Lay typologists often have an “N” ego and find refuge in typology for the validation it gives that ego image. It allows them to preserve a self-concept of higher importance by weaving together a story of “Why I was not understood in the world.” The reason, they infer, is that they are intuitive and others aren’t, and so they see things in a way others don’t, which is why they are outcast and misunderstood.

 

I’m definitely N ego, but I have never fallen prey to this type of thinking. The idea that 1/4 of the world is N first, means right away it isn’t special.  Same with enneagram types.  My ego tells me 😉 that being special involves something way beyond embodying a type in a system invented by a third party.

The problem lies with the definitions of Se and Si – which are not always so great. Jung’s Si was a bit better and more abstract, but his Se was not something most people would pin on someone like me.

When I first got into typology, I was focused on learning enneagram and allowed others to type my functions if they wanted.  I was advised right away that I had to be “N dom.” People argued whether I was Ne or Ni; I went with “tentatively NFP” although I never related to a Ne description, but Fi seemed better.

The minute I looked into functions myself, I said “Nope, Se. I’m ISFP.”  I typed as ISFP for a couple years, only to be told by others that I had a false conception of myself, that I was such an obvious intuitor.  The pressure became so great that I started wondering: what if I really am seeing myself wrongly?  By the time I got here, I was considering both FeNi and FiSe.

I do have some reasons for reconsidering Se.  I’m more about inner passions, music etc – than anything worldly.  I’m more in my heart and art than in my body.  I don’t care for food or “hookups” without romance and connection.  I’m no good at sports, I suck at drawing and dancing no matter how hard I try, and I am not cut out for stunts either. Cars, physical items etc; don’t hold power for me.  I need my living space  and clothes to reflect my inner world so that my lifestyle is conducive to my creative and spiritual endeavors, but I don’t need to “have expensive items” or collect nick nacks. Nothing material or body-oriented is my focus; I don’t even like to cook, or wear makeup or heels.

But I figured I was a sensor because I’m a kinetic learner. I learn by doing, I think with my hands.  I’m a vessel through which passion emerges. When I’m playing or listening to music, I am the song.  My body is a canvas through which to express my inner self. Aesthetics are essential to my being.  For most of my life, I obsessed over tangible projects that I poured my soul into – albums, novels, videos.  I find music, art, and anecdotal stories much more natural than describing anything in words.  Socially, I’m much more natural in person than online. I talk much less, but communicate much more. I read people through body language, feel their feelings and sense their state of mind and inner life.

I thought for these reasons I’d be a sensor, but the reason I didn’t type as Se first is because of being told (many times, correctly) that I suck at anything physical or visual. My parents make fun of me for being clumsy, awkward in my body and not knowing what looks good on me, and I internalized this, even though many others have appreciated my style. My mother did point out that when I would invent a certain style and wear it to school, others would copy; I was a trendsetter. But from my pov, I wasn’t noticing trends; I was simply expressing my inner self. So I figured, FiSe; based on how I’ve acted in my life.

The only reason I considered N is because I was bullied and wrankled on several forums 😀  and I eventually caved into the idea that maybe I wasn’t seeing myself correctly and ought to consider other options.  I understood too well that it’s difficult to see yourself objectively, since so many people mistyped – and I did not see myself as ‘above’ mistyping; as it’s unrealistic.

Perhaps my Se-Te ‘realism’ plays into my typing process too. “Why would N make someone special if 1/4 of the world is N dominant?” and “Real life experience has shown me people have trouble seeing themselves clearly” – are part of my thinking pattern when typing myself.   Also, S types have a better chance of being noticeably ‘special’ because at least, that archetype would give us the edge on expressing our inner uniqueness through our appearance 🙂  And this is why I personally don’t fall prey to such trains of thought, even if I can still be wrong.  I’ll ask myself, how do these functions and categories play out in the real world?

• This reply was modified 1 year, 12 months ago by Animal.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 12 months ago by Animal.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 12 months ago by Animal.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 12 months ago by Animal.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 12 months ago by Animal.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 12 months ago by Animal.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 12 months ago by Animal.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 12 months ago by Animal.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 12 months ago by Animal.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 12 months ago by Animal.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 12 months ago by Animal.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 12 months ago by Animal.