Typing others

[SheepDog]

This morning, my wife and I were talking about types and we decided that our Chocolate Lab was most certainly an ESFJ. Our Chow/Lab/Shepherd mix is most likely an ISFP.

Then I thought to myself, is this nuts or what?

Does anyone else try to determine their pets' MBTI type?

We do it with people, too, although some people are harder than others. If you are interested, there's a book called "The art of speedreading people" that you might enjoy.

[EternalCynic]

I try to determine peoples types all the time, but I've given it just a little thought with my pets.. now that I think about it though, with my two dogs it could be easily done. So no, I don't think you're nuts

[Claverhouse]

I should say it's sensible: animals are people too; but unproductive...

Pets, and outside creatures too, have wildly different personalities, even from the same batch. Which is one in the eye for the 'Nurture freaks'.



Claverhouse

[Boozer]

I have wondered how people here read others without giving them a test. My problem is I'm always using myself as a reference. For example, I'm such a big I that most people seem like E's in comparison. That and the fact that I'm not that well studied in MBTI typing.

[Nighthawk]

Does anyone else try to determine their pets' MBTI type?

I'd always assumed that most animals are Artisans ... living tactically in the concrete world. Their main objective being to better their immediate situation. Now that you mention it though, I imagine there could be Guardians too ... squirrels logistically gathering and storing food come to mind. I have a hard time imagining an animal NF or NT however. Diplomatic and strategic thought seems to have little bearing on their world. Does this mean those thought processes are more highly evolved? ;)

[SheepDog]

I think it does. ;)

[Claverhouse]

Project Gutenberg's 'The Minds and Manners of Wild Animals' by William T. Hornaday, 1922.

The Minds and Manners of Wild Animals (http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext04/wldnm10.txt)


Although personally, I'm waiting for a hardback edition.



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[BritainOphira]

I'm really not too familiar with all the nuances of MBTI, so I can't actually type anything, but if I had to guess I'd say one of my dogs is definitely an INTP. We act exactly alike to the point that I eventually gave up referring to her as a dog and instead began calling her my identical twin. That didn't go over too well with anyone visiting my house, though. :unsure:

My other dog is extremely extroverted and tends to mother anything except other dogs (which he hates) and the poor tarpins that wander up from the lake. (He'll bark at them for about half an hour, then give up and try to howl, something that he never learned how to do for whatever reason. Whenever I come home to him doing this, I go grab a bucket and some gloves and move them out of his territory because I'm evidently the only one willing to walk the twenty-five feet required.)

They are both from the same litter of border collies/spitzes and get along extremely well with each other.

[adamaw11]

there's a book called "The art of speedreading people"

Hey wow, that was the book that actually sparked my whole interest in MBTI. I found it in the Library once - the title caught my attention. It did turn out to be a pretty good book, even if it was a bit "yankee-infomercial-here's-how-to-order" style.

I'd never heard or seen any other reference to that book, since finding it a couple of years ago, until now :)

[cjs55]

"animals are people too; but unproductive... "

Don't you mean people are animals too; but with more problems?

[HairlessBluetick]

there's a book called "The art of speedreading people"

Hey wow, that was the book that actually sparked my whole interest in MBTI. I found it in the Library once - the title caught my attention. It did turn out to be a pretty good book, even if it was a bit "yankee-infomercial-here's-how-to-order" style.

I'd never heard or seen any other reference to that book, since finding it a couple of years ago, until now :)

That's also the book I started on. And I also have typed my animals... Monty, my Husky/Shepherd/Newfy mix, I have typed as ESTP.

[booyalab]

Does anyone else try to determine their pets' MBTI type?

I'd always assumed that most animals are Artisans ... living tactically in the concrete world. Their main objective being to better their immediate situation. Now that you mention it though, I imagine there could be Guardians too ... squirrels logistically gathering and storing food come to mind. I have a hard time imagining an animal NF or NT however. Diplomatic and strategic thought seems to have little bearing on their world. Does this mean those thought processes are more highly evolved? ;) I'm not going to say that I know for certain that animals are capable of intuition, but I do know we shouldn't discount the possibility completely. Imagine this: Some aliens have come to our planet and can't understand our language or draw parallels between our activities and theirs'. BUT (somehow) they have their own understanding of MBTI theory. Since all they can do to understand us is observe our actions and interaction, isn't it likely that they would categorize us all as sensors? Intuition is demonstrated mainly in language, and for instance: with tactics vs. strategy you sometimes can't differentiate between the two if you haven't heard an articulated plan and/or are only seeing the strategy in action. It's possible that when a dog senses your grief, he's not just acting on instinct, but is subconsciously comparing your body language to that of the memories he has of past doggy relations in sadness. Or, when the hamster I had as a kid, climbed out of her cage by pushing her food bowl underneath the water bottle and scurrying up the metal attachments, maybe she had a plan to escape and wasn't just instinctively going from random action to random action. Or when elephants place the bones of their deceased in a graveyard, they might be engaging in some abstract-ly motivated behavior.

I guess my point is that if animals have some intuition on a smaller scale, perhaps, it would be hard for us to tell since we have no way of knowing exactly what they think or how they communicate to each other.

[greenintp]

I can't even read myself

[booyalab]

I read somewhere that ENTPs are the best at speed-reading people.

[atypical]

Do "lower" animals even have a left-right brain split? - this was mentioned by lenore thomson as the basis for the different functions. I can't imagine how you'd use introverted thinking without language to put it in.

[SheepDog]

My thoughts often occur outside of language. Kind of hard to explain, but, well, uh...

[atypical]

Yeah, thats your right-brain at work.
The traditional view of left and right brain is that left is more oriented towards linear, logical, step-by-step tasks, such as language, if-then logic, structure, that sort of thing. The right brain is more about parallel processing, gestalt, taking in it all at once tasks, such as art, intuition, etc.

[Claverhouse]

"animals are people too; but unproductive... "

Don't you mean people are animals too; but with more problems?

Nooo. ( although that is extremely true ).

The sentence reads: 'I should say it's sensible: animals are people too; but unproductive...' eg: 'It is a sensible idea --- bearing in mind that animals are individual people as much as humans --- but an unproductive exercise, since they can't have it explained to them, nor would it make the slightest difference if they could.'



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[NGene]

Hmm... I think my first guinea pig was an ESFP, but I'm not too sure.

My second guinea pig was absolutely an ISTP.

[cjs55]

Ah sorry missed the meaning on the 'unproductive' Claverhouse. I was just being annoyingly facetious anyways ; )

[Seraph]

Oh, sure, I've tried that. The only problem is, how do you know if your dog's an S or an N? Aren't all dogs S's by nature? I think dogs are generally ESFP's.

I like trying to type whole species. You'll be happy to know that most of the animal kingdom appears to be introverts, so we aren't total freaks.

[booyalab]

I don't like the idea of typing animals in the first place, I think it's like deciding whether an apple is a chair or a lamp. But if we're going to do it we need to make sure they are capable of having any one of the 8 functions, not just S and exclude N. Your inferior functions are just as much a part of you as your dominant ones. Remember Jung's "shadow".

[SheepDog]

booyalab, I don't like the idea of typing for the purpose of going around and putting things in one of 16 boxes. That would be a terrific way to stop adding to one's understanding of the world, but of limited use otherwise. ;)

I suspect that we would agree that whether or not animals have certain "human" attributes is not something that we can really know, and pretending to know is not helpful, maybe even harmful depending on what we do with it.

I just find MBTI to be an interesting paradigm in which to ponder the differences among our fellow beings (and myself).

[booyalab]

Well I know it's a conceptual framework, and as such there's not a 'perceiving function' in the sense of a 'urinating function'.

[Claverhouse]

I don't like the idea of typing animals in the first place, I think it's like deciding whether an apple is a chair or a lamp.

Since it's an apple, a real question would be of what variety it is ( however arbitarily we categorize this type ): comparatively few here would consider it may be something that it could not be.


Claverhouse :ph34r:

[paladinoflunaria]

I enjoy typing people becuase it is one of few activities that I can do and maintain focus on.

On a side note, EternalCynic, I "think" of sex every time I see your avatar.

On another side note, I am going to post a thread in Rants 'n' Raves.

[booyalab]

I don't like the idea of typing animals in the first place, I think it's like deciding whether an apple is a chair or a lamp.

Since it's an apple, a real question would be of what variety it is ( however arbitarily we categorize this type ): comparatively few here would consider it may be something that it could not be.


Claverhouse :ph34r:

No, people here are deciding whether, for example, a dog is an ESTJ or INFP. Therefore, since chairs and lamps are types of furniture (I consider a lamp to be a type of furniture, if you don't, too bad..it's my analogy :P) dog and apple= things....ESTJ , INFP and chairs, lamps= types of personality and furniture respectively. So my analogy was fine.

My point was that typing a dog is attempting to use a categorization that was not meant for it. Just like neither lamps nor chairs are the right categories for an apple...I don't even know why I'm bothering to respond to this :/ oh well

[SheepDog]

If you sit on an apple, does it become a chair? A chair is not defined so much as being a thing, but as for it's utility.

[Boneca]

No, people here are deciding whether, for example, a dog is an ESTJ or INFP. Therefore, since chairs and lamps are types of furniture (I consider a lamp to be a type of furniture, if you don't, too bad..it's my analogy :P) dog and apple= things....ESTJ , INFP and chairs, lamps= types of personality and furniture respectively. So my analogy was fine.
l
A dog is a thing!? You never had one, did you? :blink:
Of course the personality types cannot be applied directly to dogs, we can't make them take online tests now, can we? But dogs have personalities, with differing in levels of introversion, dominance, etc. And at least for me, I have noticed that I get along with some dogs, but not others.

My last dog (may he rest in peace) must have been something like an INTP or INTJ. He was rather antisocial, and way too independent for "normal" dog training...but we understood each other greatly.
My parents' dog is probably ESTJ - neither me nor my dog could stand him! :D

[booyalab]

If you sit on an apple, does it become a chair? A chair is not defined so much as being a thing, but as for it's utility.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just said this to give me an ulcer.

However, in case anyone seriously considers this to be valid ..1. You can't demonstrate the inaccuracy of an analogy by intrapolation of the analogy itself. No analogies are perfect representations of that which is being illustrated. Therefore you have to look at the intended relationship between the analogy and situation, not look at how they're different.
2. In the context of my response, the relationship between INFP or ESTJ and chair wasn't that they're both things, but rather that they're both ways of describing other things. I don't care if you sit on an apple (the thing in the analogy) It's totally irrelevant to my point.


Of course the personality types cannot be applied directly to dogs, we can't make them take online tests now, can we? But dogs have personalities, with differing in levels of introversion, dominance, etc. And at least for me, I have noticed that I get along with some dogs, but not others.
my point wasn't whether dogs have personalities, my ultimate point was that if we're going to apply the MBTI test to animals we have to agree that animals can have intuition as well as sensing. Some were saying that animals can't have intuition, that they're all 'sensors'. Then the system would be incomplete.

[booyalab]

A dog is a thing!? You never had one, did you? :blink:


I have had a cocker spaniel for about 6 years. I didn't feel guilty calling a dog a 'thing' in my earlier reply because the only way I could remotely believe my dog to be offended is if I projected that onto her.

[SheepDog]

If you sit on an apple, does it become a chair? A chair is not defined so much as being a thing, but as for it's utility.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just said this to give me an ulcer.

Thank you. I knew it would. :D

[Vicideus]

Pets, and outside creatures too, have wildly different personalities, even from the same batch. Which is one in the eye for the 'Nurture freaks'.

Off-topic, but I hope you aren't suggesting that personality is purely nature. Those studies of identical twins who were adopted into seperate families is the best evidence that it's both nature and nurture. Anyways...

[booyalab]

Pets, and outside creatures too, have wildly different personalities, even from the same batch. Which is one in the eye for the 'Nurture freaks'.

Off-topic, but I hope you aren't suggesting that personality is purely nature. Those studies of identical twins who were adopted into seperate families is the best evidence that it's both nature and nurture. Anyways...

Yeah, I think it's pretty obvious that personality is at least partially genetic. I mean puppies from the same batch can vary in color/pattern of fur and eye color, that doesn't make appearance any less inherited.

[Miss Anthropic]

A dog is a thing!? You never had one, did you? :blink:
Of course the personality types cannot be applied directly to dogs, we can't make them take online tests now, can we? But dogs have personalities, with differing in levels of introversion, dominance, etc. And at least for me, I have noticed that I get along with some dogs, but not others.

My last dog (may he rest in peace) must have been something like an INTP or INTJ. He was rather antisocial, and way too independent for "normal" dog training...but we understood each other greatly.
My parents' dog is probably ESTJ - neither me nor my dog could stand him! :D
Different breeds of dogs have different specific personality traits. I cannot stand dogs, such as golden retrievers, that have a desperate need for approval, but give me a recalcitrant terrier, like a scottie dog, any day and I can relate to him. Even my chickens have specific personalities. While they may not have enough brains for the Meyers Briggs test, one is an introvert and conflict avoidant and the other is extravert and aggressive. They base their actions on sensing the environment around them. All that and their tiny brains aren't even the size of a walnut. By comparison dogs should be able to complete the entire MB test (with a translator of course) :)