Admittedly, those single-word descriptions are vague, so here are some brief descriptions:
Attitude - an individual’s primary cognitive focus
Introversion - inner world: energized through personal time; reserved; thought-oriented
Extraversion - outer world: energized through time spent with others; expressive; action-oriented
Processing Function - how an individual understands and interprets information
Intuition - focused on abstract thinking, interested in theoretical principles, creative
Sensing - focused on information from their five senses, interested in hands-on learning, practical
Decision-making Function - how an individual approaches problems
Thinking - head: detached standpoint; use reason and logic
Feeling - heart: place themselves in the situation; use empathy and consideration of needs
Structural Preference - how an individual lives in the outer world
Judging - extraverted decision-making function: structured and decided lifestyle; ‘planners’
Perceiving - extraverted processing function: flexible and adaptable lifestyle; ‘explorers’
If MBTI seems familiar, you’ve likely taken the ‘16 Personalities’ test. In fact, I vaguely remember it being a part of sophomore health class. While 16 Personalities is undeniably entertaining, and honestly, often uncanny in its assertions, it is not wholly representative of MBTI. The descriptions of strengths, weaknesses, relationships, career paths, etc. associated with each assigned type of the 16 Personalities test are derived from classic MBTI, which is why 16 Personalities test results often seem to hit so close to home. However, the test’s purpose lies in being easily applicable and comprehensible. True MBTI is not so clear-cut; its distinction is rooted in the interactions between the different personality dichotomies. These interconnections actually dissect our cognitive functions and emphasize the difference between preference and ability. While we all use both traits of each of the four dichotomies in different scenarios, our preferences highlight our dominating traits, which play into how we operate on a deeper level.
There are eight cognitive functions based on pairings between attitude and the two functional dichotomies, which are stacked differently for each MBTI type:
Extraverted sensing (Se) - using taste, touch, smell, sound, movement and sight to easily absorb information in the physical world
ESTPs (Se > Ti > Fe > Ni) and ESFPs (Se > Fi > Te > Ni)
Introverted sensing (Si) - understanding the world through past precedent and experience
ISTJs (Si > Te > Fi > Ne) and ISFJs (Si > Fe > Ti > Ne)
Extraverted intuition (Ne) - noticing patterns, symbols, and connections in the world that others may not see
ENTPs (Ne > Ti > Fe > Si) and ENFPs (Ne > Fi > Te > Si)
Introverted intuition (Ni) - reach conclusions without having a clear idea as to how they got there
INTJs ( Ni > Te > Fi > Se) and INFJs (Ni > Fe > Ti > Se)
Extraverted thinking (Te) - outwardly conveying thoughts using logic, reason, and analysis
ENTJs (Te > Ni > Se > Fi) and ESTJs (Te > Si > Ne > Fi)
Introverted thinking (Ti) - seeks to understand personal ideas using a deeply specified framework
INTPs (Ti > Ne > Si > Fe) and ISTPs (Ti > Se > Ni > Fe)
Extraverted feeling (Fe) - concerned with harmony, bringing people together, and caring
ENFJs (Fe > Ni > Se > Ti) and ESFJs (Fe > Si > Ne > Ti)
Introverted feeling (Fi) - concerned with authenticity, individualism and values
INFPs (Fi > Ne > Si > Te) and ISFPs (Fi > Se > Ni > Te)
While these descriptions of the cognitive functions are still oversimplifications, they begin to paint a picture of the depth and intricacies of MBTI. The first function in each stack is the dominant function; it’s used so frequently that it’s essentially instinctual. The next in the stack, the auxiliary function, bolsters the dominant function, also acting in relative prominence. The third in the stack, the tertiary function, is somewhat under-developed but becomes increasingly prominent as an individual matures. The last function in the stack, the inferior function, often only manifests when an individual is under stress. Ultimately, the recognition of your cognitive functions can help you to better understand yourself and how your brain works.
So, why the fascination with a bunch of letters? MBTI takes into account who you are - your tendencies, inclinations, and preferences. From there, the analysis of your traits provides accurate and useful insight into how you function. I’ve found that my most unrelenting qualities and incorrigible habits are correlated with my MBTI type. Furthermore, the correspondence between MBTI and other cognitive-psychology based personality indicators, such as the Enneagram of Personality, is incredibly overt. These strong links between different psyche models are fundamentally inevitable, as an individual’s cognitive functions play directly into their basic fears, desires, and fixations. The inherent truths behind MBTI which lend it to paradigms of remarkable accuracy are what make it so compelling to me. At any given moment, you can stop and identify how your present actions or goals are reflective of your type, and there is always further analysis that can be done. (MBTI memes are also always strikingly relatable. Like, sometimes embarrassingly so…)
Some people find this same fascination in astrology. This may be a hot take, but personally, my zodiac sign has always felt like a meaningless descriptor. My horoscopes have never felt accurate to who I am (and yes, I’ve looked at all my signs, not just my sun sign). Astrology has never satisfied me because I can’t look at it as anything besides a pseudoscience. Maybe I just haven’t tapped into my spirituality, but MBTI’s basis in traits that are specific to an individual just make the notion of astrology, a system based on a factor as arbitrary as birthday, seem obsolete. It’s not that I don’t understand the comfort in legitimizing our nature as defined by celestial bodies - I can humor it, I just can’t subscribe to it. I look at these various personality indicators as vessels to deepen my understanding of myself and grow from that knowledge. MBTI incorporates data about how I act, think, and communicate in its assessments of my strengths and weaknesses; astrology uses my time and place of birth to make those same critical observations. I simply can’t justify using astrology as any type of reliable reflection of myself. My qualms with horoscopes are just furthered when I come across endless troves of content that are supposed to be specific to a sign but are almost universally applicable. There's definitely a greater conversation to be had about whether our cognitive functions are inherent or molded, but I've found that people of the same MBTI type, regardless of how different their personalities may outwardly seem, share very similar core traits. In essence, astrology is certainly interesting, but MBTI just makes sense.
So, based on this analysis… can you guess my type?
