Sign Up | Log in |

Jordan Peterson

MBTI enneagram type of Jordan Peterson Realm:
Reality

Category:
Psychology, Philosophy, Writing and Social Sciences

TOTAL MBTI VOTES: 57


INFJ - 17 vote(s)
INTJ - 13 vote(s)
INTP - 12 vote(s)
ENTP - 9 vote(s)
ENTJ - 2 vote(s)
ISTJ - 2 vote(s)
INFP - 1 vote(s)
ENFJ - 1 vote(s)

Log in to vote!

TOTAL ENNEA VOTES: 23


5W4 - 12 vote(s)
6W5 - 4 vote(s)
1W2 - 3 vote(s)
1W9 - 2 vote(s)
5W6 - 2 vote(s)

Log in to vote!

Log in to add a comment.

Comments

Sort (descending) by: Date posted | Most voted
  • Posted on: 2018-04-24 14:22:50

    doodlepoodle

     

    His recent debate with Matt Dilahunty pretty much proves Peterson has no Te. Matt throws around what he considers to be obvious interpretation of religion and supernatural and Peterson struggles to incorporate that into his own into own argument and goes off into tangents about psychedelics and what not. He clearly demonstrates Fe and Ti given how much he tries to validate Dilahunty's world view before trying to break it down on his own.

    Peterson's biggest mistake in debates is that he expects his opponents to grasp his otherwise abstract and complex (Ni) ideas in regards to God and religion - something most atheists like Harris and Dilahunty don't have the patience for.

    Dilahunty's a clear example of a Te user (I've seen him typed ENTJ). Peterson is not. Their debate is a good example of higher Te and lower Ti clashing.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-25 00:16:03

      doodlepoodle

       

      Granted, I will say Peterson won the debate. Dillahunty's Te over simplifcation of ethics and didn't get him far after the latter half of the the debate. You can clearly see Peterson's Ti poke hole at it.


  • Posted on: 2018-04-23 01:21:08

    IAMGODson

     

    He's completely idealistic. His entire way of thinking is just idealism with a rational mask put onto it. I also believe his persona is a carefully crafted one. Whatever his type is, he's playing an enenagram 1. He is a Te user for sure though. His 'ideology' is Fi + Te.  I don't see the ponderous and contemplative energy of an Enneagram 5 in any way whatsoever.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-24 14:23:19

      doodlepoodle

       

      lol bruh stop using enneageam


  • Posted on: 2018-04-16 05:32:45

    fg2

     
    He has a donate feature in his website HA

  • Posted on: 2018-04-13 08:04:31

    Wolfsbane

     

    He said he took a  big five type personality test and scored pretty high on extroversion. Likely ENTP. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v76nSSGpACo


  • Posted on: 2018-04-06 12:43:46

    Formerly Brainer

     

    What a gay ass debate you guys are having about this individual who I struggle to find something interesting. 


    Get a life y'all.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-06 13:24:22

      doodlepoodle

       

      get off this website boi


  • Posted on: 2018-04-05 14:44:26

    boask

     

    Anoying psuedo-scientist which appears a lot wiser than he actually is


    • Posted on: 2018-04-05 18:25:32

      Thomas shnik

       

      Annoying*


    • Posted on: 2018-04-06 14:49:38

      boask

       

      Really? correcting a small mistake that was obviously a mistype? Go fuck yourself


    • Posted on: 2018-04-06 15:09:01

      Formerly Brainer

       

      Pseudo-scientist*


    • Posted on: 2018-04-06 17:14:57

      boask

       

      Thanks for the tip bro


    • Posted on: 2018-04-11 11:15:53

      doodlepoodle

       

      to Fi bois anyone not derrida is a pseudo intelllectual


  • Posted on: 2018-04-04 06:59:33

    shooshoo

     

    Dafuq are you people below me even talkin about......?


  • Posted on: 2018-04-04 02:10:56

    Khel

     

    After all this bullshitty discussion, this thread shall be the return of Ventus.


  • Posted on: 2018-04-04 01:30:25

    Ventus413

     

    My vote keeps changing to INTJ despite the fact that I voted INFJ. Something to do with the site’s mechanics must be broken. @admin


    • Posted on: 2018-04-04 01:36:43

      mike ike

       

      he gone man, he goooonnee


    • Posted on: 2018-04-04 03:44:10

      Khel

       

      Ventus, you're like, coming back from Iraq only to discover that you're country's been trumped.


  • Posted on: 2018-04-04 01:22:01

    Blank

     

    Trying to type this man can only bring us madness.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-04 01:28:52

      Ventus413

       

      He is a very complex individual, but when you look purely at his “shoes-off” self, I can’t see any type but INFJ.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-05 00:49:52

      Blank

       

      When I look purely at it I think he is just insane and cannot be typed.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-05 12:24:42

      diobono

       

      Peterson seems to have an idea of truth that is more f than t,  from what i understand he puts ethical and moral values above pure material and logical truths so that seems to indicate f>t.

      I'm not going to watch thousand of his videos to understand him because it seems like a waste of time but from an article  it says that he "weights true as being accordant with value, not truth that has no essential value except the one that is ascribed to it".

      That seems like a favouring of ethics and values over logic but then again as it's been pointed out it's just describing a philosophical argument using functions which is something that is highly questionable.. I would still type him infj because he definitely seems to view this whole post-modernism as a "disease" and not a normal academic development of things, it's something that is disruptive of the social order which is something that he cares about above even truth, and that's more of a t thing.

      It reminds me of dostoyevsky (another infj) whose life work was in bare terms to fight against the demon of nihilism that plagued russia and strongly disrupted the social order, his work is in fact critiqued by many intx for being too ideologically driven, which is also something that people are doing nowadays with peterson..


    • Posted on: 2018-04-05 12:25:45

      diobono

       

      *more of a f thing* dammit


  • Posted on: 2018-04-04 00:37:17

    Ventus413

     

    Peterson is difficult to type because his visible behavior does not resemble his actual “shoes-off” psychometric type. Depending on your interpretation of Jungian typology and the body of evidence you are working from, you could reasonably type him as INFJ, INTP, and INTJ. However, only INFJ accurately describes his underlying cognitive orientation.

    The reason why Peterson is not an extravert despite his relatively high Big Five Extraversion is because he does not fit the Jungian/MBTI definition of extraversion. It is clear that there is a subjective buffer between Peterson’s own psyche and reality, in that he subjects reality to his own internalized impressions rather than the other way around. This is the Jungian definition of introversion and it does not matter that his Big Five Extraversion is high because the Big Five is behavioristic and does not automatically correlate to the psychometric definition of Extraversion.

    If Peterson took the MBTI test, he probably would test as an INTJ. But the impetus driving his “logical” nature is not an a priori cognitive bias toward reason and logic, but his own values, social perceptions, and conscience. He believes that truth is the highest value but has justified this (whenever pressed on it) using arguments rooted in the proper function of society and on ethical grounds — which implies that the impetus of his prioritization of truth is his sense of values and human relationships/society (Fe, not Te).

    In addition, his definition of truth is by no means a traditional definition of truth. We can see this in his debate with Sam Harris — Harris employs a traditional definition of truth while Peterson employs a more ethic driven and subjective definition of truth. In fact when Harris noticed this, he spent the rest of the debate trying to convince Peterson to adopt a more rational conception of truth. One can use this debate as a cipher to decode what Peterson means by truth. And when you do this, he stops resembling an NT and instead resembles an NF with an argumentative streak.

    So why does he also resemble an INTP in ways? Because since INFJs have Ti and not Te, when they attempt to be more logical, i.e. “T,” they utilize a reasoning style that is more like the INTP’s reasoning style than the INTJ’s. Nobody who types him as INTP can utilize evidence from any aspect of his life besides his debating style, because once you do that you will find that he does not in any way resemble a P type.

    Tl;dr
    Peterson is an INFJ who poses as an INTJ and when doing so exudes some INTP communicative characteristics.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-04 01:01:32

      Khel

       

      Are you real


    • Posted on: 2018-04-04 01:27:20

      Ventus413

       

      Yes


    • Posted on: 2018-04-04 01:34:59

      scotty

       

      Why would he score I on the MBTI test?


    • Posted on: 2018-04-04 05:03:57

      Zeego

       

      HAHAHA Ventus where were you this whole time? How did you rediscover the site in its new incarnation?


    • Posted on: 2018-04-04 05:45:30

      Ventus413

       

      @scotty - for the reasons I mentioned above. Peterson’s a Jungian introvert so I assume he would score as one on a Jungian type test such as the MBTI.

      @Zeego - a combination of very busy and thinking P-D had been rendered an utter wreck because of trolling. I just stumbled upon this incarnation of the site; I’m glad to see it lives on with somewhat less trolling. It’s a shame the voting system doesn’t work well....


    • Posted on: 2018-04-04 06:46:28

      scotty

       

      @Ventus ...but "having a subjective buffer between yourself and reality" isn't asked for on the MBTI test at all with regards to E/I. If anything it may show up in N/S (where being more subjective = N). And if you're using Jung as your basis and saying he's an introvert, he'd have to be a rational and thus Introverted Thinking type would be the best fit. Which would make some sense, but with the Extraverted Thinking type I think you're getting a better fit. Jung used the word "synthetic" to describe the ET type in a way that describes what Peterson does ("Even when it analyses, it constructs, because it is always advancing beyond the, analysis to a new combination, a further conception which reunites the analysed material in a new way or adds some., thing further to the given material.") And he doesn't seem like the kind that would hang onto an unpopular subjective idea that he isn't able to back up with whatever kind of logic he decides to use. Is he not careful to avoid presenting things that may lose him some of his following? It's after all his effective communication of logic that backs fairly meanstream ideas and shared frustrations which has launched him into the spotlight. He appeals to the object quite well, maybe not in the "appeal to the intellectual process" sort of way that Sam Harris does but I do think overall there's a pretty strong case to be made for him having a good amount of Ti but not in a way where the subjective factor predominates in a way actually seen in IT types.

      Disclaimer: I've seen a lot more of people talking about him than actually what he says first-hand.

      Even if he is best described as a Jungian IT type he would get ENTJ on a test.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-04 06:50:53

      scotty

       

      PS: ...and I sort of ignored the idea of INFJ because at least in a Jungian sense he relies way too much on his "intellect", and perhaps his normal academic work (which I gather is respected enough, and uncontroversial) would be a better example of his extraverted thinking in action. And that's what he was doing for decades before he turned into a Youtube celebrity.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-04 07:36:37

      Ventus413

       

      @scotty - To be honest I am willing to concede the possibility that he would score ENTJ on the MBTI test - I was more using that to illustrate that on the surface he resembles a type with Ni and Te (and since I had already argued for introversion, I said INTJ). However, the MBTI test (while not asking about that directly) structures its questions to test for Jungian introversion - not shyness or reclusiveness. Also Peterson’s high Big Five Extraversion is mostly due to Assertiveness and not the other traits associated with MBTI E types. I still would expect him to test INTJ but it really doesn’t matter within the broader context of what I was trying to say.

      When I first found out about him I thought he was an xNTJ too, so I definitely could see why you (and others who haven’t seen that many videos of him) would perceive him as a NT type. But as I saw more of him, I noticed several inconsistencies with the (I)NTJ hypothesis, which I outlined and addressed above. The more you delve into him the more you see that his underlying cognitive orientations are centered around ethics, conscience, society, and human nature — and the brand of logic he employs is more Ti than Te. I went into this in more detail above.

      As for your argument about his academic work, he is a psychologist which is a field in which NF types often excel. He wouldn’t need to be a T type to enjoy uncontroversial academic success in this field. And intellect doesn’t necessarily equal Thinking.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-04 08:01:13

      scotty

       

      @ventus I have the actual MBTI test right in front of me and it structures its questions way more for "shyness and reclusiveness" than "Jungian introversion".

      As for intellect and Thinking, this is more of Jung's idea. I'm just saying if we are to follow what Jung writes about he'd be a Thinking type (i.e. a rational who prefers Thinking) above all. Intellectualizing "ethics, conscience, society, and human nature" would fit into Jung's view of both ET and IT types because the act of doing so suppresses the Feeling response to such issues and takes them into the intellectual domain.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-04 09:11:04

      Ventus413

       

      @scotty - On myersbriggs.org it explicitly states to not equate introversion with shyness or reclusiveness. I could easily see Peterson scoring >50% “I” on the test questions you linked because only a few of them pertain to assertiveness which is the primary facet of Big Five Extraversion that he scored highly on. But again, there is no need to continue debating this point because I’ve already conceded that it’s possible that he would score ENTJ.

      I think you’re misunderstanding what I mean by the “ethics etc.” comments. It’s not as simple as he’s intellectualizing his ethical beliefs. Rather, I mean that his ethics and conscience are a far more integral component of his underlying cognitive psychology than any of his logical justifications. I have seen him wax poetic about victimhood, purpose, ethics, religion, and other topics without using any logic whatsoever. In fact, he is naturally more of an aphoristic moralist than a moral analyst — and you can see that in many of his classroom lectures and talks delivered to like-minded crowds. Some of his justifications are not even rooted in logic but instead take the form of impassioned moral imperatives. That said, he is quite proficient with logic and argumentation when he needs to be — but he uses logic to buttress his ethical perceptions more than to construct them. Keep in mind he has a very high IQ and has been in academia for decades; any person with those traits would be proficient in logic. The fact that a significant swath of his character — the swath that seems more indicative of who he is — does not primarily use logic is a sign that he most likely is not a T type.

      It is possible that we are operating under differing assumptions as to what the T/F distinction is. In that case we will have to agree to disagree.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-04 09:47:14

      scotty

       

      @Ventus it doesn't really matter what the site says the test is supposed to be about when those are literally all the E/I questions on Form M. I didn't know what gave him a high Extraversion score but if it had to do with Assertiveness only (I'm not sure how that's actually defined), then it's easy to see how that wouldn't carry over to MBTI well. How about the rest of his Extraversion score? Was it above or below average?

      The imperatives you speak of sound more like an unconscious pull involving low-level Feeling alongside an influence from the "subjective factor" and "primordial image/archetypes" that Jung talks about, than an actual Feeling preference. This is speaking Jungverse though, not the many things that came afterward. And ultimately a lot of it is Jung's "fault" for sort of intermixing social roles and his conception of types.  Maybe it was more useful for his own purposes (leading to a bias behind his categorical system) to basically just consider intellectuals as T's and that way he could focus on E vs I.

      It seems you know more about Jordan than I do. I'm obviously not going to lecture you on who he is or isn't. My only real contribution here can be what Jung said or didn't say, or what MBTI is or isn't.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-04 16:52:02

      Ventus413

       

      @scotty - ah I see what you are saying. It is absolutely true that Jung himself classified most complex abstract intellectual thinkers as T (especially Ti) types. Part of this is because his definition of Ni was very narrow; some of the modern definition of Ni was actually built into Jung’s interpretation of Ti. A good example of someone who he typed as a Ti type who actually is a Ni type is Arthur Schopenhauer (who perhaps-not-so-coincidentally is the same breed of INFJ I believe Peterson is).

      I was using the word Jungian in a broader context to refer to the body of literature and theories that originated from or grew out of Jung’s work — specifically the ones related to typology. That probably was the source of the confusion.

      A good place to start if you want to see where INFJ is coming from (I actually forgot to mention this in my original arguments) is his answers on Quora. A sizable percentage of them are morally aphoristic and a few of them adopt explicitly Fe attitudes even when a T-like answer would have been perfectly legitimate.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-04 17:00:53

      Ventus413

       

      On Extraversion — what he said was that his score was high, “although that is mostly Assertiveness” — that implies to me that the rest of his Extraversion score was at best average. But what I am certain of is that Peterson subjects reality to his impressions before projecting his impressions on reality, which is a receptive-before-projective attitude that would most likely lead to him scoring “I” on all the questions pertaining to broad sociability and ability to start and carry conversations. I’m not a certified MBTI practitioner but I would assume that the questions’ goal is to obliquely figure out whether or not a person is a Jungian/MBTI introvert rather than simply label them as shy or reclusive.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-04 23:25:05

      scotty

       

      @Ventus

      (re: Comment 2)

      Regarding the MBTI questions you can read them yourself and see if you think there are these hidden methods of trying to measure Jungian concepts. MBTI at this point mainly cites its psychometric credibility statistically in terms of predictive value, test-retest reliability, etc. Even with what you quoted, it's like you have to imagine that the other half exists (that it really has this hidden motive). As far as I can tell, MBTI makes no effort to actually use Jung for much more than advertising purposes. Jung used the words "concrete" and "abstract" to describe E and I respectively, but then MBTI asks "solid" vs "abstract" as an S vs N question. Of course if you're using "Jungian" to refer to things that aren't actually from Jung like the 8 Myersian functions then I think you'd have a much better argument as to a pretense on MBTI's part to somehow reflect that in their questions.

      (re: Comment 1)

      Saying that Schopenhauer is "actually" an "Ni type" presupposes that one classification is correct and Jung is wrong, when no evidence has been produced to give replacement systems (such as one where Schopenhauer is INFJ) any relative legitimacy. Clearly the Jung-derivative (as in using Jungian language) with the most evidence showing it actually has utility is MBTI, which only very loosely links to his concepts, and in a way where the essence of J/P actually links best with Jung's original concept of having primary rational or irrational functions. And thus you end up with problems like his Introverted Thinking type being INTJ, his Introverted Intuitive type being INxP, his Introverted Sensation type being IxxP, and his Introverted Feeling type being INFx.

      I feel like using stuff like the presence of aphorisms to type people as F is more of a reaction to the lack of definition MBTI has for being used as a tool to categorize philosophical approaches (let's be honest, almost all these people would get NT, specifically leaning to INTJ in MBTI), so if you want to somehow divide philosophers up into different buckets rather than type them as INTJ, then you have to start creating your own rules artificially for sticking people in groupings that don't even reflect their MBTI type (see: CelebrityTypes/IDRLabs). Not to mention this involves typing their philosophical approach rather than the actual people as human beings which is certainly something that MBTI authorities would not consider to be a legitimate use of MBTI.  Although, of course, there would be some expected correlation between the two.

      tl;dr: I really don't think these little differences in philosophical approach have much place in MBTI discussions (even true Jungians would be using a very low-definition classification tool, as most people would be IT or ET types), except to hypothesize correlations, and that's mainly because what MBTI offers isn't inherently a classification system for philosophical approaches, unless you want to bend it around. But in that case can't you just use philosophy lingo to describe their differences, as I see you doing when mentioning aphorisms and whatnot?


    • Posted on: 2018-04-05 13:21:08

      doodlepoodle

       

      The problem with disscerning whether Peterson is an INFJ or not has to do with the inability for common typists to understand how Jungian functions might manifest in real life beahvior and so most are left with bare bones logical descriptions to argue on about.

      "Peterson demonstrated disagreeableness and assertiveness thus he can't be a feeler and must be an extravert." - paraphrasing some of the arguments I've heard about him not being an INFJ.

      At best they're pobably going to refer to the overly sensationalized descriptions of INFJs from letter MBTI test sties where INFJs are described as "misunderstood vessels of pain and emotion" - like a deified INFP. They don't realize that Ni dom INFJs can appear almost as distant and cold as an INTJs and depeneding on their beliefs and professions and come off as rather disagreeable even if they have auxillary Fe.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-05 18:19:45

      Ventus413

       

      @doodlepoodle - Agreed. There is a limit to how many people will even understand our arguments because they will look at Peterson and see him being disagreeable, critical, logical, and undiplomatic in debates and be like “look, he’s T/Te.” What they don’t understand is that cognitive functions are not behaviors, but mental processes. There are aggressive Fe types and placid Te types (I’m actually an example of the latter). That is why people have to interpret and analyze not just what people say, but why they say it, what their underlying cognitive biases and goals are, etc.

      There’s also the problem of people working off of limited data sets. I doubt most of the people typing Peterson as a T type have seen the video where Peterson starts talking about how his ideas are helping disenfranchised boys and literally bursts into tears. Ironically if that was your only data point, you *would* classify Peterson as a “vessel of pain and emotion” even if you were going off of simplistic stereotypes. :P

      @scotty - You raise some interesting/good points. I actually agree with you on your problem with saying “Schopenhauer is actually a Ni type” — I was not being sufficiently precise with my language there. What I meant is Schopenhauer would be considered a Ni type based on most modern definitions of Ni, not that Jung was wrong in originally considering him a Ti type under his own system. Same goes for my use of the word “Jungian” — I am using it to refer to “Jungian typology” which refers to typology that utilizes Jungian cognitive functions as its foundation. I’m not only using it to refer to ideas directly put forward by Jung himself.

      As for your comments about differentiating philosophers, I guess we are approaching typology differently. You’re very empirical in your approach, while I am more interpretive. Since the MBTI is a psychometric assessment used to approximate one’s cognitive functions (and not a simple behavioristic exam like the Big Five), I don’t think it’s enough to notice that philosophers generally exude NT behavior. Even Myers-Briggs practicioners will generally tell you that the test is measuring your “shoes-off” self and not how you are within the context of your lifestyle. Because of that, I never think it’s enough to say that a philosopher is a T type because philosophy is a T discipline and he’s really good at it. I always try to strip away the “of course they would be like that” T traits from disciplines like science and philosophy — just as I try to strip away the “of course they would be like that” F traits from disciplines like art and counseling. When I do that to Peterson, he definitely appears to be an F/Fe type.

      The other thing I’ll say is I actually agree with you about typing people as human beings and not as examples of their profession. That is why I attempt to strip away the “of course they would be like that” traits from their profession. The problem is simply trying to type people you don’t know requires you to work off of limited data sets and utilize a lot of induction and inference. In Peterson’s case much of the evidence I have to work with comes from his interviews about psychology and philosophical ideology, so I have to parse through that and work with it. If a well-reviewed personality biography of Peterson came out I would value its evidence higher than the interviews. But I haven’t enountered one.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-06 09:50:03

      scotty

       

      @Ventus about differentiating philosophers, didn't they find their way into the philosophy discipline though? Not saying that everyone who finds there way there is a NT but what I think a lot of people do is try to calibrate the type boundaries in order to basically split hairs. Like imagine a rainbow of all people, and most philosophers are the color indigo, but different shades. I feel like for the purpose of making typology meaningful when approaching philosophers, people like CT/IDRL basically created their own rainbow inside of indigo. And rather than looking at the immense similarities between them, especially compared to a more general population, they instead miss the bigger picture and are left on their little mission to try to type philosophers, scientists, etc. as something other than NT, especially when it makes them feel like they are looking at things "deeper" and "more nuanced" than MBTI. It's like an intelligence ego boost for them even though they've produced nothing of value.

      If we're saying people like Peterson, Schopenhauer, Wittgenstein, and Bohr are "INFJs" that's fine (outside of the nomenclature which is counterintuitive imo) for a single-purposed classification system geared toward philosophers and scientists. But apply it on a bigger scope and you're left with a pretty useless tool.

      And yeah as far as I'm concerned I do think that sort of figuring where people will fit in the actual MBTI world makes most sense when using MBTI types but that doesn't mean it's not interesting to think about where these people would be classified by someone like Jung or whatever people came up with after him that probably isn't anything like his ideas. Which is why I don't mind stuff like functions or Enneagram or other non-empirical personality models - they each create their own universe which you can have your fun with, but when it comes to actually saying "I am looking at their cognition" then all these systems which aren't backed up by evidence are pretty useless to me for that task. I don't even have a type in function magic lol.


  • Posted on: 2018-03-24 15:54:03

    diobono

     

    The functions are a theory. The foundation for the function theory is carl jung. Carl jung is a kantian. Kant is a philosopher. Philosophers have theories. Theories are fun. Shut the fuck up with overly dogmatic faith in dichotomies, a mix of both function and dichotomy is probably the best.If you want scientific truths don't look at mbti.

    If you want some shadow of 'grounding' for function theory look at dario nardis work, from what i know it tries to have evidence of functions through brain scans and how different mbtis have different areas of the brain light up accordingly. Its not much but enough to atleast justify using it and taking it into consideration.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-24 16:49:12

      strawberry crisis

       

      The only people who actually use dichotomies on this website are people who type using functions. Are you an Se/Ni or Ne/Si user? Dario Nardi’s work shouldn’t be taken seriously. Keep in mind that if his work proved anything at all, other neuroscientists would have jumped on his findings—neuroscience would have to be completely reshaped. His sample size is dreadful and watching Nardi’s videos, I think it’s clear that he is biased in wanting to prove the existence of the functions. I wouldn’t be surprised if he cherrypicked his data to draw conclusions in favor of the idea that functions are literal processes in the brain.

      I also really don’t like the “mix the two theories together” approach. It sounds smart to put the two together and come up with The True Type based on a careful review of both sides of it but it’s simply wrong to mix two things together that aren’t compatible with one another. It’s not even two different theories—there’s MBTI and the infinitely many different interpretations people have for the functions.

      None of this is about “scientific truths” but just logical consistency between how you decide someone’s MBTI type and the means that you use to get there.  MBTI is MBTI and the various function theories people use aren’t irrefutably about MBTI.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-02 01:26:40

      doodlepoodle

       

      The problem with the vagueness of the J/P axis in letter MBTI pretty much makes cognitive functions and letter MBTI mutually exclusive. I prefer cognitive functions because loop/grip theory can explain seemingly contradictory behavior while still staying consistent with one type (i.e. INFJ seeming like an INTP/J or ISTP).

      Before stating the fact that loop/grip theories aren't real I'll remind that MBTI as a whole is rejected by psychologists. Letter and functions. 

      It's about, as strawberry said, "just logial consistency between how you decide someone's MBTI type and the means you use to get there".


    • Posted on: 2018-04-02 01:34:09

      Khel

       

      At least letters just measure tendencies for a given time and person. Only descriptive. No "truth" pretention other than that.

      The one true type shit is dumb.

      Trying to bound a person's psychological dynamic within the functions system with loops and grips is dumb, especially since they more than anything else seem to just be ways of twisting the theory to allow it to stay in existence without facing contradictions and have no other ground, use and rules than the need to seem right. Grips are retarded, loops are retarded.

      Now everyone do what they want and in the end, this website is pretty much dedicated to shit.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-02 01:35:53

      Khel

       

      Also Dario Nardi's work is biased trash. Stop with this.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-05 13:52:55

      doodlepoodle

       

      But there are different descriptions for different types. If I get INFJ today then I get ESFP one day then ISTP the other and INTP sometime later, does that mean I am all of those types? They have contradicting traits you know? I cannot equally be the warm and wise INFJ and be the cold and socially-retarded INTP or the party animal ESFP at the same time. If you go over the descriptions for individual types in letter MBTI there are contradicting traits and overall demeanors that wouldn't make sense for a personal to have all at the same time. It defeats the point of having one type.


      If you want to reduce MBTI into simple horoscope fun and relegate it to letter MBTI then be my guest.


      Functions can at least describe why a type might behave differently (even contradict their overall type) in different circumstances and under pressure. You can get more analytical/cold demeanor in a feeling type if they're in their loop or under grip. Those traits would be described as occuring when the person in under stress or is having diffuclty operating with higher and healthier functions. These traits would be a lot more underdeveloped than users who have them higher in their stack and would be expressed unhealthily.


      Functions, loop, and grip theory can reconcile contradicting beheaviors in a type that letter MBTI cannot.


      It makes the theory more consistent under different applications. I don't understand the big hard on about them.


      It doesn't matter if functions are based on "unfounded" evidence. MBTI a whole, including letter MBTI, is a dismissed by the psychologists as a big pseudoscience. If you're upset that certain aspects of the MBTI uses theories that aren't founded on evidence then you shouldn't be wasting time arguing about MBTI (especially, when you guys get off to nonsense like Enneagram).


       


       


  • Posted on: 2018-03-23 04:10:24

    mike ike

     

    who the fuck even is jordan peterson


  • Posted on: 2018-03-22 15:01:15

    diobono

     

    This man has absolutely no Te, he literally just projects all his stupid shit theories into whatever his object of discourse is. Look at the bible videos, he does not really care about the already existing theological framework behind the bible, the content that comes out of his mouth when he talks about it is almost completely separated from the work. Shows a lack of Te but very strong ni. He is probably xnfj.

    It's like those guys who look at a painting and start rambling on about all it's obscure deep meanings without any clue of what they are going on about. Why would i watch videos of this guy blabbering on about the bible when i could look at actual bible scholarship? Anyway imo this guy is just not a T type. He plays on the emotions too much to be intx. (I already wrote a comment sort of like this but whatever)


    • Posted on: 2018-03-22 15:52:12

      Teru Mikami

       

      you and other people associate him with "Fe" because of his "cult following" and other stereotyped associations and not because he shows any identifiable traits of a strong (extroverted) feeler, if he doesn't fit into Te neither does he fit into Fe, and since when are T types incapable of rambling?


    • Posted on: 2018-03-22 15:58:11

      Teru Mikami

       

      also, you said he isn't a 5(w4) in the past, while "not really caring about the already existing theological framework (behind the bible)" is a trait that's VERY heavily correlated with type 5, especially 5w4 which cares about individuality and finding personal ways of doing things, and I'd think being accepted or "worshipped" for finding a way to talk about their insights and debate and debunk others would be any 5s wet dream as opposed to something they wouldn't want at all


    • Posted on: 2018-03-23 04:09:37

      doodlepoodle

       

      Teru, you don't really understand functions. Stop talking about them. You consistently associate Fe with F types and Te with T types without cosnidering Ti T types nad Fi T types. It's as if you don't really get the difference at all. Stop it.

      Stick to letter MBTI and ennegram. That way you can have actual conversations with other people without losing your shit at the fact they can't understand.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-23 13:39:28

      Teru Mikami

       

      woah I didn't know that every time I bring up F and T types I have to add Fe/Fi/dom/aux and Te/Ti/dom/aux


    • Posted on: 2018-03-23 16:41:26

      doodlepoodle

       

      Jesus, Teru. You tried to make a shitty joke and actually managed to shoot yourself in the foot.

      Yeah, you're supposed to acknowledge which functions they have like you're doing there.

      #Knowledge is half the battle.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-23 19:16:13

      Teru Mikami

       

      you're an idiot


    • Posted on: 2018-03-24 07:35:22

      doodlepoodle

       

      no u


    • Posted on: 2018-03-24 17:04:36

      Oracle

       

      @diobano

      Your anti-Te argument is not an argument against him being a type with Te, it is an argument against him being a Te dominant (ExTJ). It is Te dominants who almost invariably utilize objective reality and existing logical data as a foundation. Both INTJs and INFJs are prone to that disconnected-from-reality-and-existing-data style of discussion and perception because that is how dominant Ni works, being a subjective (introverted) Perceiving function that absorbs information and subjects it to the abstract and synthesizing insights of the psyche.

      How INTJs and INFJs differ is how they augment these insights. Since INTJs have auxiliary Te, they supplement and analyze their convergent and subjective abstract insights using marshaled and direct objective rationales. This is why most INTJs deny the subjectivity of their viewpoints and seem to live life by pragmatic logical standards, yet at the same time exhibit underlying signs of idiosyncratic personal idea-subjectivity.

      I don’t see how this doesn’t describe Jordan Peterson perfectly. In every interview I’ve seen of him he utilizes an assertive and surface-level-objective reasoning style that while generally civil also seems to be marshaling and direct, and unconcerned with packaging its message to soothe or appease its listeners. Despite the abstract and idiosyncratic nature of his viewpoints, when someone asks him to justify them he utilizes factual information and justifications founded upon logical standards, and does not attempt to build empathic bridges with his questioners. He also is very argumentative and blunt and does not seem to be concerned with tact. I have seen a clip where he debates a transgender professor on the pronouns issue and the professor actually attempts to build emotional bridges with him and appeals to his sense of sympathy/ethics/properness. Peterson roundly rejects all of these overtures and plows on unwaveringly with his arguments rooted in logic. An INFJ, being an auxiliary Fe type, would at least acknowledge the professor’s attempts to build bridges and then would word his rebuttal in a manner that soothes or addresses those concerns. Because INFJs have auxiliary Fe and unrepressed Ti, they actually are masters at wording their views in a manner that keeps them relatively intact while also soothing the listener. Peterson does not even attempt this, or if he does, he does not do a good job. Instead, he words his views in a manner that prioritizes clarity and sincerity - politeness be damned.

      As for the emotional appeals, that is simply an argument against being an inferior F_ type (IxTP or ExTJ). I agree that he plays on emotions more than the average INTJ, but INTJs have tertiary Fi and thus it is not beyond them to utilize pathos in their argumentation style. I believe Peterson is an INTJ with strong Fi, which would also explain why you perceived him as having no Te - since the T/F axis is interconnected, his strong Fi weakens his Te.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-24 18:02:35

      doodlepoodle

       

      Oracle, which transgender professer interviewer were you speaking about? I know there was the one on TV and there was the big debate in UoT. I've seen him do a few more and his coldness seems to be constant reaction that he throws towards them specificially.

      Just wanna know because given the circumstances I can make an argument or two where an INFJ could react the way he did.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-24 19:46:21

      Oracle

       

      @doodlepoodle

      This interview https://youtu.be/SiijS_9hPkM is the one I was thinking of. It’s of particular note because the transgender professor (Peet) approaches the interview in the way a typical Fe type would. Since they are debating decisions (which uses the T/F axis) and are not primarily interpreting, differences between introversion and extroversion would not play a significant part here. Thus if they were both Fe types I would expect to see similarities in their underlying cognitive assumptions, despite their differences on the political spectrum. But it seems to me like their cognitive assumptions and biases are completely different - toward decency and manner (Peet, Fe) and toward truth and effectiveness (Peterson, Te). Peet continually references things like sympathy, tolerance, kindness, and decency while Peterson references practicality, truth, efficiency, and past precedent. This is even true when Peterson is speaking about his ethical values (he effectively says “wait a minute, tough-minded truthfulness is a higher form of kindness than kindness”) and when Peet is speaking about practicality (he effectively says “wait a minute, the pronouns solution IS practical because it’s not that hard and it helps you treat trans people with respect”). I would be interested in reading how you see auxiliary Fe in this interview as well as if you have seen other interviews where his alleged INFJness is clear.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-05 15:50:51

      doodlepoodle

       

      First of all, I have to address a few misconceptions.


      Peets intentions are not genuine.


      He, like most ideological advocates of "trans-rights" are referring to "kindness, tolerance, and decency" to try and guilt-trip people into adhereing to trans-pronouns laws.  On the contrary, Peet is not at all trying to build bridges Peterson at all. He starts the interview by giving sarcastic remarks - he gives him a "B+ for his role a critic and an F for having conscience". He begins the interview disrespecting Peterson by not taking his position seriously and continuing to be condescending towards him throughout the interview. Peterson is essentially on the attack that's why he's gets as agitated and logical as he does. 


      He has no reason to build bridges with that's why he sticks to coldly analyzing his arguments and stating his point of view. INFJs use teriary Ti to operate when Ni and Fe aren't doing to the job. Peterson knows right away that submitting to Peets seemingly "Fe" platitudes are not going to do him any good. So he sticks to using Ni and Ti to break apart Peets arguments.


      Contrary, to what you're saying I don't think Peet has any Fe at all. He is far more interested in pointing out how Peterson doesn't follow the obvious solutions to the problem of trans pronouns like using a smartphone with coded pronouns and not recognizing that we obviously ought to be nice to others. It may seem likes Peet is concerned with moral obligations but given his lack of seriosness and respect towards Peterson, it doesn't seem to be the case. He even calls Peterson "lazy" for using their appearence to know pronoun he should use. It's more appropriate for Te types to be concerned about obvious facts and solutions like Peet. Peet not once tries to build bridges with him and rudely speaks over him many times through out the interview.


      On the contrary, Peet is concerned with being pragmatic while using morality as a mask whereas Peterson sticks to his Ni (ideals and conseuquenes) of how people ought to act (truth over kindness).


      It would make sense for an INFJ to behave way Peterson did. Ni tries to get to the core of Fe ethics and behavior to descern it's meaning and intentions and thus it's poential consequences. Peterson sees that Peet is refering to "kindness and decency" but sees it be a mask and says "kindness is the excsue social justice warriors use to exercise controll over what other people think and say". He is using Ni and Fe to project what the outcome and intention of the specific set of mindset that Peet is arguing for.


      Peet's agression put Peterson in a bad position so his auxillary Fe is less expressive than it should be and this Ti takes over.


    • Posted on: 2018-04-05 15:55:48

      doodlepoodle

       

      //"INFJs have auxillary Fe and unrepressed Ti, they are actually masters at wording their views in a manner that keeps them relatively intact while also soothing the listener."//


      You really should see Peterson's lectures. You'll understand why people enjoy them so much. 


  • Posted on: 2018-03-20 08:02:00

    preachersofdeath!

     

    Way better guess? I don't guess that he's an INTP, I know he is. Your lack of confidence indicates you don't know what you're talking about. I like how you plebs are trying to find random reasons why you think he's a certain type while all I'm doing is using my Ni. And hedonistic? Who cares? He's a nerd. No offense to Mr. Peterson, of course.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 08:20:12

      strawberry crisis

       

      Okay so this is an absolute boat load of tribe validation - whether it's due to being a saviour or demon, I'm unsure, not really enough information to gauge.
      Do you know whether your elation at being praised is due more to the fact that you felt accepted, or wanted by other people - or was it due to feeling as though it meant you personally were 'good'? There's a difference I'm hoping you'll catch on to here.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 08:48:26

      preachersofdeath!

       

      I'm merely pissed that these people don't think like me, can't see that he's an INTP, so they're pretty much a bunch of confident idiots, except for that one guy whose not even confident yet says I'm wrong and shares his opinion anyway.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 14:30:00

      strawberry crisis

       

      Can you buy a 'promise' from the shop? A promise is an abstract concept - as is 'good guys' - if you will notice - this is actually NF we're seeing here, values (F) in the abstract world (N) - "seen what promises are worth" - worth - valuation - F. "good guys" - good, value, F, 'good guys', abstract concept - N.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 17:02:57

      preachersofdeath!

       

      Speak English, obscurantist coward.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 17:22:21

      strawberry crisis

       

      Okay brilliant, so we're seeing something that helps identify which way the letters are - here, you're basically saying you like to project how you imagine an idea might play out into the future (N) - evaluate it's efficiency/effectiveness (I'd like to know according to what, exactly?) - but, at the end of the day, what matters is whether something works (in regards to theoretical ideas, this is based on an abstract value (NF) - the 'greatness' of the idea itself), and you specify this is of higher importance than encouraging new, innovative ideas.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 18:27:40

      doodlepoodle

       

      Your ego is not your Ni. That's your teritary Fi, INTJ.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-23 01:16:50

      Snowfrost918

       

      after using my Ti genius to analyze you thoroughly, I have come to the conclusion that you, sir, are an INTP who's talking shit for kicks. 


  • Posted on: 2018-03-16 10:24:04

    preachersofdeath!

     

    You guys are such retards. He is obviously an INTP.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-16 11:52:39

      diobono

       

      Why don't you lay down some reasons instead of calling everyone but you a retard? He's anything but an easy person to type. 


    • Posted on: 2018-03-16 15:32:23

      Teru Mikami

       

      seconded, I would agree with INTx but it's definitely not obvious


    • Posted on: 2018-03-18 07:49:29

      preachersofdeath!

       

      It's obvious to me because he reminds me of so many other INTPs and of no other type. This is the best way to type someone, and you could reach this conclusion with the use of reason.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-18 07:51:56

      preachersofdeath!

       

      It's obvious to me because he reminds me of so many other INTPs and of no other type. This is the best way to type someone, and you could reach this conclusion with the use of reason.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-18 13:05:51

      Teru Mikami

       

      nah he's INFJ because he analyzes people and reads jung


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 03:17:26

      scotty

       

      Yeah, explain how he's high in Extraversion and Conscientiousness in Big 5 but somehow he's obviously I and  P in MBTI? I know it's not a 1 to 1 match but ENTJ is a way better guess than INTP based on "INTPs you know".


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 03:25:45

      Lono

       

      Having watched a lot of his videos I think he's clearly Ni dom. He's obsessed with symbolism and meaning. There's a video of a sculpture he made and the amount of depth behind something as simple as a piece of art he made for fun is staggering. His hedonism in his youth although suggest inferior Se. He got himself back on track by visualizing a career and future and systematically removing his sensory distractions.

      Te and Fe aux is harder to figure out but he's a good orator and surprisingly social which suggests Fe. INFJs are frequently among the most social introverts so it fits.

       


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 05:44:17

      scotty

       

      Uh... hedonism in youth suggests... INJ?!?!???

      Please spare me your function magic here.

      And the rest of your crap just makes you sound like you're worshipping his "depth" and you think that only INJs can be "deep", whatever that even means, as if ENTJs couldn't do the same thing, especially when they have a rabid fanbase gobbling up whatever they are thrown.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 05:49:55

      strawberry crisis

       

      According to actual literature written on the stack you use today, your youth developmental process only goes from an erratic, unfocused stage until about the age of 6, from where your dominant and auxiliary functions would then develop into your early twenties. Being hedonistic during youth could only suggest Pe-dom in the model, not Pe in the inferior position.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 05:58:59

      Lono

       

      @scotty When I say youth I mean well into 20s. He was drinking and smoking uncontrollably while trying to get through Grad school so much so if was hindering his career and education

      . It's not about personal depth but about the depth of the idea. The interwoven connection of meaning is indicative of heavy Ni use. Find the video and you'll see a heavy Ni process most likely Dom. 

      Well of course he could be ENTJ but you fail to give any example or reasoning behind it you're simply attacking me. I had not settled on a type I simply gave what I believed to be the most logical. 

      The fact that you specify his letters means you probably don't type by functions so we're already looking at this from two differing viewpoints. 

      I should also point out I'm not a particular fan of his and I disagree with a lot of his beliefs.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 06:31:30

      scotty

       

      Ok I'm sorry for the attacks. Even in function models though, why would someone start from their inferior function and work backwards? This is not "logical" is it, unless you have some weird sort of belief system that younger people have to overcome their overwhelming inferior function or something like that? Wouldn't it make more sense to type him as something like Ji-Se-Ni-Je in that case? As in this hedonistic drive was too prevalent until he learned how to develop his tertiary function which he then worked on to arrive at where he is at now?

      Yes I type by letters and think that ISxP is as far from reality as you can get but I'm just trying to piece together how you view functions and I really don't even get how the hedonism thing would work.

      And "interwoven connection of meaning" just sounds like using intuition in general, not a specific kind of it.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 06:44:07

      Lono

       

      It's more that his drinking came when he was stressed and started to take over his life.  He didn't start hedonistic but became that way. The pressures of school started to deeply affect him and a life of partying numbed him and made him unhealthy. He was always a future driven intellectual but I think it shows an inferior function when it starts to hinder oneself. Most Se dom and Aux aren't exactly alcoholics as their healthy Se manifests in things like art and sports and while a hedonist tendency is possible it's generally not a focus. Hedonism is certainly unhealthy. 

      I realize "interwoven connection of meaning" does sound vague enough to be any kind of intuition but if I can find the video it feels very much like the few Ni heavy people I know discussing their creative process and very much how I understand it to be. 

       


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 15:37:12

      Blank

       

      So your argument is that others are retard for not thinking like you... That's weak. It doesn't proof anything and I'm sorry to tell you but 'ad hominems' are as much used for idiots as by idiots. If you think or believe he's 'X' great for you, try to prove it instead of complaining. If you do it right, people may change their minds. 


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 19:31:44

      scotty

       

      @Lono so basically you categorized some people as Ni and he reminds you of what they do. Well in that case I don't think we can go any further.


  • Posted on: 2018-03-14 15:50:24

    Teru Mikami

     

    pretty much given up on his mbti type (although F/aux Fe makes absolutely zero sense, you guys are reaching), but if you think he's a 1, watch this video. He explains how he had strong hedonistic tendencies, problems with alcohol and smoking, even how he had obsessive intellectual pursuits that have taken up most of his life. A lot of it really fits into the 5's integration and disintegration. Really wanna hear the reasoning behind typing him as a 1.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-14 20:51:47

      doodlepoodle

       

      How do you net see his Fe? Hedonism just says inferior Se, really.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-14 21:57:44

      Teru Mikami

       

      I don't see F/high Fe because repeatedly denying social harmony in favor of logical consistency does not fit into F/high Fe, nor does hedonism say inferior Se (though please do try to rationalise that in a way that actually holds up), that's the end of it


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 04:29:49

      doodlepoodle

       

      That's what Fe dom's do - they care first and foremost about maintaining social harmony one way or another.

      Peterson is clearly not an Fe-dom as he's doesn't have as much problem with breaking it, however, that means he could be Fe-aux, tert, or inferior. Peterson not being an Fe dom just says he's not an ExFJ. That's it.  On that note, his concern is not really about logical consistency but what is going to be good for the future of Canada.  He just uses Ti to argue for it - which he has an expert handle on as he comes off an INTx to some typists.

      He firsts his vision first and foremost and puts social harmony second that's why he's an INFJ. He clearly has a strong Fe as he's speaking out of moral concerns about Canada's future he's just not as concerned about putting on a pretty face as an ENFJ would (you have Trudeau for that).

      Let's not assume all rebels are Fi driven NTJ types or lower Fe NTP types. It's a good thing to be able to differentiate from common tendencies of certain the functions and stacks of MBTI types and how they manifest in the behavior of real life individuals.

      You really have to delve into his work to get a greater understanding of his type. I think we've spoken before about this.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 12:28:53

      Teru Mikami

       

      What are you talking about? ENFJ, being an extroverted judger, is more likely to interrupt social gatherings to forward themselves than an INFJ is. Introverts are more reluctant to deny social harmony than extroverts in the first place, this has been empirically backed by studies. INFJ has a laid-back and submissive temperament, IxFJ has the most socially submissive and cooperative temperament of any of the 16 types. Having "moral concerns" of a country's future is not correlated with a cognitive function, that's ridiculous. You people will find a way to dance your way around any argument made against you using the mental gymnastics of a tumblr kid, claiming shit like "hedonism is inferior Se", as if INxJs are the only types to be able to be hedonistic when things don't go their way, or judgers are even more likely than perceivers to give into hedonistic tendencies (again, explain this). Peterson is not a feeler.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 19:10:36

      doodlepoodle

       

      How about you do a holistic analysis of Peterson's type instead of cross referencing specific descriptions from multiples sources of MBTI and other psychological sources of study that doesn't consistently stick to MBTI and Jungian function stacks.

      You'e not looking at the bigger picture and neither are you demonstrating an understanding of function dynamics.

      //"Peterson is not a feeler"// 

      Consistently define Peterson not being a feeler under Jungian functions otherwise there's not much merit to this claim. He might as well be an ISTP since you think he's not a feeler and has problems with hedonism. Or ESTP. I don't know.

       


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 23:43:12

      Teru Mikami

       

      I don't care about your deluded bigger picture, I made that clear from the start, I think he's not a feeler and you're not making sense. If all you can tell me is to "delve deeper into his stuff" and "look at the bigger picture" without giving me anything you can back up, what am I supposed to find there? Am I supposed to realize that caring about a country getting fucked up is somehow correlated with a cognitive function? That the hedonism argument isn't self-masturbatory internet INJs trying to rationalise why they're fat and ugly and somehow Jung himself said it's "inferior Se"? That I'm supposed to deny studies in favor of your semantics that (actually) don't consistently stick to anything because you said so? Cause if so, you're right, I've got some learning to do.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-20 23:45:03

      Teru Mikami

       

      Give me something you can back up, assess his behavior, explain to me why how he acts fits into an F type in a way you can prove it, without relying on your own fantasy view of him or pointing to things behind the curtains that aren't there. If not, guess it's your problem, but I won't be convinced. Fucking poser ass poodle, you're a pibble.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-23 06:10:01

      doodlepoodle

       

      Well, what do you expect me to do? You're using hoping back and forth from MBTI functions, MBTI letters, and non-MBTI sociological studies. You're not making a definite point. How do you expect me to argue against that?


      Oh well.


      //"What are you talking about? ENFJ, being an extraverted judger, is more more likely interrupt social gatherings to forward themselves than an INFJ is."//


      I specifically said Fe. Do you know what that means? Do you how to differentiate it from Te? An Fe user is concered about social harmony. ExFJ is your gandma that wants to feed you snacks all the time or the church pastor who wants to use his religious charisma to strengthen the bond in his church. Simply speaking, Fe is concerned about satiating the well being of others. They want to bring people together or create a harmonious or morally good society.


      Te types on the otherhand are more concerned with the implementing a set of personal objectives based on practical rules (if you will). They are first and foremost concerned about completing their agenda due to Fi-Te and are more likely to, as you said, interupt social harmony as they do't have Fe and want to satiate their own personal Fi feelings and desires. They are far more likely to fight and disrupt social gathering.


      That said, Fe doms are first and foremost concerned with creating social harmony. They can be assertive given their competence with Fe but that is not the same thing as disrupting a social scene (or interupt as you said). In most cases Fe doms are the ones conducting a social scene. Their goal is to create an environement where everyone can be emotionally and morally stable and they do it via Si or Ni (aux functions).


      Those are two different things you have to understand. Being asertive and being socially interuptive are not the same things.


      ExFJs assert their desire to bring people together. ExTJs assert their own desires to attain what they want.


      Your analysis of E types (not ENFJs since you didn't consider functions) is based off the general assertive nature of extraverts and you confusion of assertiveness with social disruptiveness and concluding the same would apply to all E types regardless of function dynamics. Again you need brush up on your functions.


      //"Introverts are more reluctant to deny social harmony than extraverts in the first place, this as been empirically backed by studies. INFJ has a laid back and submissive temperment, IxFJ has the most socially submissive and cooperative temperment of the 16 types."//


      Introverts are more reluctant to deny social harmony than extraverts? IxFJs? That's arguable. But IxTPs? IxTJs? IxTJs have teritary Fi that feed into their Te. They don't care about social harmony. IxTPs have inferior Fe they want to brush over being socially caring and repress it since it's an inferior function. If they do express it it's usually slow and immature. What about ExTJ's (as I've explained), or ExTP's? ExTJs are the most combative extraverts they care the least about social harmony. ExTPs are more Fe driven than Ti dom IxTPs but they're still no where as much concerned with social harmony than FJs.


      Maintaining social harmony is almost exclusively associated with Fe dom/aux types. If those studies included their findings and described them in accordance to MBTI functions you would probably end up with results akin to what I'm describing (but of couse MBTI and congitive functions are pseudosciences so it never would).


      As for submissiveness, that has more to do with the inability to assert oneself and not necessarily caring to please someone else. It's a complicated phenomenon and you can't associate it with a single set of MBTI types.  Lack of Extraverting capacity will do that to any Introverted type, you sumbit to someone else when you cannot argue your position. That's not necessarily doing it to make others happy other person happy. It might be because you've already failed trying to assert your position and failed and fighting back will only damage your reputation (if you're a Te-Fi or any other Thinking type for example).


      Again, it's a complicated phenomena that you decied to absurdly oversimplify.


      Submissiveness is not the same thing is caring to soothe the tensions of another person. It could have many different causes.


      As for IxFJs. Again, not necessarily. Given their conciously people pleasing nature and being not as extraverted as their ExFJ counter parts they would come off as the most submissive types of MBTI. However, in the real world, IxFJs are capable of combativeness and disagreeableness if they mature and develop their Fe and Se/Ne along with their Ti - like INFJ Peterson or (maybe) ISFJ Roger Scruton. 


      Simply speaking, dominant Ni/Si makes them trend seekers of society and people. Their first and foremost first concern is to maintain tradtions of ethics if they're lead by Si-Fe or philosophize on or relevalute systems of ethics if they have Ni-Fe. They're not as driven as Fe doms to create a stable system of ethics for a group of people. An equally assertive IxFJ is less caring about social harmony relative to an equally assertive ExFJ. They can be more disagreeable and combative like Peterson they've matured enough or have reason to do so.


      ISxJs appear submissive but that's a result of their introversion and generally lesser tendency to be assertive but I've already argued that submissiveness/assertiveness is not necessarily the same thing as being a people pleaser - that's more in a dimension of agreeableness which I've stated before that Peterson does score higher than average on. Again, it's complicated.


      //"Am I supposed to realize that caring about a country getting fucked up is some how correlated with a cognitive function?"//


      Yes.


      You observed Peterson being disagreeable and assumed that makes him a "Thinker" (or a type with Te/Ti in their dom/aux position). I explained he is being disagreeable out of moral concerns for his country that makes him a feeler - or INFJ specicially if you go by functions. His combativeness driven by his moral concern is an example of a strong Fe being fed by a strong Ti but being lead by a strong Ni. This is why Peterson is an FJ. Specifically INFJ since his other functions are dominant Ni and inferior Se.


      //"claiming shit like "hedonism is inferior Se", as if INxJs are the only ones to get hedonistic when things don't go their way. "//


      Yeah, that is what actually happens for inferior Se types. Brush up on your functions, Teru.


      Over indulgence in senory activities to the point of being irresponsible is conventionally defined as being hedonistic. Se aux or dom types are likely to do it, sure, but because they have healthier control over thier Se they're likely to put it to use for something productive or healthy like playing sports, outdoor activities that are productive or starting a career in a physcially engaging job like construction or landscaping.  Peterson described his troubles through college causing him stress out and begin acholism and other unhealthy Se activites.


      It's has all the indicators inferior Se manifesting as it comes out during stressful times and shows up as unhealthy habits. Hedonism is unhealthy expressions of Se. Inferior Se, because it's less developed than dom/aux/ter Se is most likely manifest unhealthily and therefore be described as hedonistic.


      Same somewhat applies to lower Ne in xSFJs.


      //"or judgers are more likely than percievers to give into hedonistic tendencies"//


      They aren't and neither is Peterson. Peterson is not hedonistic - he just had troubles with hedonism earlier in his life when college stress got to him. Otherwise he's as collected as a judger would be.


       


    • Posted on: 2018-03-23 13:37:45

      Teru Mikami

       

      Why do you consistently try to explain the entire theory instead of simply giving your reasons for typing the guy? All you can back up in this entire mess of an analysis is that "Fe users are concerned with harmony" which Peterson isn't, and that "Te types are concerned with implementing a set of personal objectives based on practical rules", which doesn't even apply to his type, since you're not using it to argue for it. You spent so much of your time trying to explain the difference between the ExxJs only to conclude that yes, there is a difference, but I didn't say there isn't, nor did I say that it's completely unlikely for an introvert to deny social harmony or that it's impossible for certain introverted types to be more or less likely to do so than others, just that, on average, it's less likely for introverts than extroverts (but let's ignore that and write an entire thesis on the definition of submissive!). ENFJs are more likely to interrupt social gatherings than INFJs, ENTJs are more likely to do so than INTJs, nothing of what you said changes that. You pick my words to twist and flip them around, the only thing you're arguing here is semantics. 

      You observed Peterson being disagreeable and assumed that makes him a "Thinker" (or a type with Te/Ti in their dom/aux position). I explained he is being disagreeable out of moral concerns for his country that makes him a feeler - or INFJ specicially if you go by functions. His combativeness driven by his moral concern is an example of a strong Fe being fed by a strong Ti but being lead by a strong Ni. This is why Peterson is an FJ. Specifically INFJ since his other functions are dominant Ni and inferior Se.

      I disagree! He's actually ESFJ because his Fe is interacting with his tert Ne repressing his poor Ti which is feeding into his Si! It just works like this! Why can't you see it? Are you an idiot? Hahaha you're such an idiot, you can't see his Si hahahah. You mean to tell me that you think functions are subjective mental gymnastics used by biased losers who will rationalise any kind of trait into a type just so they can pin their own 4-letter code on someone without having to make sense or provide any kind of proof? Hahaha yeah okay buddy he's Fe-Si-Ne-Ti end of story, go on typing by letters! Can you believe this guy?

      Explain yourself instead of treating me like a fucking child you rambling moron.

      It's has all the indicators inferior Se manifesting as it comes out during stressful times and shows up as unhealthy habits. Hedonism is unhealthy expressions of Se. Inferior Se, because it's less developed than dom/aux/ter Se is most likely manifest unhealthily and therefore be described as hedonistic.

      No, inferior functions are repressed, unhealthy INxJs deny the present moment and live in their heads, you're describing the "Se grip" which is a circle-jerked phenomenon used to excuse the most overrated types having Se in a baby position so they can blame their flaws on it or can tell you shit like "hey we can be violent too!!". Hedonism and inferior Se are not correlated, every single type will act out in the present moment under stress, "having trouble with hedonism when stress gets to you" is not something only Ni-doms experience so you can't argue that somehow Se is to blame when everyone goes through it, Se or not. It's ridiculous mental gymnastics used by people who want everything to be related to functions because they're so messed up MBTI has become their world view, it's not grounded in anything.

      On the other hand though, Peterson explained how his hedonistic tendencies interfered with his intellectual pursuits almost textbook like I explained it just now, and since that's an actual documented thing in enneagram, that's my reason for typing him a 5, which was the only thing I was even arguing about to start with. I think he's a T type, Ti or Te, dom or aux, both make more sense than F (dom or aux, Fi-Te or Fe-Ti, know I have to add this or you'll jump on that too) to me. I gave you my reasons for what I think, so give me yours or fuck off, you're a brick wall at this point.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-24 08:47:14

      doodlepoodle

       

      //"Why do you try to explain the entire theory instead of simply your reasons for typing the guy."//


      Because you don't understand how to categorize human behavior and nor do you know how to corrleate MBTI to human traits and other tendencies (granted, I know it's pseudoscience). That's why I have to break them down step by step because you've clearly demonstrated that you don't understand them. 


      winksmileIt's not semanitcs. It's me trying address your deficiency in knowledge. Please appreciate it.smilewink


      I'm not gonna deal with Fe and ExFJ and the Extraverted thing. I've said that enough. Go back to the points I've made about Extraverts and types of Extraverts under MBTI. It shows how assertiveness for Extraverts can  be interuptive/disruptive or condcutive depending on whether an ExFJ has Fe or Te.


      You were wrong. Extraverts can be socially interuptive but not if they don't have Fe (theoretically speaking of course).


      You don't know how to define human traits and I had to put it in order by defining assertivenss, submisiveness, and it's relation to capacity for social interaction in a consistent manner with MBTI functions. If you don't understand then that's your fault. 


      winksmileYou have glaring issues with the terminologies you use. I'm trying to fix that. Please appreciate it.smilewink


      //"Explain yourself instead of treating me like a fucking child you rambling moron."//


      How can I do that when you yourself are rambling on about people who adhere to "tumblr" theories about MBTI functions are deluded retards. You do this everything I try to explain some about MBTI functions how it can relate it to Peterson's type. It's childish and your inablity to clearly state your own thoughts about makes it even worse. This is why I have break down my thoughts so precisely.


      I gave you chance to dicuss why you think Peterson is a "thinker" (or whatever MBTI type you have in mind) and let our conversation focus on just that but you couldn't that happen to some "tumblrina" now couldn't you? No, you had to chnage the goal post and ramble on about your distate for people who try to use accepted theories regarding inferior functions instead of giving me something to work with. 


      You haven't made a single argument for what you think is Peterson's type after I made the comment about Fe doms.


      Whatever. It's your loss.


      winksmileI'm trying to enlighten you with my Ni-Fe magic goodness about your emotional issues. Please appareciate it.smilewink


      //"Why can't you see it? Are you an idiot?"//


      Yeah, Teru, why can't you see Peterson's an INFJ? Are you an idiot?


      frownsmileYou have glaring issues with your MBTI typings. I'm trying to fix that. Please appreciate it.smilewink


      //"It's not grounded in anything"//


      I think everyone here knows that about MBTI and I've acknowledged it once before, again in this post, and again right now. I'm just asking you to be consistent in the way you type.


      And you're doing it again. You came this close to understanding how Peterson is an Ni dom and you fucked it all up because you were molested my some tumblrite when you were a kid.


      In common speak (I hope you understand what that means, we're Westerners after all, we're all socially capable individuals - I hope) or when we speak of things in a conventional sense, hedonism is usually associated with indulging in external sensory activities. It's usually described as unhealthy alcoholism, partying, raving, etc - it's conventionally described by using sensory activties as examples. On this basis specifically and in accoradance to MBTI functions, the presence of Extraverted Sensing, or Se, would explain why 


      Lower Ne is more likely to manifest in supersitious beliefs or unrealistically wild ambitions.


      Peterson's bouts with alcoholism and other unhealthy obsessives acitvities under stress seems like expressions of inferior Se or Peterson under going, as you said, inferior Se grip. For someone driven enough to consider a politcal career and had worked for the NDP party in Canada in his teenage years (he left by18) Peterson's seemingly uncharacteristic lack of control during stressful times and in indulgence in sensory activites seems to indicate he has inferior Se and thus has to have dominant Ni.


      We can see this in his his concern for Canada being driven solely about it's moral decay in the future. He could be ENFJ but he demonstrates a Ti strong enough to give people the impression he's a Thinker (Te/Ti dom/aux).


      You can see it in his lectures.


      They're very analytical and goes from point to point. It can even seem at times as if Peterson is rambling if one doesn't understand the context he's speaking about, but also very it's step by step because Peterson's other goal is also to be an expert communicator (as he thinks Universities should be place where people come to train their ability to voice their opinions). He's not an aimless rambler analyst like an xNTP. His Fe is skilled enough for effective communication otherwise his lectures wouldn't as engaging as they are. He can come off as argumentative but his motivation are solely by moral concerns for his people and his Ti is used to argue for and about his concerns. It's as if Fe is superior to his Ti but his Ti is strong enough that it's not an inferior function but it's still under his Fe. 


      The only sensible typing of Peterson in this case is Ni-Fe-Ti-Se INFJ. It makes the most logical sense when you consider his work, motivations, and tendencies as a whole.


      //"I gave you my reasons for what I think"//


      You gave me many reasons why specific things about my ideas on certain types and functions are "wrong". You have yet to make a detailed case on Peterson's type.


       


    • Posted on: 2018-03-24 10:21:25

      fg

       
      "Explain yourself instead of treating me like a fucking child you rambling moron." if you don't want to be treating as a child try to don't act and reason as one

    • Posted on: 2018-03-24 13:22:03

      Teru Mikami

       

      You spent 1000 words writing out passive-aggressive remarks only to call me emotionally unstable, you sure you doing okay bud

      //"It's not grounded in anything"//

      I think everyone here knows that about MBTI and I've acknowledged it once before, again in this post, and again right now. I'm just asking you to be consistent in the way you type.

      Functions aren't grounded in anything, there is this one part of MBTI however that is, has been polled and has actually been tested on, GEE GOLLY I WONDER WHAT IT IS

      And you're doing it again. You came this close to understanding how Peterson is an Ni dom and you fucked it all up because you were molested my some tumblrite when you were a kid.

      <- THE MORAL ETHICS OF THE EXTRAVERTED FEELER

      In common speak (I hope you understand what that means, we're Westerners after all, we're all socially capable individuals - I hope) or when we speak of things in a conventional sense, hedonism is usually associated with indulging in external sensory activities. It's usually described as unhealthy alcoholism, partying, raving, etc - it's conventionally described by using sensory activties as examples. On this basis specifically and in accoradance to MBTI functions, the presence of Extraverted Sensing, or Se, would explain why 

      No, the presence of extraverted perceiving functions would (start to) explain why, there are hedonistic intuitives who don't even have Se in their stack

      Lower Ne is more likely to manifest in supersitious beliefs or unrealistically wild ambitions.

      yes I'm obviously an ISTJ because it's in my bio, go and accuse me of missing the bigger picture some more because that's a trait that's related to SJs and you're clearly offending me with that one (because I'm an SJ)

      Peterson's bouts with alcoholism and other unhealthy obsessives acitvities under stress seems like expressions of inferior Se or Peterson under going, as you said, inferior Se grip. For someone driven enough to consider a politcal career and had worked for the NDP party in Canada in his teenage years (he left by18) Peterson's seemingly uncharacteristic lack of control during stressful times and in indulgence in sensory activites seems to indicate he has inferior Se and thus has to have dominant Ni.

      grips aren't real

      We can see this in his his concern for Canada being driven solely about it's moral decay in the future. He could be ENFJ but he demonstrates a Ti strong enough to give people the impression he's a Thinker (Te/Ti dom/aux).

      The argument that INFJs Ti is somehow as "strong" as that of an xxTP's or will appear (as) objective and cold is, again, a circle-jerked fad, the only people who claim this are mistyped INTPs on online fora or INFJs who overhype themselves, it's not a thing, no matter how ridiculous it sounds, the typology community is full of self-hyping heaps of shit

      We can see this in his his concern for Canada being driven solely about it's moral decay in the future. He could be ENFJ but he demonstrates a Ti strong enough to give people the impression he's a Thinker (Te/Ti dom/aux).

      Because he is, thinkers have moral concerns too you elitist twat, IxTJs specifically can be very oriented towards "bettering humanity as a whole", more than any feeler, it's not related to Fe

      You can see it in his lectures.

      They're very analytical and goes from point to point. It can even seem at times as if Peterson is rambling if one doesn't understand the context he's speaking about, but also very it's step by step because Peterson's other goal is also to be an expert communicator (as he thinks Universities should be place where people come to train their ability to voice their opinions). He's not an aimless rambler analyst like an xNTP. His Fe is skilled enough for effective communication otherwise his lectures wouldn't as engaging as they are. He can come off as argumentative but his motivation are solely by moral concerns for his people and his Ti is used to argue for and about his concerns. It's as if Fe is superior to his Ti but his Ti is strong enough that it's not an inferior function but it's still under his Fe. 

      He's an expert communicator but appears to be rambling to everyone who doesn't understand his Ni Vision, of course, and if xNTPs are rambler analysts who never make a point, INFJs are holier-than-thou deluded schizophrenics (hint: they're not)

      The only sensible typing of Peterson in this case is Ni-Fe-Ti-Se INFJ. It makes the most logical sense when you consider his work, motivations, and tendencies as a whole.

      No. You just said yourself that the INFJ typing is only based on how you perceive his motivations, there is no way you can point to an observable Fe trait that's an actual Fe trait, such as preferring harmony, being friendly and empathetic, wanting to be liked, preferring emotional or group values over objectivity, etc (fourth time I'm saying this and asking you to point me to either one of these traits!!!). You don't make sense.

      //"I gave you my reasons for what I think"//

      You gave me many reasons why specific things about my ideas on certain types and functions are "wrong". You have yet to make a detailed case on Peterson's type.

      I gave my reasons before ever even talking to you, simple or not I don't care, he's not a feeler because in MBTI terms he's not an F and in function terms he's not an auxiliary extraverted feeler, don't deny that I said this or tell me I need to fully type him, I don't fucking have to, you're the one convincing me, and I said literally all of this in my original comment, you've resorted to insulting me instead of giving me the shit I asked for more than a fucking week ago, there is no arguing with you, I'm done here man


    • Posted on: 2018-03-24 13:24:22

      Teru Mikami

       

      @fg I'm sorry but I'm afraid you're in the grip of your inferior function so I don't have to listen to you, wish there was something I could do :/


    • Posted on: 2018-03-24 13:52:34

      fg

       
      Teru I'm sorry but I'm afraid you're in the grip of your inferior brain so I don't have to listen to you, wish there was something I could do :/

    • Posted on: 2018-03-24 14:26:44

      Teru Mikami

       

      ooga booga booga french people smell


    • Posted on: 2018-03-24 14:34:07

      fg

       
      "ooga booga booga french people smell"if you don't want to be treating as a child try to don't act and reason as one

    • Posted on: 2018-03-24 14:57:59

      M@l@rken

       

      wow fg, great constructive criticism, keep it up, proud of you!


    • Posted on: 2018-03-24 16:30:12

      doodlepoodle

       

      You're a fucking joke Teru. Respond when you've returned from psychotherapy.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-24 16:56:03

      Teru Mikami

       

      you know I'm pretty sure he wrote a thing or two about gaslighting and other shady tactics used in debate, didn't go that deep into his stuff did you


    • Posted on: 2018-03-24 17:02:12

      doodlepoodle

       

      That literally has nothing to do with his typing.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-24 17:17:48

      Teru Mikami

       

      neither does accusing me of being insane you blithering idiot


    • Posted on: 2018-03-24 18:56:55

      doodlepoodle

       

      I'm telling you to fuck off because you can't type worth shit. You're even worse than that dishonest little bastard Chaotic.


    • Posted on: 2018-03-25 10:35:50

      Teru Mikami

       

      for as far as I remember you're nearly twice my age and anonymously telling me I'm molested and insane for disagreeing with your position on a public forum, aren't you a big guy


  • Posted on: 2018-02-18 17:52:29

    fg

     

    INFJ by function undoubtly. by letter undoubtly to. i don't know why some people can believe he is a Te aux or even a thinker.


    • Posted on: 2018-02-18 17:54:37

      tiger_greengrass

       

      dichotomies are more accurate than functions


    • Posted on: 2018-03-14 20:50:58

      doodlepoodle

       

      dichotomies are for dich suckers 


  • Posted on: 2018-01-28 18:42:30

    diobono

     

    I love how this guys idea of "slaying the dragon" is getting a fucking girlfriend,cleaning your room and getting a job promotion. He doesn't have any vision. He's just making shit up to promote his stupid survivalist stance.

    He basically uses arguments from biology that are all twisted to fit his dumb vision, uses his retarded lobster argument (deleuze would be ashamed) to show that there is a "hierarchy" in the animal kingdom that somehow is the same as humans. He cannot look outside of the current world perspective, or imagine a different reality than the current one. He is clearly a Si dom who makes gullible people think he's sooo smart, and maybe he truly is but at the end of the day he is just an intellectualy fraudolent 6w5 isxj that just makes shit up. His books are a joke.

     


    • Posted on: 2018-02-01 06:10:26

      idkwhattoputman1

       

      ok troll


    • Posted on: 2018-02-01 06:33:33

      doodlepoodle

       

      YOU NEED TO CLEAN YOUR FUCKING ROOM BUCKO 

      #GETSORTED


    • Posted on: 2018-02-11 18:24:03

      scotty

       

      I agree with you but apparently he got high on openness, extraversion and conscientiousness in Big 5, and above average agreeableness for a man. So ENxJ makes the most sense, not ISxJ.

       

      Source: https://youtu.be/v76nSSGpACo


    • Posted on: 2018-02-18 17:13:03

      diobono

       

      yeah the more i think about him the more he reminds me of the enfj I know. I think he is xnfj. People are so gullible to type him as intx in my opinion. Just look at his bible videos, he definitely appeals to peoples emotions and has very strong fe,but makes you think he is a intj or something.

      His Fe is maybe higher than even infj, too much of a showman to be a heavy introvert inxx. And he has developed this cult of  personality that no 5w4 (known as iconoclast for gods sake!) would like. 


  • Posted on: 2018-01-02 18:57:45

    Blank

     

    Is this guy really a Ti dom? Everything I have seen of him is him being strongly argumentative about something without using that much logic. He looks more like a Ni dom to me, he has insights and knows a lot of cool stuff about the things he studies but his logic seems cuestionable at least. For example, he says that emotional intelligence is not an intelligence because you could have an intelligent person who is bad with people. Okay, but you could argue exactly the same about saying that math intelligence is not an intelligence because you can have someone who sucks at it (i.e. Abed Nadyr from Community) and still being highly intelligent. He has just cuestioned the whole concept of intelligence with that stament but he doesn´t realice that.  He seems to obviate some of the implications of what he says even if it´s contradictory. Obviously it´s just an example from a detail but for what I´ve seen from him in youtube he´s a lot like that. Not saying that he´s bad or stupid, I like him a lot, I think he is very interesting and very smart but his logic doesn´t look like proper logic to me. He also have the tendency to being highly argumentative which looks more like Te to me. Te users are usually driven to win the debate sometimes at any cost. So... while I won´t discard INTP or INFJ I´m giving him INTJ.


  • Posted on: 2018-01-02 17:40:36

    matejko108

     

    no offense, but Peterson is a totally obvious 1. Probably 1w2 but I'm not sure about that. Definitely 1 though.

    The only other typing that is even remotely possible is an insanely integrated 4w5. But probably he's just a 1.


  • Posted on: 2017-12-27 23:30:00

    sportsbrah

     

    INFJ by functions, INTP by dichotomy


  • Posted on: 2017-11-08 19:36:30

    doodlepoodle

     
    The once-in-a-lifetime INFJ who doesn't happen to be a hard liberal.

    • Posted on: 2017-11-09 05:54:26

      Moonbait

       
      He seems to be at least INTX to me, and comes off like a pretty cold rationalist. I voted INTP but I can see why others voted INTJ.

    • Posted on: 2017-11-09 09:30:36

      Teru Mikami

       
      You go around typing everyone you remotely like or agree with as an INFJ, stop the self-masturbation and lay out your reasons

    • Posted on: 2017-11-30 08:22:02

      doodlepoodle

       

      Oh yeah, given his approach to the whole gender scenario he seems comes of a pretty disagreeable thinker. He's demonstrated a pretty hardcore Ti and is one of the reasons why his lectures are so enjoyable. His refusal to conform to the gender pronoun demands can seem inferior Fe or insterestingly Fi which is why people think he is probably an INTJ or INTP.

      I don't think that's the case at all. I think his obsession with phenomenology, Jungian archetypes, and mythicism is a pretty good indicator that he's an Ni dom. He sees it as some sort of truth instead of an interesting appraoch to reality that an Ne user might demonstrate. His crusade against non-gender pronouns isn't actually a result of not wanting to be conform due to inferior Fe or impeding agianst his values of an Fi but very an Ni-Fe drive to protect Canada from what he envisions as a terrible Marxist dystopia in it's future. He sees what the university intellectuals and government officials want to do with restricting free speech and he's simply putting his foot down to do what is thinks is in the best interest of Canadians. He's "not doing it" because he sees where the law is going to go when he gradually begin to give up parts of our rights to free speech. He knows the Communist nightmare it could potentially draw Canada into.

      If you want an actual personality assessment, Peterson did give out his score on the Big 5 personality test. He scored high in Extroversion - however he associates this with assertiveness and not sociability. High in openness, neuroticism, conscientiousness and, as an intersting surprise, "above-average" in agreeableness. If you want to translate that into MBTI you could say he is introverted, an intutive for his openness, a "doer" due to his concientiousness, but also a feeler due to his agreeableness. It spells INFJ, if you take it simply.

      He also seems to have interst in the works other INFJs like Jung, Piaget, and Solzenitsyn so there's that (I'm not sure about Netizsche).

      You can see it in the link > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v76nSSGpACo

       


    • Posted on: 2017-12-28 02:08:23

      Teru Mikami

       

      "He's demonstrated a pretty hardcore Ti and is one of the reasons why his lectures are so enjoyable."


      Exactly. INFJs are still aux Fe-users, meaning that they focus on people. They don't go hopping around trying to please everyone, but their focus still lies with people. If an INFJ relies more on comparing and relating different factors than they do on understanding and analyzing people then that means one of three things: either the INFJ is not an INFJ, the whole looping thing (which is probably a load of shit) that would make him nihilistic, neurotic and biased by definition is going into effect or function stacks are just wrong and everything this site is about is a giant fad. I think it's pretty obvious which category Peterson falls into.


      "I think his obsession with phenomenology, Jungian archetypes, and mythicism is a pretty good indicator that he's an Ni dom."


      First two would make roughly every user on this site Ni-dominant, and watch this video of him explaining his stance towards religion (which I'm assuming is what you meant with mythicism), dude keeps rambling on going off on tangents and questioning what he says as he's saying it, never really arriving at a point etc (he does this often). Being an agnostic doesn't make you a Ni-dom and neither does this almost stereotypical INTP behavior.


      "His crusade against non-gender pronouns isn't actually a result of not wanting to be conform due to inferior Fe or impeding agianst his values of an Fi but very an Ni-Fe drive to protect Canada from what he envisions as a terrible Marxist dystopia in it's future. He sees what the university intellectuals and government officials want to do with restricting free speech and he's simply putting his foot down to do what is thinks is in the best interest of Canadians. He's "not doing it" because he sees where the law is going to go when he gradually begin to give up parts of our rights to free speech. He knows the Communist nightmare it could potentially draw Canada into."


      INTx would make him incapable of holding a stance against gender pronouns for reasons other than "not wanting to conform due to inferior Fe" or "defending his personal values due to Fi" but INFJ would make him Canada's national superhero, of course dude. How does Fe even have a role in your argument? It's not enough.


      "If you want an actual personality assessment, Peterson did give out his score on the Big 5 personality test. He scored high in Extroversion - however he associates this with assertiveness and not sociability. High in openness, neuroticism, conscientiousness and, as an intersting surprise, "above-average" in agreeableness. If you want to translate that into MBTI you could say he is introverted, an intutive for his openness, a "doer" due to his concientiousness, but also a feeler due to his agreeableness. It spells INFJ, if you take it simply."


      There is no correlation between the Big 5 and the Myers-Briggs strong enough for it to "spell something out". In terms of the Big 5, I score extremely similar to Peterson (and my girlfriend, who's an actual INFJ), does that make me an INFJ? And can you really picture an INFJ scoring high on assertiveness? Not only is it unlikely, it goes directly against what Fe in an auxiliary position is supposed to be about, by definition.


      Anyways, letter-wise he's INTJ, function-wise he relies more on introverted thinking than anything else. He's future-oriented and obviously an introverted thinker, but where's his auxiliary function? Is he the once-in-a-lifetime INFJ with no Fe? Is he an "INTJ with Ti well-developed"? Or is he an INTP who's not a total dork? The choice is yours.


    • Posted on: 2017-12-28 02:09:36

      Teru Mikami

       

      fuck u for making me write all of this tho here's a meme 


    • Posted on: 2018-01-02 06:15:09

      doodlepoodle

       
      //"If an INFJ relies more on comparing and relating different factors than they do on understanding and analyzing people then that means one of three things: either the INFJ is not an INFJ,"//

      I don't see why an INFJ can't do both especially given their Fe is closer to their Ti given their aux-tertiary positioning. I think it makes even more sense why Peterson is the logician he is while still being such an expert communicator. And no, Peterson, unlike an xNTP, isn't interested in exploring subjective impersonal ideas as signified by Ti and Ne, but instead uses Ti as a means to analyze people and derive lessons to teach to his audience; his capacity to compare and contrast with Ti *serves* his Fe desire to analyze and understand people.

      //"First two would make roughly every user on this site Ni-dominant"//

      No, not exactly.

      Peterson sees truth in them through some Ni-Fe justification and thinks Jungian-Campbell mythological archetypes are cross cultural means of expressing ideas and creating lessons regarding the human conditions. Trying to understand the underlying similarity between a select set of ideas is usually a sign of Ni and Fe to focus of moral practicality and systems instead of subjecting them to the self-exploring morally relativistic questions of Fi. This is just simplifying it mind you and is a lot more complex than what I'm explaining. I made that comment to show that above all else Peterson is an Ni dom to clear any misconceptions of him being an xNTP.

      Fi and Te types are more likely to use MBTI as a means of understanding themselves and may not pay much credence to the greater cultural importance of archetypes and Si types might not actually understand why Jung tried to understand archetypes. Fi types in particular would be very averse to believing that human beings are inherently more similar than they'd let on, given they're so invested in individualism. They'd reject the values of Jungian archetypes right away.

      Following MBTI doesn't necessarily mean you're an Ni-dom. Keep in mind MBTI was not made by Jung but two women who tried to find ways of organizing women into specific jobs during WWII, neither of whom I believe were Ni-Fe users (I believe Isabel Meyers was INFP but I don't remember Catherine's). Jungian functions were added to MBTI much later (by Keirsey I think, I can't remember who exactly).

      Also, Peterson himself doesn't actually approve of MBTI.

      //" and watch this video of him explaining his stance towards religion (which I'm assuming is what you meant with mythicism), dude keeps rambling on going off on tangents and questioning"//

      The reason why you think he rambles on is because the video is made from a longer, full length, video where Peterson tries to address many other topics at at once. First of all, it's a very complex topic and Peterson actually had to make a series of two hour long videos on YouTube dedicated explaining God and the Bible in his Jungian-Campbell mythological way. He had to summarize his beliefs by saying "I act as if God exists" to cut across the complexities of the intentions and lesser understandings of atheists and agnostics who might try to use his belief in God to discredit him. He answers this in the first two minutes of the video.

      He doesn't ramble on. Pay close attention to the way he delivers his message. He will *always* enunciate his points when explaining something and will try to explain enough of the technical details of the topic to give you a good idea of what he's saying or at least get you interested.

      That's why he's such an expert communicator and why his lectures are so enjoyable to watch.

      An INTP would get stuck in his Ti-Ne theories and wouldn't be nearly as good as Peterson when trying to explain them even if they were the same age. They would actually ramble on about the technicalities of their ideas than explain the most important ones and getting to the gist of them like Peterson does.

      //"INFJ would make him Canada's national superhero, of course dude."//

      He pretty much is.

      Not a national hero mind you, given the hard left political climate of Canada which is why the contemporary left vilify him so much. However, for the modern conservative rebel, Peterson is seen as a father-figure and a savior of the Enlightenment values that made the West what it is today.

      Go to some Jordan Peterson groups online or on any comment sections of his videos. An interesting criticism I've seen for of a lot of his supporters is that they're trying to worship Peterson as a hero but more interestingly see him as a surrogate father figure for they never had one when growing up (keep in mind this is the case for millennial Westerners). I think there was another where Peterson explains how he's surprised that so many of viewers are young men.

      This might be loose ground to go on but I'd say his capacity to appeal to a mass of people through his charisma and inspire them enough to take on moral tasks is something exclusive to Ni and Fe driven xNFJs (xNFPs would inspiring but they would be more obnoxious if not pretentious for their Fi). I don't think he'd have the same reception if he were an xNTJ or INTP.

      //"How does Fe even have a role in your argument? It's not enough."//

      He doesn't want his home country to be dragged into a Communist nightmare that's why he's battling the left up here in Canada.

      You forgot this piece of my comment when you were making your response.

      "...but an Ni-Fe drive to protect Canada from what he envisions as a terrible Marxist dystopia in it's future. He sees what the university intellectuals and government officials want to do with restricting free speech and he's simply putting his foot down to do what is thinks is in the best interest of Canadians. He's "not doing it" because he sees where the law is going to go when he gradually begin to give up parts of our rights to free speech. He knows the Communist nightmare it could potentially draw Canada into."

      //"There is no correlation between the Big 5 and the Myers-Briggs strong enough for it to "spell something out"."//

      Not exactly. Capacity for Extroversion will determine whether you're driven by an introverted or extroverted function, Openness will determine whether you're a sensor or intuitive, Conscientiousness to determine if you have an extroverted judging function in your dom or aux stack, and Agreeableness determines if you have an Fe-Ti stack or Te-Fi stack. Neuroticism; capacity to fall into negative emotion is something exclusive to Big Five but it's somewhat linked to Agreeableness.

      //"And can you really picture an INFJ scoring high on assertiveness?"//

      Assertiveness in Big Five has to do with your capacity to communicate your thoughts clearly. It's associated with Extroversion and given his ability as an expert communicator you can see why. INFJs have auxiliary Fe so I can see how they could score high of assertiveness.

      On the other desire for social harmony or Fe is associated with Agreeableness which Peterson scores above average on (for a man). To there's that for him being an INFJ.

      //"I score extremely similar to Peterson (and my girlfriend, who's an actual INFJ), does that make me an INFJ?"//

      You seem to not know which type of personality assessment to choose from whether it be dichotomy MBTI or an Jungian Functions MBTI. So I don't know.

      Why do you think you're an ISTJ?

      //"The choice is yours."//

      INFJ it is. A healthy INFJ with well developed Ti and Se.

    • Posted on: 2018-01-02 12:12:46

      Teru Mikami

       

      look I appreciate the love letter but I feel like this was way too nitpicky right off the bat, I can see a lot of your arguments but I really don't know how any of them would be reserved to specifically INFJ. Most of what you say can be applied perfectly to Peterson but doesn't really hold up if you apply it to anyone but him. I score high on conscientiousness, moderately high on agreeableness (which I take as higher than average) and extremely high on openness, only thing I differ with is my low extroversion score, and I'm not INFJ. And if you claim Peterson is an INFJ because he sees that PC culture isn't exactly taking society in a positive direction, then how do you back it up when applying it to other people who share his beliefs? Majority of what I see here is "more likely" or "less likely", instead link me a lecture where he explains that his motivations stem from his desire to "analyze people" or "protect Canada" or anything else you claimed and not from being a completely reasonable person who specialized in the right area. You're leaving lots of open ends.


    • Posted on: 2018-01-02 17:07:01

      doodlepoodle

       
      I understand that typing systems can have overlaps and one type isn't going to perfectly translate into an equivalent type on another system. I understand why you think you're not an INFJ but that also why I asked you explain to me why you think you should be labelled an ISTJ.

      I'm genuinely interested now.

      People can share Peterson's beliefs but believe in them differently. Anti-communist sentiments can done by many types of individuals, in particular by more conservative SJ types but also other NT or SP types as well (the least by Fi dom or aux types). The reason why I think Peterson's beliefs specifically show he's an INFJ has to do with the fact he's concerned about the future of Canada and his approach to understanding Canada’s obsession with Socialism/Communism is done out of moral concerns for the people specifically. He's not focusing on a technical analysis of Communism (even though he does here and there) to see why it wouldn't be an beneficial economic system. He cares more about the fact he thinks it's a deeply nihilistic system masquerading as a compassionate one to manipulate people into a tyrannical government so the rulers can express their resentment onto them in whatever way they wish (Fe).

      A Te aux or dom type is more likely to analyze the short comings of Communism/Socialism as an inadequate economic system but wouldn’t dabble much on it’s moral short comings like Peterson does almost all the time. The same might more or less apply to Ti driven xNTPs if they’re knowledge about economies.

      An Si driven ISFJ might think badly of it because it opposes their traditionally religious lives.


      Check this video out where he tries to analyze neo-Marxists fallacies on Communism.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlB_xNOAn1c

      He get's pretty passionate about it and you can really see his Fe come out facially – and it’s not self-expressive like an Fi type but more communicative, accusing, and purposefully subtle like an Fe type might otherwise would.

      His analysis of neo-Marxist arguments focus his judgements on the people who make them and the outcomes of their mindset (Ni-Fe). He calls them "dangerous" and proposes the outcomes of implementing Communism in the saintly fashion that they think they would. Again if you look his analysis of is heavily based upon Fe judgement and Ni projection of outcomes. It's a pretty good example of his Fe coming and being served by his Ti when he tries to deconstruct the intentions of people. You can see this type of analyses in pretty much all of his lectures when he isn't dealing with hostile forces. Look up anything he does on Marxism or Communism and you'll definitely see his Fe shine through.

      It can a little difficult to get a read on Peterson if you aren't acquainted with his topics because you can miss his Fe which he keeps under wraps due to his academic position and expresses Ti most of the time – in particular when confronting people he doesn't like (pronoun advocates, communists, etc) which is how most people get to know him. So I understand perfectly why people think he's an INTP or INTJ.

    • Posted on: 2018-01-02 17:51:34

      strawberry crisis

       

      //"There is no correlation between the Big 5 and the Myers-Briggs strong enough for it to "spell something out"."//

      Not exactly. Capacity for Extroversion will determine whether you're driven by an introverted or extroverted function, Openness will determine whether you're a sensor or intuitive, Conscientiousness to determine if you have an extroverted judging function in your dom or aux stack, and Agreeableness determines if you have an Fe-Ti stack or Te-Fi stack. Neuroticism; capacity to fall into negative emotion is something exclusive to Big Five but it's somewhat linked to Agreeableness.

      Where did this magical link come from? There is a fairly strong correlation between “intuition” (especially together with “perceiving”) in MBTI and “openness to experience,” a similarly strong if not stronger correlation between “extraversion” in MBTI to “extraversion” on the NEO-PI-R, a far weaker correlation between “feeling” in MBTI and “agreeableness” on the NEO-PI-R and a similarly weak correlation between “judging” and “conscientiousness.” These aren’t related to anything “the functions” dictate, or else there would be a relationship between “F+J” and “T+P” with agreeableness and “F+P” and “T+J” with the absence of agreeableness. This doesn’t make sense since “feeling” is more intrinsically harmony and tact oriented than “thinking,” which explains the moderate correlation between “feeling” and “agreeableness.”

      What are you referring to when you say “extraverted judging function”? Something Jung talked about in Psychological Types? Something Myers mentioned in the MBTI manual? Something someone on Personality Cafe wrote out to try and create a magical link between Myers Briggs and Jung’s functions? And why is a scalar “agreeableness” facet indicative of a dichotomous “Te/Fi” or “Fe/Ti” preference? You speak like these traits necessitate a particular outcome with unrelated traits with any particular correlation below 1, a leap which would transcend empirical data and create a link without any real theoretical reasoning to back it up—unless you have any? This is maybe the first time I’ve heard of people connecting function stacks to Big 5 traits and you’ve done it in such a way that makes me feel skeptical of how you’ve personally reconciled the relationship between Big 5 traits and the functions, so would you care to explain where you’ve drawn out your claims from?