Any MBTI Step II Administers In The Audience?

[INTrPosr]

I took the MBTI Step II four years ago, which resulted in INTP. I also took the Geier DISC with the same results. Although I was pretty honest with my answers, I did not properly utilize my administerer at the time. Now she cannot be located, so I wanted to ask some questions. My preferences were very clear for introversion and thinking (scored almost 30) on each, my intuition was quite low (scored 6) and my perceiving was moderate (scored 15). This is the first time that I have really stopped to review my results.

Since I have been battling with whether I am another type (as we all do), I looked at my E/I preferences. I scored 5 on contained and quiet (I think the quiet was exaagerated), scored 3 on receiving (quite sure that I could actually been out of preference with initiating), scored 2 on intimate and reflective (could have been out of preference on the reflective by preferring active). I know that I took the thing in 2001, should I retake it? The results only provide definitions for your preferences, not the alternatives (i.e., initiating/receiving, expressive/contained, etc.)

[bcct]

Retake it. See what is the outcome.

[INTrPosr]

No problem, can you front me the money just in case it results in INTP again? The only reason that I would consider that is because I have come to a conclusion that the results were in error. I guess since there were no responses, most of you never actually took the authentic test? If you have, I would like to know your conclusions and results.

[Eileen]

Have you explored the cognitive processes (Ni, Ne, Ti, etc)? Rather than taking the test again (which will cost money and imo is not definitive), read profiles, look at the cog. processes, that sort of thing. I am much more sure that I am INFJ through self-verification and reading than I am through the MBTI test I took (which was a "real" one). What types are you vacillating between?

[eyebyte_atWork]

I doubt that retaking it would tell you something useful

For many a strong S comes out and a strong J - this is due to trying to fit into mainstream society and it's ideals of what you should be like. The real question is what defines your life's drive??

For example:

Which ONE of these four descriptions bests describes you. Choose only the one that bests does it.

Desc 1
And they would if they could be magistrates watching over these forms of social facilitation. They are proud of themselves in the degree they are reliable in action, respect themselves in the degree they do good deeds, and feel confident of themselves in the degree they are respectable. In search of security as they are the "Security Seeking Personality" -- trusting in legitimacy and hungering for membership. They are usually stoical about the present, pessimistic about the future, fatalistic about the past, and their preferred time and place is the past and the gateway.

Desc 2
This is the "Sensation Seeking Personality" -- trusting in spontaniety and hungering for impact on others. They are usually hedonic about the present, optimistic about the future, cynical about the past, and their preferred time and place is the here and now. And they would if they could be virtuosos of one of these forms of operation. They are proud of themselves in the degree they are graceful in action, respect themselves in the degree they are daring, and feel confident of themselves in the degree they are adaptable.

Desc 3
This is the "Identity Seeking Personality" -- credulous about the future, mystical about the past, and their preferred time and place are the future and the pathway. They are proud of themselves in the degree they are empathic in action, respect themselves in the degree they are benevolent, and feel confident of themselves in the degree they are authentic. This type searches for their unique identity, hungers for deep and meaningful relationships, wishes for a little romance each day, trusts their intuitive feelings implicitly, aspires for profundity.

Desc 4
Ever in search of knowledge, this is the "Knowledge Seeking Personality" -- trusting in reason and hungering for achievement. They are usually pragmatic about the present, skeptical about the future, solipsistic about the past, and their preferred time and place are the interval and the intersection. And they would if they could be wizards in one of these forms of operation. They are proud of themselves in the degree they are competent in action, respect themselves in the degree they are autonomous, and feel confident of themselves in the degree they are strong willed.

Do not waste your money on another test - and don;t sweat the results either.

[INTrPosr]

Have you explored the cognitive processes (Ni, Ne, Ti, etc)? Rather than taking the test again (which will cost money and imo is not definitive), read profiles, look at the cog. processes, that sort of thing. I am much more sure that I am INFJ through self-verification and reading than I am through the MBTI test I took (which was a "real" one). What types are you vacillating between?Did that Eileen. I do agree with Berens and Nardi's suggestions to validate ones type. However, I am looking at their system, not MBTI. In that system, I could be a different type than in MBTI, Socionics or Keirsey's temperament.

Eyebyte quotes:
I doubt that retaking it would tell you something useful. For many a strong S comes out and a strong J - this is due to trying to fit into mainstream society and it's ideals of what you should be like. The real question is what defines your life's drive??I agree eyebyte. As for Keirsey's temperament, I am undoubtedly NT, but probably INTJ. I think that has been my problem in letting loose of this madness. The search and research of material only excaserbates my dilemma. Seeking the ultimate truth in personality type is futile because there are so many systems and the personality in general is too fluid, marked by changing with one's environment. I would surmise that one must pick a system, determine their type and be okay with that. It is understandable that people see themselves differently based on the system they prescribe to.