True Personality Typing

Sure, I can check it over. I'm just seeing this now, but yes, feel free to send it to me in "Messages"

STUDY NOTES POST #9: HOW PEOPLE DID, IN TYPING ME AS A FICTIONAL CHARACTER

There was this one post in the Attitudinal Psyche Facebook group, where the person asked an interesting question: " How do you think the folks on Personality Database would type you if you were a fictional character?" There is a person from my dreams (part fictional, part real) who is also my typology twin. We met him earlier, in the "One family, 3 ESFPs" post. He was Arvid, Jr., the one who preferred to be called Arvid because "that was his name ". Funny how we're similar, even down to that. I'm the same way with my name 🤣

Anyway, I found a typing questionnaire online, and posted it several places: in some discord servers I knew had Personality Database type description typists, in the Attitudinal Psyche Facebook group, where I knew theory typists hang, and on Reddit, where I was likely to get both. Here is the questionnaire, and the answers:

I knew I was hard to type, but I didn't realize how hard until nearly everyone failed to type me correctly when I was a fictional character.

So if I had to pick one thing in Arvid's typology/my typology that threw off the typing for most people, it is that we're both social blind 3s. Somebody even confessed that they could clearly understand the whole typology once they knew they were dealing with a social blind 3. It just shows how flawed some 3 descriptions are, if people can't imagine 3s being social blind.

So anyway, now, I'm going to go through the parts of a Personality Database typing that can be gleaned from the questionnaire, and write what people should have seen, and then what they did see

MBTI: ESFP Yes, as we all know from the post I shared earlier, Arvid was an ESFP. However, I don't know how many people typed him as an ISTJ. I have no idea where they got the thinking from, except maybe the correlations, correlating ISTJ to his incorrect Enneagram. My answer to question number 6 is a dead giveaway he was a feeler, and I'm sure the answers to some other questions probably also suggested feeling>thinking. Other answers I got were INTJ and ISFP. How they missed the obvious Se dominance is beyond me

Enneagram: 3w4 sx/sp 3(6?7?)9 While I am clearly 379 in my tritype, Arvid could have also possibly been the 369 tritype instead of 379, as it's not clear whether his head fix is 6 or 7. In my case , my head is clearly 7, which is the one possible difference in our typology (just that one number). Anyway, nearly everyone got the sp/sx right. Two people in the Enneagram group on Reddit got the core right (3), but were newbies, so they didn't try to type anything beyond there. Everything else said about his Enneagram was incorrect. When I pointed out he was a 3 and sx/sp, people's eyes were then opened, and they could totally see 3w4 sx/sp. The top incorrect answer given was 6w5 sx/sp 613. I also had people typing him as a 9 and a 5. I think one person typed him as a 1.

Socionics: SEE (And yes, I've been able to confirm my Socionics is in fact SEE ) There was one person who actually said he was SEE. They got it right. Everybody else was wrong. The most common answer was LSI ( once again, where's the thinking?) Other incorrect answers were ESI, SEI and SLI. I also don't know where everyone got the idea he was introverted

Attitudinal Psyche/Psychosophy: EFVL Only one person got this right. They were the first person who responded in the Attitudinal Psyche group on Reddit. The most common wrong answer was FEVL, but the answer I put for number 8 is a pretty clear indication of 1E. It's also pretty obvious he's 2F with his openness and experimentation in the realm of physics. Other incorrect answers were VFEL, VFLE, LFVE and FELV. I think one person might have even responded FLEV, if I remember correctly

Classic Jungian: ES(F) Only one person took a stab at this one, and got it right. I'm pretty sure they were also the one who said he was SEE in Socionics. Go figure.

So yes, that was a summary of how people typed Arvid based on the questionnaire, and thus how they would likely type me if I were a fictional character

Here's a picture I drew of Arvid, so he could be visualized:

Here's a link to the original blog post where I talk about him:

I hope you enjoyed reading about my experiment

David was actually typed in a DISC profile book. The things used to type David as his DISC profile can also type him as a member of the Ne-f type family in SOJT. Ne-f is the main SOJT type family for the MBTI type ENFP.

As far as Harry Potter, about 2 years ago, Akhromant (who used to have a blog on here) made an argument for Harry Potter being ESTP. Now, there were a lot of Akhromant's typings I didn't agree with, but I actually agreed with the Harry Potter one, because if we put what Akhromant said about Harry Potter to the SOJT test, Harry would have been part of the Se-t type family, which is the main SOJT type family for ESTP.

That was how I came to those conclusions. I don't know if Akhromant necessarily described Harry Potter correctly. So I might reanalyze Harry Potter at a later date. But for now, until then, he's ESTP

I hope that answered your questions

JUNGIAN TYPOLOGY POST #18: SOJT TYPE FAMILIES, MBTI TYPES AND SOCIOTYPES ARE NOT EQUAL! THE PANJUNGIANS ON PERSONALITY DATABASE ARE WRONG!

Hello, everyone. After being asked questions over and over about the likelihood of ESTJ 6, it has become clear to me that many people believe that SOJT, the MBTI and Socionics are all the same. I have already discussed how these 3 typologies are actually very different from each other, but I think this will make it clearer, as I talk about levels of specifity :

Most specific: the SOJT type. The SOJT type is the most specific unit of the 3 typologies, and is a person's differentiation pattern, with everything that is conscious in their pattern listed.

Next most specific: the SOJT type family. The SOJT type family contains several SOJT types that are related to a fully differentiated SOJT type, and all manifest similarly to the fully differentiated SOJT type they are grouped with

Next most specific: the MBTI type. An MBTI type contains SOJT types from about 4 closely related SOJT type families, which can be either introverted or extroverted, thanks to the alternating Grant stack

Least specific: Sociotype. A Sociotype contains various SOJT types from about 10 closely related SOJT type families. The SOJT types, once again, can be either extroverted or introverted, because of the Socionics alternating stack

I hope this explains a lot of what I've been talking about when I mention the specifity of SOJT, and how it is different than MBTI and Socionics

TYPING IN PRACTICE POST #19: A JUNGIAN Se-f WHO IS ACTUALLY EMOTIONALLY AND MENTALLY HEALTHY!

Hello, everyone. I know this typing in practice post is out of turn (next was supposed to be Barack Obama), but somebody sent me these videos to type in AP. I couldn't completely type them in AP, because I could only really see a self positive E and 4L; however, I was able to type them in SOJT, and Jack is pretty clearly an Se-f type in SOJT

I know I've spent a lot of time focusing on *Unhealthy* Se-f's, such as Florence Ballard, Kurt Cobain and Michael Hutchence. However, Jack is actually a very good example of a *Healthy* Se-f.

How did I reach the conclusion Jack is Se-f? Because, first of all his videos are all about spontaneous reactions he has when he watches other videos. He reacts spontaneously (Fe2) in his videos to things he experiences with his senses in a tangible way (Se1). He also wants everything to be practical/rational/ common sense, which are all desires of an Extroverted sensation (Se) type. And he responds very spontaneously (feeling) to the videos he watches with expressiveness and sympathy (Fe).

To confirm this, I also typed Jack in DISC. Only I was present. So yeah, I feel confident to say he is an Se-f family member in SOJT, a Primary I in DISC, and his closest matching MBTI type would be ESFP. Here's the videos I watched:

So, in summary, now we finally have a healthy Se-f! 👏👏👏

Thank you. The Bible people actually came from a DISC book that I have. I confirmed that every Bible character was typed correctly in DISC, by typing them in SOJT and using SOJT in a confirmation role. If they were typed correctly in DISC, I added them to my typings list

As far as Milo Yiannopoulos, I've never even heard of him, so I can't help you there.

As far as Akhromant's typings in general, a lot of them are mistypes, because he puts too much weight on Myers' dichotomies and letter cluster behaviors, "ghost" functions (which are actually a version of Beebe's 8 function model), the Kiersey temperaments, and the Berens Communication Styles. None of those things score a passing grade in accuracy , reliability or validity when organizations who test those things rank typology methods and tests. Akhromant is a little better than most, because he includes Neo-Jungian typing techniques. But sadly, he still has many more mistypes than accurate typings, because of his inclusion of typing techniques that fail the accuracy/reliability/validity test 😥

ANNOUNCEMENT: MY NEXT PROJECT

Hi, everyone. I'm sure you've noticed how I'm adding additional typologies to the bottom of my True Types posts. This is actually part of my next project, which was to do the same thing with the Enneagram and Attiduinal Psyche that I did with the MBTI.

That, basically, is to use at least one of the 3 typing systems that are consistently considered accurate, reliable and valid (DISC, SOJT and the Big 5) to figure out someone's Enneagram and Attiduinal Psyche types.

So I have recently started typing the people from my dreams all over again-this time in Enneagram and Attiduinal Psyche. I am looking for trends that develop, so that I know which of the 3 trustworthy systems I could use to type people in Enneagram and Attiduinal Psyche. So far, it looks like it would be a combination of your MBTI type (obtained from comparing your DISC and SOJT results) and your Greek Temperament Blend ( obtained from a surprisingly accurate correlation I found between the Big 5 and the 4 Greek Temperaments in January) for both of them.

I have already found some

MBTI +Greek Temperament Blend = AP type

and

MBTI +Greek Temperament Blend = Enneagram

correlations, so I think I'm on the right track.

I'll get back when I have typed all 200 dream people in Enneagram and Attiduinal Psyche, and I'll let you know what I've discovered

First of all, *I* didn't type Donald Trump as an ENTJ. I just saw him typed as one, and agree with the typing.

I agree with the typing, for the following reasons:

Donald Trump clearly has conscious Te. He's not a feeler, for sure, as he doesn't promote a sense of unity and community you'd find with conscious Fe. And I think everyone agrees on the conscious Te part I've never seen Trump typed as anything other than ExTx.

He also has conscious Ne, and how do we know this? Because Jung starts the description of Se, by saying no one beats Se1 in realism. Donald Trump is very much the opposite of a realistic person.

And maybe the reason you don't see a lot of Trump's Ne is because he spent most of his presidency with unbalanced functions. I am paraphrasing here, but Jung says in these unbalanced situations, unconscious Fi would lead Trump to be defensive, and attack everyone who went against his plan. Unconscious Si would then lead Trump to develop a thinking pattern that his ideas were the best, until reality smacks him in the face. And isn't that exactly what we saw evolve in Donald Trump over his presidency?

And then on top of that, when I looked for characteristics of DISC in Trump, only D had enough characteristics present to be above 50/50. And Primary D =ENTJ.

So I confirm Donald Trump as

Te1, Ne2, Si3, Fi4 in SOJT

Primary D in DISC

Here's some reading about conscious Te and unconscious Fi from Jung:

JUNGIAN TYPOLOGY POST #17: PULLING TYPINGS OFF THE INTERNET-THEY DON'T PROPERLY REPRESENT JUNG'S FUNCTIONS

Hello, everyone, I pulled a bunch of typings people did in a Jung MBTI group out of the group, and I'm actually going to talk about how these typings do not correctly represent Jung's functions, although that's what the people in this group *claim* to be using.

First , we will start with a typing somebody submitted to the group last Tuesday:

I could get somewhat of a typing from this, but not a complete one. If I had been doing this typing, I would have asked the person who submitted it a few key things:

1. Why did the person do xyz? Motives are very important pieces of knowledge to do a correct typing.

2. Was this person in a traumatic/abusive situation at home? This is an important question to ask in most typology groups, because they usually use some mood-based typology in their typing process. I don't, so I normally don't ask people that, but this group does, so if I were using their typing methods, this *is* something I would ask. Traumatic and abusive situations in the home definitely affect people's demeanor

3. Does he prefer xyz over abc? If his situation were different, would he still prefer xyz over abc? As I've mentioned several times in this blog, knowing a person's priorities of the 4 different foci essentially hands you the hierarchy of their conscious functions on a silver platter. Knowing a person's first and second priority in the foci can immediately tell you what the person's dominant and auxiliary functions are. With the information provided here, all I could really determine for sure is that this person is a sensor. The fact that it was mentioned that this person gets along well with others made me think the person is also a feeler. There was a remark that mentioned this guy preferred interacting with nature over interacting with people. That suggests S1, F2; or S1, T2. In these examples, the person preferred feeling and thinking about equally. So, without any further information, my tentative type for this person would be xSFP (preferring F>T) or Sx (instead of Se or Si, because we don't have enough information to know the attitude of the conscious). Here, however, were the responses of this group that *claims * to use Jung's functions. After each, I'll tell you what's wrong abou what they say. And I'm not necessarily saying these people mistyped him. They might have the right type, and just got lucky. More information being provided could back up their type claims, but with only the information provided, their typings were questionable at best, and here's why:

This is questionable at best, because as I just stated above, there was not enough information provided to definitely type this person as an ISTP. The only definitive things at all in the description above are S1 and an undifferentiated aux

To the person above, I would hate to say it, but first of all , if you read Jung, you would definitely know unconscious Fe is not about positive expressivity. Jung, in fact, defines unconscious Fe here:

Second that Kiersey Temperament +Berens Communication Style = Greek Temperament is nothing but ****, and any good typist knows that

Once again, Fe3 has nothing to do with positive expression. Jung says in many places that x3 is thae auxiliary of x4. What does that imply? That the unconscious functions have at best , neutral, and at worst, negative, connotations with them. Alternating between funny, extroverted and life of the party; and quiet, contemplative and timid; would be because of a *conscious* feeling function, not an unconscious one. Notice how after reading the exact same paragraph, I determined this person to have *conscious* feeling.

Also , this particular group associates Ti with self identity 🤔 Jung's definition of Ti has nothing to do with self identity, and if you actually read Psychological Types, you find if there *is* a function that has anything to do with self identity, it's *Fi*, not Ti.

Then there's this person, talking about an "SP" trait as if it's exclusive to ISTPs, and thankfully, someone else in the group was at least able to see this error and correct the person:

Now that I read it, they aren't fully correct. To the person directly above, that's S1, not Si1.

And after I remembered that if Jung has a function that that anything to do with self-identity, it is Fi; I think I'm wrong. There was enough information provided to type this person. He's not an ISTP, by the way. His SOJT type is Se (preferring F>T), and his closest MBTI would be ESFP. Sorry, you guys. 🤣😂😆 I'm going to post this in my server . If anyone reads this here, or in my server, and sees any other misrepresentations of Jung, other than the ones I've already pointed out, please point them out , and let's discuss. I'd like my readers to learn Jung well enough to recognize typology errors like these, and I'd like to get better at recognizing them too 👍🤞✌️

TYPING IN PRACTICE #18: 2 MORE ESFPS WITH DEPRESSION; SADLY THEY COMMITTED SUICIDE; KURT COBAIN AND MICHAEL HUTCHENCE

Earlier in True Types post # 11, where I typed Diana Ross, Mary Wilson and Florence Ballard from the Supremes, I mentioned that Florence Ballard was an ESFP who had sadly been overcome by depression.

Well, I analyzed 2 people who were also in music, and were also ESFPs, and also depressed. Unfortunately, in these instances, both committed suicide. They were two people who's music I listened to during my late teens and early 20s in the 1990s. They were Kurt Cobain of Nirvana and Michael Hutchence of INXS. I was heartbroken by their passings.

Both Kurt and Michael were very easy to analyze in both SOJT and DISC through videos. Both of them had a primary focus on tangibles and a secondary focus on people. That represents Se1, Fe2. In addition, as far as DISC characteristics went, both Kurt and Michael had only I above 50/50, meaning they were both Primary I. Se1, Fe2 and Primary I results for both confirm that both were, in fact, in the MBTI terminology, ESFPs.

I particularly found Kurt Cobain's Fe2 interesting, in that it presents an interesting scenario about how to can tell the difference between Fe and Fi.

In one of the videos I watched, Kurt was asked why he had done drugs for a while. He said , because the rock stars he had grown up on all did drugs, and he felt that if he didn't do drugs too, he "wouldn't be accepted as a rock star ". Then he was asked what he would tell others after his experience doing drugs. Kurt replied, "Don't do drugs. It's stupid."

Both those statements from Kurt show that he has conscious Fe, and now I will talk about the difference between Fe and Fi.

If Kurt Cobain had conscious Fi instead of conscious Fe, his reasoning for using the drugs would actually be to not stand out and look different. As I mentioned to someone on my discord server, there is a simple way to tell whether a function is extroverted (outgoing) or introverted (reserved). Associate images of going out with "outgoing" and pulling in for "reserved" . If feeling pulls in, feeling is going to be concerned about how "I" feel about a situation, whereas if it goes out, feeling is going to be concerned about how "others" feel. Kurt being concerned about the "others" suggests his feeling is going out of him (extroverted), as well as his social acceptance reasoning for using the drugs to begin with. He used them not so that "I won't stand out and look different " (Fi). No . He used them so "other people would accept him as a rock star" (Fe).

Another interesting thing about Kurt, in his suicide note; he was concerned about how his wife Courtney and daughter Francess would feel if they had to continue to live with a depressed husband and father. His suicide note was very selfless, and Kurt talked about putting Courtney and Francess out of their misery of having to deal with a chronically depressed person like him.

Michael Hutchence was pretty much a repeat story, so I'm not going to go into detail with him. But yeah, if you watch the videos you can clearly see both have a primary tangibles orientation and a secondary people orientation, with both orientations going out of them rather than pulling in:

TYPING IN PRACTICE #17: COMPARING PRIMARY D AND D/I; ENTJ AND ENTP-CS JOSEPH AND CHRIS FROM ASURA PSYCH

With this Typing In Practice post, I will compare and contrast two MBTI YouTubers, CS Joseph and Chris from Asura Psych. Just like most in the MBTI community, both are mistyped. Chase (CS Joseph) claims to be an ENTP and Chris claims to be an INTJ. They are actually an ENTJ and an ENTP respectively.

The SOJT was very easy to do on them using life themes, probably because they're both fully differentiated. Chase was tasks (T)first, intangibles (N) second. Chris was just the opposite: intangibles (N) first, tasks (T) second.

Then, I used DISC characteristics to confirm this, and sure enough, Chase had only D above 50/50 and Chris had D and I both above 50/50

D is an extroverted quadrant, therefore the attitudes for the life themes are e. Chase is Te1, Ne2, which translates in MBTI terms to ENTJ. Chris is Ne1, Te2, which translates to ENTP.

The main reason I combined these 2 together was so that you could watch the videos, and compare and contrast Chase and Chris.

The video of Chase is 20 minutes long, so I have 2 10 minute videos of Chris.

Note the similarities: both have ideas about intangible objects that they're trying to shove in people's faces. They both have a commanding type attitude, and both want to be in control of your thinking about their ideas .

However, note the differences:

Although both are quite blunt in their delivery, you can see Chris's secondary Influence, in the fact that Chris actually says some affirming statements with a vision of hope for the people he's talking about. Contrast this with Chase, who's just frank and speaks his mind in almost a taunting way about the people in his video

Above is the CS Joseph video, and below are the 2 Asura Psych videos. Have fun comparing and contrasting!

TYPING IN PRACTICE # 16: JENNIFER LOPEZ

Jennifer Lopez is the last of the 5 people I typed from watching CS Joseph videos.

The first time through the CS Joseph video, that I watched back in the summer of 2021, all I had enough knowledge about at the time, method-wise, was DISC. In looking for DISC characteristics in Jennifer, I could tell both D and I were above 50/50. I left the typing there at that time, and came back to it later, as I learned more about Jung's functions.

I came back to the typing about a year later, armed with knowledge of the functions. I found Jennifer to have Se as her dominant function, but her auxiliary seemed to alternate between Te and Fe, with Te being slightly more common.

Therefore I was able to determine that Jennifer's SOJT type is Se, and that she has a slight preference for T over F. Her DISC characteristics having both D and I above 50/50 would also be consistent with the SOJT type Se (preferring T >F).

So what does all this mean in MBTI terminology? It means that Jennifer Lopez is Se1, Te2 ( although that Te2 is by a thread). The DISC result going along with this SOJT type is D=I (-). The MBTI type represented by Se1, Te2 is ESTP.

Therefore, in summary, we can say that Jennifer Lopez has the D=I DISC profile with the result D=I (-), that her SOJT type is Se (preferring T > F, and that her MBTI type is ESTP

To learn more about the SOJT type Se (T>F), you can read my True Types mock interview with our dream friend, Rusty:

JUNGIAN TYPOLOGY POST #13: SIMPLIFIED ORIGINAL JUNGIAN TYPOLOGY (SOJT) AND THE MBTI ARE NOT THE SAME

This was a post that I should have made eons ago, but I feel compelled to make it now, because there's a group of MBTI purists who are trying to push their followers to believe Simplified Original Jungian Typology is not Jungian. Sounds crazy, but it's true 🥴

So I guess I'm on a quest to defend Simplified Original Jungian Typology, here, as well as show the differences between the two systems. So let's start.

Simplified Original Jungian Typology (SOJT) had its origin in Europe, among Jung's pupils and their pupils. It types people exactly how Jung did in Psychological Types. It types both your cognition and your differentiation.

So on my blog , when I talk about SOJT type families, I'm talking about all the SOJT differentiation patterns that have the same cognition. It uses terms like, let's take the type ESFP for example, Se-f, fe-S, Se, S-f, etc. to describe the different differentiation patterns that all have the same cognition. What do all those examples have in common? An Se dominant function, and an Fe auxiliary function. They just have different differentiation patterns, for example S-f alternates between Se Fe and Si Fi for the conscious, hence, we don't know whether to label the person e or i, so we just label them S-f (and that's the best description I've written yet for undifferentiated attitude 👏👏👏Yay!).

The Se-f, in this case, would be the fully differentiated type. All fully differentiated types look this way. I've had some of those MBTI purists say that's not Jungian, because it doesn't say "Se-fe". Guys, this is not the MBTI. This is SOJT. It's a totally different typology, and if "e" appears anywhere in the annotation, it means the whole conscious is extroverted; and if "i" appears anywhere in the annotation, it mens the whole conscious is introverted.

One final interesting note I will say about SOJT before I move on, and talk about the MBTI. That's the difference in grades between SOJT and the MBTI. SOJT consistently scores 80% or higher on several metrics, such as accuracy, reliability, validity and test-retest. The MBTI, on the other hand, consistently fails in all those metrics, scoring less than 60% , and that is all forms of the MBTI, including the dichotomy test from the official MBTI 😳, which is the highest ranking of all MBTI methods. If you're wondering why people who are really vested in the MBTI would try to steer you away from SOJT, look no further. It's because they don't want you to know you're mistyped, and they don't want to lose business 🤫

Now, we move on to the MBTI. Dang, where do I begin? There are are so many factions of MBTI, it's not funny. You have Grant Stackers (probably the majority of the community), you have MBTI purists (who use eeii and iiee order/IJs are judgers/IPs are perceivers), you have people who totally type by temperaments (Kiersey, Berens and CS Joseph), you have people who only believe the dichotomy test is valid, etc, and I could go on. I'll just leave it there.

The whole MBTI community is fragmented, the functions mean different things, depending on whose method you're using. The purists have the right and *only* right definitions of the functions, but they tend to disfavor the functions, and prefer to use MBTI facets, MBTI letter cluster behaviors and temperaments over the functions 🤔 That's sadly, where even the purists falter. They fail to realize that *nothing* about the MBTI is accurate.

I don't think I need to share the background story of the MBTI, because I'm pretty sure anyone who reads this knows the story of how the MBTI originated. But Briggs and Myers definitely interpreted Jung their own way. Then Grant got hold of Briggs and Myers' theory, and created his own. And every MBTI theory after Grant is an interpretation of Grant. The MBTI is like a massive, unending, "telephone game", where the message at the end of the line is extremely altered from the original message, and the original message is lost

That's exactly why I tell people to not even bother to use the MBTI to figure out their MBTI type, and to use Simplified Original Jungian Typology and DISC instead. Oh, and by the way, DISC is the only other typology that scores 80% or higher on all the metrics I listed above for SOJT. Yep. SOJT and DISC is the way to go, if you really want to figure out your MBTI type. I tell people that all the time

TYPING IN PRACTICE POST #15: ALICIA KEYS

I was actually going to post a different typing in practice first, but decided to go with this one first, since it's one where we can learn a lot of things about typing, so here goes

Alicia Keys was born Alicia Argello-Cook, and raised by a single mother in a rough neighborhood in New York City, called, "Hell's Kitchen". Her mother recognized Alicia's music talent early on, and enrolled her in piano lessons at age 6. She graduated as Valedictorian from her high school graduating class. She was offered a scholarship for Columbia University and a recording contract from Columbia Records at the same time. She chose the recording contract, and the rest is history.

I became interested in her after she had released 2 albums and this poetry book:

I read the book through many times, but this was the first time I read it through in relation to trying to type her. I have seen people type Alicia Keys as everything under the sun, but it was time to get down and dirty, and figure out Alicia's SOJT type, and what MBTI that goes with. So let's get started.

Step 1: I reread the book, looking for functions in the parts where Alicia talks about her own life, or the stories behind the poems. It seemed like I was seeing both extroverted and introverted versions of all the functions, and couldn't determine which judging function and perceiving function were conscious and which were unconscious. At that point, it became clear to me why everyone has such a hard time typing her- she Has an undifferentiated attitude . But I have learned, over the past year, the best practices for accurately typing an undifferentiated attitude, and I will be sharing them here. But let's take a little aside, and talk a little bit about Si.

Jung describes introverted sensing here, on page 363 of Psychological Types, like an interpretation of a painting. I like that description, because it has one be able to easily comprehend how an introverted sensor can actually internalize their experiences with objects

Here's a very obvious example of Si from Alicia's book:

So one function that stood out to me, as being part of Alicia's Jungian type was probably Si. So I went on to step 2.

Step 2: since I couldn't even tell the order of her functions from the book, or by means like the function related themes, I figured the next step to do with her would be to watch videos of interviews, and conduct a function analysis. As I explained in the Typing In Practice post on Madonna, a function analysis would be where I comb through the videos, looking for instances of thinking and deciding, and figure out what functions are present in the process. So I watched the videos a few times. I could definitely see Alicia's undifferentiated attitude. It was as clear as a bell. And I will add 2 of the 4 videos I watched at the end of this post, because they had other great examples of Si: Alicia sharing her experiences with songs, New York City, and the color purple, just to name a few. After I was done here, this was the function tally I had. Notice how close the numbers are for each attitude of the same function. This is pretty typical when typing undifferentiated attitude. At least I now have a dominant and auxiliary function for Alicia now , and can tell she's S-f in Jungian, or using the letters, SFP:

Step 3: I could just abandon the typing right here, and just call Alicia Keys an "A" SFP. But that would not be as specific as I have the potential to get. Really? I can get more specific than that? With the help of DISC, I can. With DISC, I can identify which attitude is the preferred one. I knew from my combined DISC and SOJT typings of dream people, that make up the True Types posts, that there are 2 "A" SFP slots on the DISC wheel. Slot 6 is in the Primary I profile, and prefers extroversion. Slot 132 is in the S/D profile and prefers introversion. So, I played the videos again, this time looking for characteristics of various DISC quadrants, and this was the end result:

So now we have a most resonant MBTI type for Alicia Keys, as we add the letter I as the first letter, with the letters.

In summary, Alicia Keys has an undifferentiated attitude and striking Si. She doesn't fit neatly into an MBTI type, but her best match for MBTI type is ISFP.

Here's the videos, where you can see great examples of Si in Alicia Keys. Note what she says about songs in the first one, and New York City and the color purple in the second:

If you would like more information about the SOJT type S-f preferring I>E, you can read the following True Types post, where I do a "mock interview" with my dream buddy, Dave:

TRUE TYPES TYPE FAMILIES POST #4: MEET THE Ti-n FAMILY

I have located all 5 SOJT types that make up the Ti-n family. They are 3 slots in the C/I/S profile, and 2 slots in the D/C profile. The slots numbers are 133, 136, 156, 36 and 56.

Here are characteristics that all the 5 SOJT types had in common, and *should* be part of the MBTI type descriptions for INTJ:

All the things listed above *should* be part of INTJ type descriptions in the MBTI, because they were common to all 5 SOJT types in the Ti-n type family.

Now let's take a look at the 5 SOJT types in the Ti-n family, and what makes each SOJT type distinctly different from the other 4:

Ti-n (fully differentiated type)

Read more about Ti-n here:

Ni-t (short primary, long secondary)

Read more about Ni-t here:

Ti (N>S) (undifferentiated auxiliary)

Read more about Ti (N>S) here:

Ti-n/Ni-f (more than one type, with double dominant)

Read more about Ti-n/Ni-f here:

T-n (I >E) (undifferentiated attitude)

Read more about T-n (I>E) here:

TRUE TYPES TYPE FAMILIES POST #3: MEET THE Te-s TYPE FAMILY

I was able to chronicle all 5 SOJT types in the Te-s family that would all be represented in DISC. They all fall under the D/C profile, and are found in the off wheel result D=C, as well as slots 21, 41, 141 and 22. Slot 121 also belongs to the Te-s family, but it is a SOJT type above and beyond the 5 represented in each DISC profile.

Here are the similarities between the 5 SOJT types that make up the Te-s family. These *should* make up the description for the MBTI type ESTJ. But we know how messed up the MBTI is:

What is written above *should* be what an ESTJ type description in the MBTI looks like, Since those were all common characteristics of the Te-s type family.

Let's go on and look at the 5 main SOJT types that make up the Te-s type family, and what makes each SOJT type distinctly different from the other 4

Te-s (fully differentiated type)

Read more about Te-s here:

Se-t (short primary/long secondary)

Read more about Se-t here:

Te (S>N) (undifferentiated auxiliary)

Read more about Te (S>N) here:

Te-s/Se-f (more than one type, double dominant)

Read more about Te-s/Se-f here:

T-s (E>I)

Read more about T-s (E>I) here:

TRUE TYPES TYPE FAMILIES POST #2: MEET THE Se-f FAMILY

I was able to chronicle all 5 SOJT types that belong to the Se-f type family. They are all within the Primary I profile in DISC, and are in slots 5, 6, 7, 108 and 8 on the DISC wheel. These people *should* also be the MBTI type ESFP. But we know how off the modern day MBTI type descriptions are

Here's things that these 5 SOJT types that make up the Se-f type family have in common:

This should be how the MBTI defines the type , ESFP. As noted, their MBTI type descriptions are pretty far removed from the actual list of commonalities among the 5 SOJT type in the Se-f family.

Let's now take a look at each individual SOJT type in the family, and what makes each distinctive from the other 4 SOJT types:

Se-f (fully differentiated type)

Read more about Se-f here:

Fe-s (short primary, long secondary)

Read more about Fe-s here:

Se (F>T ) (undifferentiated auxiliary)

Read more about Se (F>T) here:

Se-f/Fe-n (undifferentiated dominant and inferior)

Read more about Se-f /Fe-n here:

S-f (E>I) (undifferentiated attitude)

Read more about S-f (E>I) here: