<p>But measuring for behavior has its own issues-- the Voigt-Kampff empathy test in Philip K. Dick's <em>Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep</em> is set to test behaviors of "empathy" by testing the reaction time of a person to a scenario in which an animal is being mistreated.</p>
<p>The test measures a behavior, but it measures that behavior in relation to the society itself (which values animals) so the test is not actually measuring the behavior unique to every individual, it's measuring the individual's adherence to societal values.</p>
<p>Picture a happiness test. How could you measure if a person was happy without applying some standards (a good massage, a million dollars, acceptance into college) of what makes a society happy?</p>
<p>ahahaha, Myers Briggs types. Well, for what it’s worth, I’ve definitely gone from being an INTP to an ENTP over the course of first year at Chicago. :)</p>
<p>Do you consider yourself extroverted because you do more “social” things, or do you think your prospective has become extroverted? Because it could be that you happened to meet more like-minded people, and can socialize with those friends better. Introspective is not synonymous with anti-social.</p>
<p>Also, Myer Briggs, though it can seem wishy-washy, has been accurate among a lot of people I know, both according to them and their peers.</p>
<p>As I understand it, “introvert” and “extrovert” are fairly rough and misleading slogans for the poles of the Meyers-Briggs I/E axis. It’s not about whether you are shy or outgoing; it’s more about whether you are more driven by internal processes vs. what other people want or respect or need. An “I” sets his or her own agenda and sticks to it; an “E” is listening to other people, formulating a plan to meet their needs, and then revising in accordance with their feedback.</p>
<p>It’s not so much that I’ve gone from I to E, but rather from INTP to ENTP. The two are pretty close anyways, but I’ve definitely felt my function strengths changing. For example, my Ne dominates much more than my Ti nowadays, and I especially feel like my Ti isn’t as strong as my friends who are clearly INTP’s. There’s a sort of internal dialogue or thought process that I don’t quite have; I’d rather replicate it in interpersonal communication. I guess my behavior has also matched the ENTP profile moreso than the INTP one, but there’s a feedback loop there that’s hard to isolate. Of course, it could easily be that I was an ENTP all along (there was anecdotal behavioral evidence in retrospect), and that I just became conscious of it recently.</p>
<p>Also, I believe I vs E refers more to sources of ‘energy’ for lack of a better word rather than perspective. As a MBTI ‘extravert,’ I draw energy/inspiration/enthusiasm from without, rather than within. Correlated with levels of socialization, sure, but the same thing not exactly.</p>
<p>And yeah, MBTI is a massive inside joke among my friends xD. We hate on INTJ’s.</p>
<p>EDIT: As an INTP, I also had an incredible ENTP face I could put on. Somewhere along the road, I discovered that the ‘face’ was more me, i was more comfortable with it, than my default INTP personality. So the tendency for INTP’s to adopt alternate personalities/ faces, as well as the ENTP tendency to resist categorization, makes it all the more difficult.</p>
<p>@JHS. Ya I agree. I think the uniqueness of MBTI introspects is their preference for individuality, such as that being alone isn’t a bad thing. My friends and I are all introverts, and sometimes we would just sit and think, as weird as that sounds, without talking to each other. It isn’t awkward at all. You can still be very social as introverts, but the need to be social is less prominent.</p>
<p>@Rny2: That’s a good analysis. Its possible that you are just along an I/E gradient, so you posses qualities of both. Personally, I agree that I am an INTP, but my only qualms with its description is that INTPs are supposed to have difficulty in relating to others emotionally, but I can do that easily. MBTI is just not absolute I guess, but its pretty damn accurate. Its also funny you said INTPs have the ability to put on a “mask.” I have a friend who claims to be an introvert, but to me, he seems like a obvious extrovert. Maybe he is just putting on a mask. And damn INTJs. Those fuc<em>ing judgmental pric</em>*. lol jk.</p>
<p>@shadowzoid: It’s very possible I’m somewhere between I and E. My I was always my weakest trait (I have MASSIVE N and P), and MBTI certainly allows for moderation between extremes on traits. However, I’d say that there’s a different way in which archetypal INTP’s and ENTP’s express their I and E’s. So with someone with the same I/E trait/quality, the energy flow would be the same but it would express in different behaviour. Essentially, what is the difference between a low I INTP and a low E ENTP?</p>
<p>I guess preference. I have always felt that introspects were more comfortable being alone, or immersing themselves in their own thoughts, while extroverts have felt greater need for emotional connection. Of course that line blurs, so I guess the line between E and I blurs.</p>
<p>I don’t know if anyone has already mentioned this before since I only briefly skimmed through the thread, but there seems to be a lot more N’s than S’s. </p>
<p>It makes sense; UChicago is known for being very theoretical and ‘intellectual,’ traits which lend themselves to N’s. S’s would be more tactile and practical, and probably be engineers or business majors. Good thing we have neither of those for undergrad xD.</p>
<p>It’s not really a question of intuitiveness or quirkiness. Chicago attracts a lot of Ns because of its emphasis on theory. Someone who is a strong S might even want to avoid Chicago.</p>