Sign Up | Log in |

Zeego MBTI

Myers Briggs type and personality details of 'Zeego'
Zeego MBTI type

Politicans and Leaders

Part of:
Personality Databank

[Personality Databank MBTI list]


INFP - 16
INTP - 13
INTJ - 1

[Famous INFPs]

Log in to vote!


5W4 - 11
4W5 - 8
1W9 - 1

[Famous Enneagram 5]

Log in to vote!

Old (unmoderated comments)

Check out the movie A Field in England, friend. It's mind bending. We all love Zeego. .

MBTI type of Zeego

. . .

Find out about Zeego personality type

. . .Information about Myers Briggs Type Indicator of Zeego. . .Which of the 16 personality types is Zeego?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Basically what I'm trying to say is a lot of people who we type as INFJ likely would not get that type on an MBTI test. The problem with the whole typology in general is that nobody really writes out procedures for typing someone. Hey Zeego, wattuppp. Just passing by to say hi :) See you somewhere :)The funny thing is, after INFJ, INTP is the most random typed type there is. People all over the map are typed as these types without any logical consistency whatsoever. Scotty, stats just show number and probability, not individual and his/her possibility (ughh I know I think in Fi not Ti, but I hope you get the picture). We can't tell the individual truth using stats like that, but realizing it in ourselves can. People have found a way to make INFJ the umbrella type to encapsulate pretty much every personality type that wouldn't otherwise fit in the system of stereotypes. The issue isn't figuring out what my functions are so much as defining what the functions even mean in the first place. All these alternate definitions of the functions are making the whole system look like a huge blur to me. Many INFJs have troubles associate with the rest of the world, therefore they can take on other types they find more relatable. Identifying with ISFP is something I think a depressed INFJ is like, perhaps. :)When you say you can relate, do you mean you've gone through something similar. Actually, I have considered INFJ a few times. It seemed pretty intense. I can relate so much it's weird. O. In general I felt things a lot more strongly, and individual events seemed more impactful to me then they do now. I had a sense of that Se "intensity," a primal animalistic kind of impulse, and I also felt like I had a stronger emotional drive guiding my actions. After the second one, when I switched back to INTP, I actually went through a period of major depression and dissociation because I had trouble identifying with my "new" self. I didn't know about MBTI at the time, so I had no clue what the fuck was going on. Even the really out there astrology stuff can generate thoughts that can potentially help you understand psychology better even if it is based upon a lie. I think that all systems make you think about things in a way that sheds light on different angles that other systems don't hit. I just changed my MBTI type on my profile to "MBTI is a lie"Believe it or not, I'm starting to think Enneagram has more credence than Jungian typology despite having even less evidence to support it. Probably cause that is what they are :) The idea that all people fit into one of 8 archetypes is really silly though. There is no empirical evidence for "INxPs have more Si than ISxPs" or function magic crap like that, but the letters do mean a lot. I think the fact alone that MBTI and Socionics both claim to have empirical evidence for their respective systems (even though the existence of one would necessarily preclude the other) brings both systems into question. I think I'm actually approaching a point where I want to reject typology altogether. I don't know what to think about Jung. What do you think about the implications on typing. (example: Jung as an INTJ due to Ni-Ti, something I've believed in for a while) OP Jung leads with his intuition but also identifies as introverted thinker which makes sense. Socionics people seem to have adjusted their definition of Te to be more Ti-ish for the IxTJs (or IxTp in their world), but I don't see the need to do that. As a sidenote, I find it funny how in the second link, reckful's quotes from Jung start with "Originally Posted by Jung"The thing that bothers me above all is people using a *lack* of a tertiary/inferior function in whatever model they use, as proof that a person does not fit into a given type (if an INTJ is not to demonstrate Fi for example). It is a detriment to typing as a whole because INTJs are probably actually lower than average in use of Fi. If anything, lack of Fi in an introvert would be pretty good evidence in the direction of IxTJ. I tend to look at it more as (using INTJs as an example), if you are more ambiverted while being strong J you are more likely to look Ni-Te, but if you are very introverted and not as J, you are more likely to look Ni-Ti. So an ungeneralized T function makes more sense in the auxiliary position, giving something like the Ni-T mentioned in the forum post. reddit. com/r/mbti/comments/3oik52/when_were_function_stacks_introduced_to_mbti_and/ 2) http://personalitycafe. html#/enterZeego, where did you find the thing of Jung saying that the function model were two pointing at the same direction and the other two at the opposite.