In previous entries of this series we discussed Extroversion and Introversion, Sensing and Intuition, Thinking and Feeling, and finally Judging and Perceiving. In this post, we bring those for preferences together to find your type.

Those four preferences are all you need to decide your Myers-Briggs type. If you are more introverted pick ‘I’. If you prefer Sensing pick ‘S’. If you feel (ahem) you are a Thinker pick ‘T’. If you decide you are a Judger pick ‘J’, if uncertain pick ‘P’ (ha ha!). Add it all together and you would be (in this case) an ISTJ or ISTP. That is the simply and quick way to type yourself (or somebody else).

You can try a more involved test online. The test asks 72 questions and will return your type.

It is important to note some things:

• Type may point to the reasons for communication difficulties or other misunderstandings.
• The map is not the territory. Knowing a person’s type only gives indications as to how they might be. Most people do not perfectly match type descriptions
• The various preferences (E versus I, S versus N, etc.) do not simply add together. They interact with each other to create the whole type.
• Type is not a prison. Phrases like “you can’t expect an XXXX to do that” are just excuses. Type points to preferences and motivations, it does not prevent you living a full and useful life. It does not mean you can never be polite, disciplined, creative, etc.
• It would be very rash to make decisions regarding employment (to offer or take), romance, education, etc. based solely on type.
• Without changing basic preferences, people adapt to different situations: individuals may present as a different type as they adopt to current need (e.g., a Feeling, Perceiving manager may present a Thinking, Judging face as required by his current role).
• Under pressure, such as stress or tiredness, people may even appear as an opposite type (the “evil twin” effect).

The simplest way to find out about a particular type is to perform a search using the four-letter code. Such a search will return many entries. However, because I am such a nice guy, I provide links to the Typelogic entry for each of the 16 types.

Notes:
As of the posting date, Typealyzer has my blogging style as INTJ (The Scientists). Typealyzer is wrong.

However, on various Internet discussion boards, INTJ predominates. While INTJs represent a small portion of the general population (perhaps two percent) they can make up the majority of posters at such sites (by simple poll). Indeed all intuitive types feature in far greater numbers than they do in the general population.

Previously we discussed the different way in which people gather information about the world, their so-called Perceiving function. We also discussed how they make decisions, their so-called Judging function. We now look at how someone uses those two functions together.

The last letter defines whether a person prefers to use their Judging function (Thinking or Feeling) or their Perceiving function (Sensing or iNtuition) in the outer world. More correctly, it defines which function a person prefers to use in its extroverted form.
[We can use each function (e.g., Thinking or Sensing) in an introverted form or an extraverted form. For now though, the "uses in the outer world" description is good enough.]

Judging types prefer to use their judging function in the outer world. They want to bring order to their outer world. They will tend to seem more ordered and decisive because their decision making function is their public face. Perceiving types prefer to use their perceiving function in the outer world. They want to take in information from their outer world. They will tend to appear more flexible or questioning because their information gathering function is their public face. In conversation, judging types may prefer to argue (come to a decision) where perceiving types may prefer to discuss (find out more and understand their options).

While Judgers will use their Judging function in an extroverted manner, they will use their perceiving function in an introverted manner. Perceivers reverse this: they use their perceiving function in an extroverted manner but use their judging function in an introverted manner (bringing order to their internal world). This balancing of cognitive functions is what completes type. It also means that we tend to be aware of only one part of other people. We only see their extroverted public face (J or P), their private (introverted) function are not clearly visible to us.

Judgers
Judgers tend to like more order and schedule in their life. They are more likely to belief in a correct way to approach something. The will tend to have more “should” and “ought” in their beliefs.
What they seek: Stability or certainty.
Motto: Decide and schedule.
Complains about Perceivers: Messy, disorganized, unreliable, indecisive.

Perceivers
Perceivers tend to like flexibility and options in their life. They are more likely to believe that there are many ways to approach something. They will tend to have more “maybe” and “depends” in their beliefs.
What they seek: Discovery and options.
Motto: But what about . . .?
Complains about Judgers: Rigid, dogmatic, rushed, argumentative.

Notes:
It is important to understand that the J/P preference does not stand alone. How it appears depends very much on the preferred Judging function (Thinking or Feeling) but also on the other preferences (Extroversion versus Introversion, and Sensing versus iNtuiting). However, the basic dichotomy does still apply.

It is also important to note that we are talking of preference and basic motivation. Perceivers are capable of keeping to a schedule and Judgers are capable of exploring options. Neither type is stuck into a world of constant disorder or rigid steadfastness. However, each type will tend to be more comfortable in one type of situation over the other. Also, we all adapt to our current situation: A perceiver may appear more scheduled during the work day, while the judger may appear more relaxed on his day off.

The mystery quote is:
But soft, what light through yonder window breaks?

The line is from William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet (Act 2, scene 2, 2–6) and the full quote is:

But soft, what light through yonder window breaks?
It is the east, and Juliet is the sun.
Arise, fair sun, and kill the envious moon,
Who is already sick and pale with grief
That thou, her maid, art far more fair than she.

When I included the line, I was not thinking of the play. I was thinking of that moment when analyzing a problem, just before a solution comes into plain sight. It is the brief period just before the final aha moment. It is the moment when you realize that all of that work, all of that analysis, all of that thinking might just reveal an insight, a solution, or (heaven forefend) and actionable item.

It also turns out that I may have misquoted, or at least mispunctuated, the line. Some versions show it as:
But, soft! what light through yonder window breaks?

A group of scientists at NASA have come up with a plan to approach that cute girl.
Not entirely work safe satire from The Onion

Who said philosopher geeks are not romantic. Have a happy St Valentines Day.

<3 <3 <3

See it on the YouTube Video (probably work safe – roughly PG rating).

Clippy as hero, almost as unlikely as a heroic nerd.

In Sensors and Intuitors I discussed how people take in information. In this article I discuss how they make decisions. In Jungian terms this is the “judging” function. In Myers-Briggs typing, this is the third letter of the four-letter type (Thinking or Feeling).

Thinkers, as you might have guessed, prefer logic and objective analysis. They tend to seek the most correct answer. They will tend to use objective and measurable data. They may neglect human interest in order to promote efficiency.
Hospital room their brain is like: Operating theater because they are clean, cool, and organized for efficiency.
Star Trek character they are most like
-Old series: Spock.¹
-Next Generation: Data.²
Motto: But that is illogical.

Feelers, as you might have guessed, prefer to make decisions based on person-centered values. They tend to seek the fairest answer. They prefer to use empathy and compassion to guide their decisions. They may neglect purely factual concerns in an effort to promote harmony.
Hospital room their brain is like: Children’s ward because they are warm, friendly, and organized for harmony, empathy, and good feelings
Star Trek Character they are most like
-Old series: Mc Coy.³
-Next Generation: Deanna Troi.
Motto: Very good, Spock. We may make a human of you yet.

Notes:

Yes, I did realize that I posted this the same weekend that Star Trek hit the theaters. It was all part of my plan (thinking) to give some of you a smile (feeling).

¹ Just like real life thinkers, Spock (as part human) would be able to access Feeling (emotion). He is far more extreme than most real life Thinkers.
² At some point, Data received an emotion chip. This means that he too would be able to access Feeling (emotion). This ability to switch from a preferred mode to a different one is more like real-life Thinkers.
³ Although McCoy disliked Spock’s cold logic, he was perfectly capable of using logic to solve a crisis. Just like real-life Feelers he could access logic (Thinking) but preferred Feeling.

So here is another video of a man doing stunts. No quad bike, no muscles, just a lot of skill.

You are back. OK. Did you watch it all?

So it seems romantic, if a bit cheesy. At least it would be if this were a declaration of love to his current girl. As part of a wedding proposal it would be sort of cool in a dorky kind of way. But this was a “love letter” to a woman that left, without looking back, two (count ‘em) years ago. And she did not leave contact details. She just “disappeared.” Now I am not the coolest guy on the block, but even I can figure this stuff out. If she has gone 404, if she is MLNA (for you snail mail types), it is over. It is dead. The horse ain’t getting up, so stop flogging it.

Can you see John Wayne, Humphrey Bogart, or Sean Connery doing this pansy ass crap? For them it would be:
Q: “Where is Loren?”
A: “Don’t know, the dumb broad walked out on me. Meet Susan my new girlfriend.”

So let’s go over this:
Over eager declaration of love = cheesy
Action filled marriage proposal = cute
Overwrought, whimpering to some chick that walked (maybe ran) out two years ago = creepy.

The first gets you a contented sigh, the second a big expensive day, the last a restraining order.

This seven minutes of hell took nine months to create. It took energy and skill. All that effort could have been spent to do something useful like… um… get a new girlfriend. Hey, it’s just a suggestion.

At least the Numa Numa kid had the grace to be embarrassed.

Notes:

The video itself is well made. Apparently Captain America (see note below) made it single handedly (the zooms, tilts, and pans were created with editing software). He managed to create some good action shots and a fairly professional feel to it. The script is not too bad with the mystery of what is all about building to the reveal at the five-minute mark. A bit long, perhaps, but still better than I (or many others) could create.

Some cynical types believed that this was made to promote the person in it (Ben Ryan Metzger) for the role of Captain America. Someone certainly posted it to many chatrooms. Given that the camera spends seven minutes on Metzger’s muscles and 20 seconds on Loren, I would not rule that out.

Some even more cynical types suggest that Metzger might not be gay.

A Nerd is someone who is passionate about learning in general. It is someone that is interested in more abstract and academic pursuits. These interests may or may not be technical. They may, or may not, be obscure. They are more likely to know quite a lot about quite a lot but not necessarily to the huge depth of the geek.

A Geek is someone who is passionate about some particular subject or subjects. Often these will be technical or obscure. They will tend to know their subjects in incredible depth and detail, far more than a normal person could bear.

A Dork is someone who has difficulty with common social expectations and interactions. They may, or may not, be a geek or a nerd. They may have perfectly normal interests and knowledge but just find people “difficult.”

Where the confusion comes is that often these are mixed. Many nerds also have particular subjects they are geeky (expert) about. Many geeks also have a general interest in subjects outside their area of expertise (nerdy).  Due to their introspective nature, many geeks and nerds also have trouble with common social interactions (dorks).

To sum up: Some nerds are also geeks. Some geeks are also nerds. Not every nerd is also a geek. Not every geek is also a nerd. Geeks and nerds can also be dorks but not every dork is a geek or a nerd. Geeks and nerds are not always dorks.

I hope that has cleared things up.

One of the archetypes mentioned in my article on chick taxonomy was the Femme Fatale. Well it turns out there is a real life version posting on the Internet. Naturally, Typealyzer considers her a party girl.

Have fun nerdy reader, but beware the warnings in my taxonomy article.
The linked blog is probably not work or family safe.