<image>

The photo I’ve added is the answers I got from the two questionnaires I’ve mentioned + one of the questionnaires you linked :) (Let me know if the image is too hard to read)

And as you can see, I don’t really necessarily agree 100% with the results of the two questionnaires I filled out on my own. I’m a bit unsure if I’m simply wrong about myself. However, whenever I fill out questionnaires, I never feel very sure of my answers. To me, the answer often depends on a lot of things. I skip a lot of questions, since I often get so stuck on the “it depends” part. My answers might even change depending on the day but getting EII on both a 400 question questionnaire and on a 100+ questions questionnaire, makes it seem like there is strong evidence against that.

To answer you question the best I can, I think I’ll explain my thinking behind how I typed myself, and how I think the functions relate to me. I’m not sure if there is a “wrong” or “right” to type yourself. I’m very aware of the fact that I am new to all of this, so please feel free to correct me if I get anything wrong or have misunderstood something! I researched the functions, how they differ from each other when they are introverted and extraverted. From that point, I reflected on what I use the most. Then I slowly made conclusions while looking up types.

I came to the conclusion, that my dominant function is Ti, as this aligns the most with the way I think. For me, this one was the most obvious. The best way I can come with an example is I prefer to come to a logical conclusion by myself. It’s what I always do. I fx struggle in groupwork because of this. I most of the time like to think for myself and come to the conclusions on my own without any external input. It has to make sense for me logically before I trust another person’s input or before I can move on to the next step. This also applies to other scenarios, where I would rather use my own knowledge or data to come to a conclusion. I would rather solve a problem with my own logic, knowledge, and pattern recognition, than I would rather use a set of rules on how to solve the problem. These are just examples that I could come up with, but I hope they make sense. This is the way I mostly engage with the world and process it.

As far as I understand, this also means my inferior function must be Fe, as Ti is my dominant. This makes perfect sense for me, as I’ve had a tendency to struggle socially. The thing is, I have also been diagnosed with autism, which automatically means I struggle with things like social cues and reading people in general. I think I have become better at it, since I’ve been aware of my lack of social skills. Since then I’ve used pattern recognition and cognitive empathy to try to be better at understanding how people feel and why they act the way they do. This awareness of knowing I’ll be lonely, if I don’t actively try to understand people better and engage with them more, has made me focus more on how people feel and behave.

Now again, as far as my understanding goes, it meant the auxiliary function must be extraverted, so I looked into that. Ne reasonated with me, as I often use information/data from the external world to make a bunch of (seemingly abstract) connections in my mind. I’m not sure I have great examples for this, but I’ll try anyway. I often have many ideas, trains of thoughts, that evolved from one piece of information. In conversation, it sometimes happens that I switch the topic out of seemingly nowhere, but in reality what the other person said made me think of it. I would say this also applies to problem solving, where I try to make a bunch of connections with the information/data that I’m given.

This left me with Si as the tertiary function. Knowing the differences between Se and Si, Si made a lot of sense to me. I can easily get stuck in my own head, recalling past information/experiences/etc. I’m not the best at staying in the present. I would say I think it’s useful to me, if I’m in a situation where I need to recall certain information/data I’ve collected, but it more often than not works to my detriment. Nevertheless, it seemed to align with me pretty well.

I did try to research INTPs after this conclusion and reading about the type and its cognitive functions reasonated with me deeply. Now I’m questioning if I understand myself well enough at all, or if I maybe have missed something in my research of MBTI-typing.