suggestion is to read Ekaterina Filatova's introduction to socionics, which is undoubtedly the best English-language socionics book (link). This book uses a simplified four-function model that is on the surface pretty similar to MBTI. Once you understand this model, it is a pretty gentle climb to the full Model A. While the book does not describe the full 8-function model it does give an excellent overview of the most interesting facet of socionics, which is intertype relations. I highly recommend the book to anyone interested in socionics regardless of how much knowledge or background you already have. If you have a Kindle the digital version is very cheap ($3).

I think CelebrityTypes does a great job at outputting accessible writing based on Jung's work. A lot of their best work is in their members section.

The best place is to clear your head of MBTI and start at the source. Then start reading works by his students like Marie-Louise von Franz (look around for her lectures).

An ex-FBI guy called Joe Navarro pretty much spent his entire life doing that. He wrote a book called What Every Body is Saying, that I think you'd be really interested in. (If you care at all about developing Fe)

Also, what I'm about to say might hit you a bit harshly, but you don't seem to get the implication, so let me just say that what I meant by this comment was that your experience with people's smiling might be because a lot of people are projecting a smile towards you, rather than smiling genuinely.

ENFPs and ENTPs are from completely different temperaments. If you are not familiar with David Keirsey, then it would probably behoove you to become familiar with his temperament theory.

I believe the best way to get rid of confusion about your type when the types are cross-temperament is to see which of the four temperaments you have the closest affinity with.

For example, I am an INTP, so I belong to the Rationals temperament, as Keirsey describes them. I identify more with the Rationals than any other temperament group. Not only that, but I identify with the other Rational types (INTJs and ENTPs, and to a lesser degree, ENTJs) more than the other types in the other temperaments generally. There are some things I relate to and like about some other NF types like INFJs and ENFPs, but ultimately I don't relate to their temperament (Idealists) more than I relate to the Rationals temperament.

If you are ENTP, then you will likely identify with other NTs more than NFs generally. If you are ENFP, then you will likely identify with other NF types more than NTs generally. For more clarification, I would highly recommend picking up Keirsey's Please Understand Me Part 2.

https://www.amazon.com/Please-Understand-Temperament-Character-Intelligence/dp/1885705026

Aside from the book I'm writing? ;)

Yeah, there are a couple. The problem is that even though these books talk about the cognitive processes in depth, the way they're written seems to confuse people for some reason. I've know people that read both of these and STILL had no idea what the functions are or how to use them. Despite that, these are two of the best:

Personality Type, an Owner's Manual by Lenore Thomson This is the most in depth and accurate coverage of the functions currently out there. A bit complicated (there is actually an entire wiki out there devoted to trying to understand what Lenore was talking about), but very good. I've picked up more from this than any other comparable book.

Gifts Differing by Isabel Briggs-Myers - Aside from Psychological Types, this is the book that got it all started. Great book.

Also you can check out the website of my partner and I: PersonalityHacker.com This isn't nearly as complete as it will be soon, but it's getting there.

I'm Camronn, by the way.

If you want to go the formal route, look into the Murphy-Meisgeier Type Indicator for Children® (MMTIC). It's the MBTI equivalent for children. (Google it for more info.)

If you want to go the informal route--or even if you get the MMTIC--consider reading a book on the matter. There are several good ones. One is, "Nurture by Nature: Understand Your Child's Personality Type..." https://www.amazon.com/Nurture-Nature-Understand-Childs-Personality/dp/0316845132

Good luck with it.

It’s possible I’ve seen others mention their results are different based on mood. So the online tests aren’t that great.

I became more confident in my result after reading some books about my type.

Such as : https://www.amazon.com/Comprehensive-INFP-Survival-Guide/dp/1945796154/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1539050811&sr=8-1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_QL65&keywords=infp+survival+guide&dpPl=1&dpID=412knVQuKlL&ref=plSrch

Iam no parent but I found this book to also be interesting.

https://www.amazon.com/Nurture-Nature-Understand-Childs-Personality/dp/0316845132/ref=mp_s_a_1_fkmr1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1539050902&sr=8-1-fkmr1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_QL65&keywords=nurture+by+nature+mbti

Iam not sure how accurate MBTI is, but I do know it can be an effective tool for introspection.

Typing is largely pattern recognition, whether one is "typing" a cow, or a fox, or an ISFJ. You might enjoy and appreciate this book:

https://www.amazon.com/Art-SpeedReading-People-Speak-Language/dp/0316845183

One of my favorite ISFJs: https://youtu.be/ANZu80VNP2w

Your type is something natural like left- or right-handedness and related to what parts of your neocortex you use most often. This inherent preference will not change, but you certainly will develop a greater degree of competence in more regions as you grow older, or in Myers-Briggs terms, develop your third and fourth functions.

You have the first step by being aware there's bias everywhere and it takes many forms. Now you just have to recognize when you're reading something that's laced with it and take everything with a grain of salt.

If you haven't, try reading recommended books on MBTI. Going back to the source material like Gifts Differing by Myers herself. For free internet stuff, MBTI Notes is really good and even talks about type bias.

A great book on personality type and children is

Nurture by Nature by Paul D.Tieger and Barbara Barron-Tieger

http://www.amazon.com/Nurture-Nature-Understand-Childs-Personality/dp/0316845132

No single source, but these are the ones that I found the most useful in my endeavors

• Michael Pierce's Youtube videos
  
  
• http://mbti-notes.tumblr.com/ (good despite being tumblr)
  
  
• My True Type: Clarifying Your Personality Type, Preferences & Functions
  
  
• Building Blocks of Personality Type
  
  
• Neuroscience of Personality: Brain Savvy Insights for All Types of People

Still looking for recommendations, but since posting, I've pulled together a list of books that seemed interesting. Wondering if anyone has any opinions?

MBTI Manual

Jung: A Very Short Introduction

Psychological Types

The Archetypes and The Collective Unconscious

Jung's Map of the Soul: An Introduction

Simple and effective?

"Gifts Differing" Isabel Briggs Myers

"Please understand me" David Keirsey

"The Tavistock Lectures" Carl Jung via von Franz(afaik) edit: It's actually this: https://www.amazon.com/Analytical-Psychology-Practice-Tavistock-Lectures/dp/0394708628

Have you read Carl Jung's Personality Types? Myers-Briggs certainly didn't make it more scientific. Carl Jung was a scientist. The studies that try to compare MBTI to other typologies use MBTI, not Jung. MBTI is simplified, tries to use tests, and self-ascribed answers to such tests. Everytime I come across a research paper that purportedly has tested MBTI, their tests are weak and use this MBTI, never Carl Jung. It is very difficult to identify which attitude and functions are truly dominant and requires analysis. One may deny functions easily, but that we think in terms of meaning with logic, that we know our values via feeling (not emotion) is common knowledge, that we perceive the possible or the actual are categories of being and with some observation one can notice a tendency toward one or the other. In my opinion, Big-5 is a variation of Jung's typology and will in time be recognized as a weaker and emptier form, because for Jung, the typology extends far beyond mere typology, but encompasses his entire theory of psychology, including collective unconscious, archetypes, mythology, etc.

I suggest to keep it simple, because I have found it is sufficiently useful in my interactions with others.

Psychological Types, C.G. Jung

Gifts Differing, Isabel Briggs Myers

In my opinion the most essential readings on MBTI. The one flows into the other quite well, contrary to the popular belief that MBTI grew far away from Jung; Myers adapted his work pretty faithfully, it's the recent stuff that strays.

The eight function models are a branch of the original model. Any four function model doesn't necessarily reject the 8-fcts, but the latter is just redundant and imo confusing. The essential reason for this, as I see it, is that the latter sees the e/i movement of energy as momentary while the former, 4-fct, sees it as typical. If Ti, for example, is Thinking typically drawn inwards, then it makes no sense that the same person sometimes typically goes outwards.

This book talks about OP's question.

You can find the ebook download if you look around. I've skimmed the book and I've found it useful.

I'm assuming that you have the revised version of Psychological Types from the Collected Works of C.G. Jung (Volume 6). Myers' quotes in Gifts Differing are from the original English translated publication in 1923.

Here are the CW6 version's page and paragraph numbers: Pg 340, Par 575 & Pg Pg 387, Par 637.

The Anthony Stevens diagram can be found in:

http://www.amazon.com/Jung-Short-Introduction-Anthony-Stevens/dp/0192854585/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1457802826&sr=8-1

or

http://www.amazon.com/Jung-Anthony-Stevens/dp/069101048X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1457802890&sr=8-1

To see the excerpt from the latter, go here:

http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive-functions/431786-jungian-analysts-take-jungs-functions.html

(if you don't have an account, the pic in that forum post is the same in my reddit post above.)

Jung's diagram was taken from:

http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Jungian-Psychology-Analytical-Bollingen/dp/0691152055/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1457803325&sr=8-1

Pg 137

> The cognitive function test results are all over the place, and never in my life have I seen a result which would even somewhat resemble any theoretical results. The results of the 3rd and 4th fuctions and the PoLR function can be basically anything, and you can have rather high results in a function that is not in your ”function stack”.

If you acknowledge that everyone uses 8 functions then you need to take all of them into account when analyzing somebody's cognitive functions test.

It isn't the case that your functions go in descending order of use from 1-8. Everyone will show more "use" of a cognitive function that has the opposite attitude to their primary or auxiliary function than, say, their inferior when you're looking at a cognitive functions test.

>The correlations between MBTI dichotomies and Big 5 are in turn high.

Sure, you can show correlations between what sort of test questions will produce the resulting percentages. And correlations are exciting. I am skeptical that this means what you're implying. The scientific research that has been done on cognitive functions is, I would say, highly suggestive that cognitive functions will be measurable with better imaging tools.

In the mean time, feel free to continue exploring your trait continuums or dichotomies, but you didn't make it clear to me why that would make the theory falsifiable if we're still relying on subjective reporting.

Here is the mobile version of your link

Thats right! Lots of people use them for floating.

You could even double it up with these https://www.amazon.co.uk/Disposable-Protectors-Waterproof-Covers-Bathing/dp/B072R2V327

She wrote in Russian (passed away two years ago). Her book and some of her articles are a translation to English.

Start at the source:

Psychological Types by C. G. Jung

Gifts Differing by Isabel Briggs Myers

There's actually a book written about this topic: https://www.amazon.com/Hitler-Biography-Ian-Kershaw/dp/0393337618

... :P

Could you give me some recommendations? I'm currently a third of the way through reading this one.

http://www.amazon.com/INTP-Personality-Careers-Relationships-Meaning-ebook/dp/B00H7NWLJ6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1410382277&sr=8-1&keywords=intp

The Art of Speed-Reading people suggests that it's 60% S and 40% N

Personality Type, bv Lenore Thomson

https://www.amazon.com/Personality-Type-Practical-Understanding-Yourself/dp/0877739870

Quite detailed, although I find her ideas on the brain rather questionable. She also explains where all 8 functions are in a type.

>I’m new to this MBTI/Enneagram stuff

brah, y u no show luv for Big Five?

Also I suggest you start at the beginning.

Psychological Types is DENSE AS FUCK, so I'll point you to other material by Jungians who present Jung's ideas in a much more manageable and understandable manner.

> Marie von Franz's "Lectures on Jungian Typology"
___
> Jolande Jacobi's "The Psychology of C.G. Jung."

Many supposed sex differences are based on bad science (e.g. a study that deliberately ignored some of their data, as in the study using fruit flies that is the source of the myth that concludes that men are evolutionarily more predisposed to promiscuity) or studies that did not recognize their own limitations (e.g. the studies that concluded that women were more risk-averse, which only addressed certain kinds of risk that were not equally likely in each gender due to cultural influences). Source: Testosterone Rex.

Thus while I have heard, and have no reason to disbelieve, that more exposure in the womb to testosterone results in a longer ring finger relative to pointer finger, I am highly dubious of the claim that (a) there is a "masculine brain" and (b) that higher testosterone exposure is going to e.g. reduce someone's ability for empathy. Brains are complicated. Society is complicated. We have only begun a rigorous scientific study of humans (biologically, psychologically, socially) in the last 10-100 years, so it shouldn't be surprising that we don't have it all figured out yet. And psychology is the reason I included 10 in the range, because until the last few years it was widely considered acceptable to throw out the outliers in your data, aka p-hacking, resulting in our current reproducibility crisis in the social sciences.

Also you assume that there is no bias in the MBTI data, which is rather suspect. If there is truly evidence that women are more likely to be Fs and men are more likely to be Ts, I would look first to socialization and culture as the reason. However I strongly suspect that the reason this would show up in the reported results is that the tests are written in a biased manner such that women are more likely to answer as an F and men as a T, given societal influences.

Re this, for those who are curious: It can be shown via statistics that historically a male will have a greater chance of having >0 offspring in a given year if he has sex with only one partner multiple times, compared to many partners on the order of once each. To not get too bogged down in the details, the general idea is that at any given moment most women couldn't get pregnant, and data suggests that human males are not more attracted to human females at times when they can get pregnant, thus they are ~randomly sampling from the population, etc etc the point is that the idea that men are naturally more promiscuous than women is based on bad science, read the book I linked for more info.

Tl;dr: I think the fingers/testosterone correlation may be real, but that we have no scientific basis for extrapolating and making claims about the personality traits of the humans attached to those fingers.

http://www.amazon.com/Personality-Types-Using-Enneagram-Self-Discovery/dp/0395798671/ref=pd_sim_b_1?ie=UTF8&refRID=0QW0J2HS72X2DKKWB5Q3

That was the book I read on the Enneagram, and it went pretty deep into the downward spirals people can fall into, with a little about getting out of them. Reading about the patterns that people display made me more self aware about my own behaviors, the negative ones.

Once you figure out what your negative behaviors are, and you've got something you want to change, I would step out side of the MBTI network, so you're not limited in potential resources. Learning to exchange unhealthy defense mechanisms for healthier ones is just a matter of trial and error.

Honestly, the real problem here is that to complete a goal you need a starting point A, a finishing point B, and a path to connect the two. You have no point B because you don't know what you want to become. You have no point A because you're unsure of what to measure.

It is just way more efficient to fill in the path once you have your points. Asking for a path without those points? At best, everyone is going to fill you with well meaning crap that might not even apply to your situation. At worst you become a meandering wanderer who chases self help books and new age bullshit while they get further and further from solidifying an actual identity with every step.

Not shadow functions, inferior functions. Stimuli that go with your inferior function can be very stressful or very soothing during times of stress, and when you're "not yourself" you tend to act more like your inferior function is your dominant one.

Example: I'm an INTJ--NiTeFiSe. When physical things in my external environment are out of sorts, I get really uneasy, irritable, and easily upset. This can be anything from my desk being out of order to having eaten badly. Things I find oddly soothing include cleaning, anything that gives me an adrenaline rush, and good food. Out of character inferior function outbursts for me are things like wanting to scream or break things, or being very impulsive.

If you're an ESFP, your stack is SeFiTeNi--basically the exact opposite of me. Ni as an inferior function means you probably get stressed out by random ideas that pop into your head that may seem to border on paranoid or conspiracy theory-ish. You may get a lot of pleasure when you have "Aha!" moments and come to correct conclusions that are the culmination of thought processes that you're not totally aware of. Because Ni is an introverted function, you probably spend a lot of time when you're stressed just pondering things, rather than experiencing them. Acting more like INFP when you're stressed points at FiNe as the functions you're picking up on, and Ni can be tough to tell apart from Ne (but you've still got your secondary Fi acting in conjunction with it.) Ne would be more like seeing a thousand reasons someone might hate you, where Ni would be more like seeing a thousand people hate you in the same ways.

This book goes into way more detail about how inferior functions manifest when you're stressed out!