| menu |
Lil Kim
rapper
| e | i |
| n | s |
| f | t |
| p | j |
| function | ennea | variant | socio | psycho | |||
|
|
|
| 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 1 |
| h |
| e |
| x |
| a |
| c |
| o |
| public myers-briggs votes | (20/02/04 15:26) bibliology: ESFP |
| (18/08/16 10:35) kawaii: ESFP |
| public function votes | (18/08/16 10:35) kawaii: ESTP |
| public enneagram votes | (18/07/23 04:15) kawaii: 3w4 |
| public instinctual variant votes | (20/02/04 15:26) bibliology: sx/so |
| public tritype® votes |
| public sociotype votes |
| public psychosophy votes |
| public hexaco votes |
strawberry crisis enfp 7  Being future-oriented in that single-minded way is generally only indicative of judging or sensing (depending on how it's defined) in MBTI if it can be tied to anything at all. Locking yourself into a procedural process to meet an end goal that was envisioned by traits that may or may not be intuitive is a poor, poor way of attributing an intuition preference of some kind to someone, be it in actual MBTI or Nu-MBTI. I've always thought of that as a "compromising mechanism" for actual judgers to be able to relate to an otherwise very floaty and perceivingly-defined set of traits (like having things come to you rather than being proactive in creating the inevitable closure strong perceivers hate) and the N in Ni begins to shift in meaning to something that allows enough room for nonsense like S meaning being more attentive to its surroundings by definition. Maybe it's okay if Nu-MBTI adopts a warped idea of S and N since in the end it isn't MBTI, but deciding to use its ideas of S and N to guide you in typing them in MBTI without properly analyzing how its traits actually match up against those that are defined in MBTI will lead you to make very strange conclusions. 0
2018-08-16 03:23:11pm (post #2857) |
| related entries |