what's an "eff"?

I met this girl once and, unusually for me, we spent a long night just talking about ourselves and other bits of assorted life stuff. In the middle of it she said something which made absolutely no sense to me:

"You're NF!"

I don't like to let on that I don't know something, so I think I tried to nod and smile. Since my brain was going "What's an 'eff'," my confusion must have shown up enough for her to mention something about "Myers-Briggs" before moving on to the next topic.

She was a psych major.

I remembered that. She was right. A couple of months later I got an email message from a co-worker pointing to this Keirsey Temperment Sorter thingy. It was kind of amusing. Turned out I was INFP. Cool. Pretty accurate too, I thought.

I took a similar test. INFJ, this time. Uh oh. I took a bunch more, and repeated some. I bounced between INFP and INFJ, and even came out with an INTP at one point.

Well, this was turning out to be unreliable, so, of course, I dug a little deeper.

Keirsey's tests are derived from work done by Isabel Myers (hence "Myers-Briggs"), which in turn comes out of Jungian analysis. It's based on the notion of Archetypes: while each individual is very different, it's because we're all made up of the same core set of (for want of a better word) personalities, but certain, er, personalities were more or less prevalent in a given individual.

Jung liked astrology.

The way the Keirsey sorter works is to use a series of questions to get you to choose your preference between the extremes of his "dimensions of temperment." You're either Introverted or eXtraverted, iNtuitive or Sensing, Thinking or Feeling, Judging or Perceiving. Then again, Keirsey takes great pains to point out that none of these are absolutes, just points on a scale. Preferences. Which explains why the tests have so many questions: approaching each "dimension" from different angles to get a number. It also explains why I keep bouncing between J and P.

Four dimensions with two values each means 16 types. But that's kind of a lot. Hippocrates had four personality types (based on bodily fluids), so it made sense for Jung/Myers/Keirsey to do as well. For reasons of personal observation, Keirsey groups some letters and comes out with four types: SJ ("Guardians"), SP ("Artisans"), NT ("Rational") and NF ("Idealists"). So I'm an Idealist. Hippocrates would likely call me "Phegmatic," but "Idealist" sounds better somehow.

I read over the personality traits. I liked INFJ because INFP was just too nice. It still comes down to something of a dilemma between INFP and INFJ. It's probably more useful to go through each of the "dimenions" or "fuctions" individually. That's what the tests do, after all.

Introversion vs eXtroversion

Forgone conclusion.

Sensing vs iNtuition

Keirsey likes this one, ranking it more important than any of the other dimensions. It's the difference between whether you prefer to base judgements and make decisions based on your senses, observing your surroundings, or you prefer to deal with internal abstractions and thoughts. Introspection vs Observation. By far most people are S, Keirsey says. I'm N. Hands down. It's rare that I ever score a Sensing point on a test. I live in the theoretical; the abstract. Every once in a while, I'll come out, rub my eyes and go "Wow! What a nice day out!" but usually, I'm having more fun inside.

Thinking vs Feeling

This one's a little bit harder. I have managed to get NT once or twice. Not often, though. I do routinely score at least a few T points. If I'm perfectly honest with myself, though, I have to say that most of my decisions and reasons for what I do are more often based on what I'm feeling. I'm quick enough to think up a good, rational excuse for it afterwards, if anyone asks, but it's rarely more than that.

Perceiving vs Judging

I have a hard time grasping this one. It's represents how you organize things: whether you like to work to a schedule and bring things to closure (J) or you like to be flexible, spontaneous and adaptive (P). I hate schedules and don't really care (too much) if I don't finish things. I'm not very spontaneous, either. Going over the literature, I'm probably more P than J. But there's lots of J in the mix. Usually, I score pretty close to 50-50 here. I don't want to be bothered with schedules and hindered with excessive structure, but I need some sense of stability to feel comfortable. Usually, I hope somebody else makes the structure for me (and, in turn, I'll happily frustrate their efforts to make me stick to it). If that's not there, I'll set arbitrary deadlines and grasp around for reassurances that the world won't collapse out from under me, making whatever I'm doing a pointless excercise. I've been going around calling myself INFJ for a while. I think I have to adjust this to INFP. (If you're interested, Vicky Jo sent me a link to her INFJ or INFP page, which gives a far better analysis than I ever could. I'm pretty definitely INFP).

I can't take those tests anymore. It's too easy to cheat and get the answer I want. With a little effort, I can be reasonably honest. Just as well, since it looks like the full Keirsey Sorter has become a for-pay service. We were supposed to have Myers-Briggs tests done at work, but the company I work for ran out of money, so I guess that idea's shelved.

Personally, I'm rather happy with who I am. Reading things like the INFP mailing list, you'd think I was cursed or something. I see it as having a lot of good stuff to work with. A fairly unique perspective. I don't cop out and make excuses for myself—I take responsibility and ownership of my problems. Maybe too much. Sure, it's not easy being me, but I wouldn't have it any other way.

In the end, I find this sort of personality typing to be a bit unsatisfying. Sure, it works and I like Carl Jung and all, but it's too... well, simple. I would find more fascinating self-analysis tools elsewhere...