The Importance of Changing Impressions

     I believe that we exist in a society that is a little too obsessed with first impressions. Interviews are carried out on the basis of first impressions and so are blind dates. It's due to the lack of time, obviously, since we do not have the luxury of said commodity to spend hours upon hours and days upon days getting to know each and every being on this planet.

     Still, I feel like this culture that has been created people that are quick to pass judgement over the smallest bit of details they have regarding another person.

What's the Problem?
     Take today's hot newspaper article topic by the way: the one in which an ex-RGS student sues the school. A lot of outrage ensued and for a moment, I was caught up in it too. I found myself thinking that the girl was a terrible person who was either incredibly naive or incredibly self-centred. It was not until quite a while later, when the flood of such emotions have passed and I overheard my other classmates talking about it, that I began to question my judgements.

     I wasn't eavesdropping, not in the least, since those judgements were voiced pretty loudly. I'm not quite sure whether what I remember hearing was the general consensus on the issue, but I do recall many of the people in fiery discussion calling the girl a "horrible" or a "terrible" person. It's not a fair judgement, is it?

     The girl, as well as ourselves - we are at the age where we make foolish decisions and take ill-advised actions. As much as we don't want others to judge us based on one mistake we made, I'm sure we can extend the same willingness to understand towards the girl. Also, aren't we placing ourselves, very arrogantly I may add, upon a higher moral pedestal? None of us know the girl particularly well, not enough to understand her situation, her thought processes and her motivations. So who are we to pass judgement on her character? It would be horrible to imagine that just by making one mistake, the whole society decides to frame you as a terrible person.

     I'm not saying that what she did was something I agree with, because it's not. I believe what she did was wrong, I believe it was misguided. However, just because what a person did was horrible does not mean that person herself is a horrible person. Actions do define a person, but this is just one incident. If we were to pass judgement just based on this, it would be an over-generalisation.

     That's the problem with society today, I think. Judgements are passed too quickly one a person's character simply based on one meeting. It is important to know a person thoroughly before you make any judgements and that takes years upon years of interaction. Well, not exactly refrain from making judgements, but at least, make room for doubt. That's what I'm allowing myself to do for the girl in the article today - giving her the benefit of the doubt.

What's the Solution?
     I have this person in class who asks me, albeit not in front of everyone, what I think of certain people. My answer is almost always the same - "I don't know them well enough". That's true, is it not? It does sound sad that I don't know this many people, but it's the reality. Just a single year of being in someone's company does not give you any right to claim that you know the person entirely. Everyone is extremely complex, with a character shaped by years of experience. It's rather presumptuous to make judgements just after one year, isn't it?

    It is fine to pass judgements on a person's actions and that's what I normally do. I state certain situations that have happened before, followed by how that affects my impression of that person. Never once have I claimed to know anyone entirely, because I don't want to undermine the value of their life experiences. Yet, from what I see, that's not what most people do.

     People are quick to judge and I'm perhaps guilty of that, at least in the moment of things. If I'm encountered with an unexpected situation, I find myself quickly trying to pass a judgement. I do calm down and re-evaluate afterwards, but when a judgement is passed towards a person, the damage cannot be undone.

     So what's my solution to all this? I think that passing judgement is inevitable, because as humans, our minds constantly seek order and patterns. We have the need to classify people, categorise them, not in conventional means, but in ways that makes sense in our own minds. Because of that impulse, which comes from self-defense and need for security, we are quick to judge, quick to conclude, especially so in a fast-paced world like ours, where we don't have the time to sit down and think. My solution, therefore, is to not restrict yourself from passing judgement. Just make sure that before you are sure of your judgement, you don't voice it out, because that is what creates rumours and gossips.

     Keep your mind open, I think that's also extremely important. I know my situation is unique, that is, my ability to keep my mind open. It's something I'm proud of, but I don't brag about, because it's not necessarily a good thing always. My dad has often said that I'm indecisive and weak, because I'm unwilling to pass concrete judgements and decisions until I have the full story. It's not that I don't pass them at all, it's just that I change my mind when circumstances change, making me quite unpredictable and easily swayed. It may be bad as a personality trait, I mean, you are meant to be stubborn, somewhat. I do act stubborn, but I am full of doubt, always, about everything.

     What's important about this trait of mine is that you can pass first impressions. In fact, I make first impressions fairly quickly, about less than 5 minutes into knowing a person. These first impressions are not made based on conversation, simply by the way someone presents themselves and the atmosphere they bring along with them. Of course, these impressions aren't that straightforward.

An Example
     For example, to use a personal example really, there's this person I know who is generally accepted as quite charismatic. However, my judgement of him right now, is highly unconventional. Charisma is there, yes, but most people believe it is backed by confidence and knowledge. That, to me, is the exact opposite. When he argues, he sounds like he knows everything, but when you dissect his argument, like you should in any debate (this is where MUN experience comes into play), you realise that he talks in the most round-the-bush ways and makes absolutely no sense. He sounds like he makes plenty of sense, but he doesn't. He isn't even confident of what he says, especially when you pay attention to the speed difference between his words. The faster he speaks, the more unsure he is. Where exactly lies the charisma then? It's in other people's judgements.

     Most people aren't used to my very annoying manner of picking people's arguments apart, albeit, I don't do it openly. After all, that's the difference between debate and MUN. In debate, you pick apart arguments openly, because that is your job. In MUN, you pick open the arguments in your thoughts, but you don't voice it out unless necessary, because that would ruin the progress of discussion. In MUN, we encourage constructive argumentation, not destructive arguments. You are arguing to reach an agreement, not to completely shut another person down.

     Because of this, people are easily fooled by his quick and unnecessarily complicated speech. It makes no sense. It is highly destructive and non-constructive. He often attacks the other person's points instead of building upon it. He talks in a very convoluted way. In the end, when you write everything down, you realise, there isn't much at all. Still, when you listen to the rant, it's rather impressive. A trait of the Extroverts, I believe. That's what creates the impression of charisma, the ability to cover up flaws.

     Therefore, the first impression, often, for me at least, comes from what other people think of someone, i.e. "People think he is charismatic". But do "I" think the same? I don't know, not yet at least. And then comes the period of observation, which comes in different forms. In this example's case, it is the observation of his arguments, which is the key source of the first impression - "charisma". From there, I make my own conclusions, based on my own experiences or others. In this case, because I do have extensive experience in poking holes in people's arguments (I don't do it out loud because that creates too much troublesome conflict and I'm not in the mood for it...usually), I choose to rely on  my own experience. Then comes face-to-face interaction, which is only necessary if you are unhappy with the first and secondary impressions.

     He is quiet when not under pressure of expressing himself and it's a contemplative silence, because there is often a glint in people's eyes when their brains are moving fast. Still, there is a huge barrier and atmosphere of restraint, which means that the cover-up is still very much there. That is the extent I've reached before I gave up and that formed the final layer of impressions.

Bringing It Together
     So my advice is for you to form a first impression not based on personal opinion, but on general opinion. Then, by observation (not in a creepy or intrusive way), form the secondary layer of impression. This is often the thickest layer of impression and the one that changes the most, because most judgements are formed this way. The tertiary layer is formed only when two people are friends, or have the opportunity to spend time together away from large crowds. Being away from large crowds is important, because the presence of large crowds makes people hide even further into their shells, Introverted or not. The first layer of impression should always be there, if only existing to be questioned. The secondary layer is the most actively changing one, and you should allow it to be changed with every situation you encounter, yet the changes must not be too drastic. The tertiary layer is the one that should change your judgement the most, yet most people can't get too deep in that layer. I mean, I did give up already, because frankly, at one point, you get tired of people especially when you aren't getting enough to actually contribute to the tertiary layer.

In Conclusion
    Well, if you are comfortable sticking with your own methods, feel free. But I'm just suggesting my own way of doing things, which has worked so far. Maybe it's exclusive to silently contemplative people who are quite intentionally fake...like me? Maybe it works for everyone? Who knows? This is another attempt of mine to re-conciliate my thoughts after all.

The Immense Fear of Stagnation

     There are plenty of people who fear change, who are obsessed with maintaining a sense of security and stability. In fact, there are two phobia terms for that - "Metathesiophobia" and "Tropophobia". Yet, for some reason or another, my fear is the exact opposite and it appears that this phobia is so rare that there is no one term for it. Or, it is extremely complicated.

      I went to a local university for lunch today. It's one of the top universities both within the country and worldwide, yet, the idea that I may attend this university in the future scares me more than anything else in the world. It's not that I dislike this country - it is secure, it offers so many opportunities regardless of one's economic or social position (there is inequality, as there will always be anywhere, but it is minimised) and in fact, I believe that for a person who seeks security, they shouldn't want to move at all. That is not me, however, because it's the idea of stagnation and staying in a small country where I can travel from one end to another within 2 hours that scares me more than taking risks ever can.

     Maybe it's the way I was brought up, family issues and all. Independence has always been a great part of my life. Unlike my sister, my education at home, in the early years and beyond, were largely my own initiatives. In the early years, I was brought up by a nanny, who never cared much beyond satisfying basic needs. My father, for his entire life, lives within himself and for himself - he preaches those ideas too. He never does much in the family, unless he is in an exceptionally good mood. I realised as a child that I could not bank my life upon someone whose participation in my life was solely based upon his erratic emotions. My mother was always there, but in those early years of being a parent, she was also quite liberal and allowed me to do things as I like. It's under these conditions that I grew up.

     Now, that sort of independence can have 2 kinds of effects. 1, you could become extremely selfish, caring only for yourself, because that's all you know. Fortunately, I ended up with the 2nd effect, which made me a highly idealistic person, with lofty dreams that may be beyond my capabilities. I guess personally, effect 1 may be better, but for me, I think I can't live with myself if I spend my life living selfishly. I just feel like I have not realised my life.

     Basically, my point is that it is independence at a young age that has made me so unshakeable when it comes to my ideals and dreams. I'm the kind of person, and I know it deeply, that would go through as much suffering as I need to go overseas to study. It's not just the academia or the prestige, I care naught for the latter, in fact. I'm fine with going to a less well-known university, as long as it is overseas. And like I said, it's not that I hate this country, I just want to expand beyond these narrow shores. Of course, I still have my personal agenda, because I would like to go to England for my studies, but the school itself doesn't matter to me.

     I want to experience a society outside of the one I grew up in. I don't want to experience it, knowing it is temporary, but to experience it genuinely, as if I were to inhabit it for my entire life. Every society will be confining in its own way, but it's not ridiculous to assert that in a small country like this one, although security and stability is much higher, the feeling of freedom is suppressed. The government and nation has done much to try to alleviate the problem, but personally, I want to travel beyond the borders and feel life outside.

     As I walked through the local university today, I silently asked myself - How many of these people chose to come here just because it is easier and more secure? I understand, of course, the monetary burdens, the family attachments, but the need to be free and expand my horizons is greater for me. I would rather stay true to myself, then settle for something easy. To stay true to myself is to pursue that lofty dream of mine relentlessly, because I know, even if I cannot see it completely to fruition, I would have made enough of a change in the world to have given purpose to my life. For some, their dreams could be to settle down with a family and bring happiness to that family. For that, you need security, so yes, I do understand.

     And then comes the fear. I am willing to suffer as much as I need to, but what if that's not enough? What if, at the end of the day, I'm still going to have to permanently station myself here? My life could be comfortable, it could be secure, but I would have betrayed myself, I would feel like I have not lived life to the fullest. My hands were shaking as I thought of these and truth be told, I have never been so afraid. Because idealism can be deadly. It has made me adopt ideals more lofty than most, yet it'll probably drive me crazy if I can't realise it. After all, if my purpose in life lies on this, then what is life if I fail? Doesn't that purpose just disappear?

     Emotional rant, I know. But as I write, I'm trying to rationalise my thoughts. It's dangerous for me to go around with the fear still so deeply embedded in my mind.

INFP or INTP? Double MBTI Theory

     I was almost inclined to accept the fact that I am now officially an INTP, if not for the continuing INFP tendencies in my behaviour. I am still a highly emotional person and although I recognise that too deep of an emotional attachment can break a person, I still value emotions above logic in most situations. It was an official test, complete with both theory tests and practical, face-to-face tests involving scenarios, but as with all personality tests, there are faults.

     Personality tests require you to be perfectly honest with yourself. However, it is my theory and observation that the older a person gets and the more a person goes through, the deeper they bury their "true" selves. It's, more often than not, unintentional and it's more of a reaction than an action. It's not uncommon for people beyond a certain emotional maturity to completely lose a sense of what their "true" selves are, especially if that original self was not exactly very intuitive, thus making it difficult be surfaced under all that façade needed in life.

     Right now, I am entertaining the theory that, at the very core of my personality, I am still very much an INFP. I am highly idealistic and despite how much I think I've changed in the past four years (each year had it's own major incident) in regards to many things, my inner most desires and dreams have not changed. Even more, I think that, ironically, despite the fact that most of these incidents are supposed to drive me away from that idealism, they ended up strengthening it, to the point that values that were intangible before came to take the form of tangible goals. That INTP personality that has been surfaced is not negligible, however, and I believe that it is the usual façade I put on in situations that require emotional detachment (e.g. MUNs, arguments, studies).

The INFP Side

     It's quite difficult for me to confirm this theory with anyone, because INFP, being the hidden self, is often obscured from most. I have intentionally made it so, and whether I regret that decision is another story. It is within my intention that people who are acquaintances cannot pinpoint my personality. It is also within that intention that even friends can only see the INTP and very brief glimpses of INFP, only in times which I deem necessary (e.g. offering emotional support). There is only a handful of people, in my whole life, that can see the INFP. Perhaps, there are more, but those aren't people who I intentionally let that side of me be known.

     The reason isn't that I hate people. Quite the contrary. Firstly, INFPs are some of the most vulnerable people out there. We are too emotional, too idealistic, and therefore, we take things too personally. Anything that sounds remotely like an insult is, to us, an absolute insult. And we are the kind to take insults to heart, even if we don't show it. It's, therefore, for the need to feel secure and to maintain inner peace, that I choose to let so few people in. Secondly, INFPs' deeply emotional and perceptive nature allows us to feel hurt deeply, no matter whether it is our pain or other's. I don't show it, I rarely do. It's one of those pairs of contrasting talents I hold dear. The ability to sense what other people are feeling/thinking and the contrasting ability to pretend I don't notice it. Because of this perceptive nature, INFP's tend to be quite pessimistic on the inside, because as introverts, we tend to hold dark thoughts inside, instead of projecting them outwards. I truly believe that being able to feel others' sufferings is a blessing, but I also understand that other people might not feel the same way. It is not my place to burden another person with my dark thoughts and thus, the less a person knows me, the less obvious it is when my pessimism or depression is expressed outwardly.

     I would say that Charles Xavier from X-Men is probably an INFP, at least before all that shit happened to him. He holds great ideals that may seem impossible, wishing for harmony between humans and mutants. As a telepath, he has come to understand and care for people around him, no matter whether that care is projected outwardly or not. It can be argued that he is an ENFJ, because he has that sort of teacher-like personality, but that is more applicable to his older self. As the younger Professor X, in First Class and that timeline, Charles Xavier is very much an INFP. Perhaps all INFPs when nurtured properly become ENFJs in the end? Perhaps INFP is just a longer route to becoming an ENFJ? I don't know, but that's another theory. The point is, if you want to imagine an INFP, remember Charles Xavier before Erik Lehnsherr and Raven left him - the arrogant on the outside but kind and idealistic man on the inside.

The INTP Side

     Remaining a pure INFP in a world like this is painful. I know it myself because as much as I wish there were no suffering in this world and everyone can exist in harmony, it's a very far-fetched ideal. Like Charles Xavier, I want to become the force of change that brings the world closer to harmony and peace, yet like him, there are obstacles I have come across that makes me doubt myself. Of course, the obstacles I face are more personal and selfish than his (although Erik and Raven leaving is a deeply personal failure for him).

     So basically, whenever my INFP tendencies lead me into trouble, the kind of trouble that causes emotional scarring, it's like my T/F function takes a complete flip and becomes INTP. The INTP is coldly logical and when the INTP side of my personality is on the surface, I become quite obsessed with forming theories. Though forming theories is still a habit of mine even when I'm complying more to INFP tendencies, theory-forming becomes a method of self-protection when the INTP takes over.

     To make it less confusing, basically, whenever I take an action based on ideals or emotions and the action backfires, the INTP rises to the surface. I then take the basis of that ideal and try to apply logic to it. A very basic example would be...infatuation. If I am infatuated with someone, the INFP side idealises it to the point I take action and when it backfires, I end up taking the whole idea of "infatuation" and try to form theories around it. This way, I manage to distance and detach myself from an otherwise overwhelming emotion and at the same time, gaining a better logical understanding of it, since those theories are, more often than not, quite legitimate.

     The INTP wasn't always there and I suspect that it has been incidents over the past few years that has developed such a natural defence system. Whenever I feel the threat of becoming too emotionally involved with some situation or someone, I take a step back and try to rationalise the situation. 

So, INFP or INTP?

      One can easily argue that since INTP has become an instinctive reflex of mine towards threatening situations, I am more of an INTP than an INFP. However, like I've mentioned before, I still believe that INFP is the core of my personality, while INTP is simply a mask that I wear.

     INTP is the mask of superiority. People think I'm egoistic and I also exemplify egoistic tendencies. I brag, I show-off and I tend to mock people of lower intelligence. The INTP is also what makes people believe that my interest in Business and Finance is solely because I am materialistic and I like money. However, people who know me as an INFP would understand that money is just a means to a greater end, because I understand that many of my goals cannot be reached without financial backing. What I wish to achieve is to gain enough money from doing business and to set-up a non-profit organisation to help people in poverty areas. Perhaps, if possible, I would like to personally travel to such areas to help out. 

      Whatever my goal is in the end, it remains that it is extremely idealistic. For the good of humankind? It sounds like something out of a movie, but being an INFP at the core, it seems impossible for me to let go of such ideals. INTP is a mask I have constructed, after having that naturally naive INFP side of me hurt, so that I can deal with the realities of the world while preserving my INFP dreams.

      So, the conclusion is that, while the test revealed me to be an INTP, I still believe strongly that I am an INFP, with the mask of an INTP. Perhaps it is for the best? I like it this way, because I don't think that I am a person who can settle for anything less idealistic than my currently dreams. 

Characters I'm Obsessed With #1: Charles Xavier (X-Men)

     There are many fictional characters that I seem to have an unhealthy obsession with. Of course, more often than not, these characters are simply gorgeous men, but the obsession goes beyond appearances. There's always something about the character's personality that I admire greatly, a personality that I wish that I could have.

     I have never read any of the X-Men comics, shame, but I don't really have the time for it. Still, I guess I could call myself a hardcore movie-verse fan, because I'm literally a walking Encyclopaedia on the subject. Then again, for many things that I like - favourite movies, books or games - I pride myself in becoming such an Encyclopaedia, knowing way more than is necessary.

     One of such characters that I am unhealthy obsessed with is Charles Xavier from X-Men. Both the old and young versions, I mean. Of course, the obsession leans towards the younger version more, because he was much more relatable back then, not to mention that his actor, James McAvoy, is just bloody glorious with his stunning blue eyes.

     Did I ever mention how much of a sucker I am for blue eyes? It's to the point that it doesn't even seem like I have a choice. There's this quote I've seen online, which was meant to be a joke, but it's pretty relevant here. "A brain is an amazing thing. It starts working from the moment you are born and never stops, except when you die or when you see an amazingly attractive guy." Given that a relatively cute guy on the street can make my brain blank out for seconds (sadly these guys don't exist in school...or it's blessing in disguise), James McAvoy's blues makes me all kinds of brain-dead. Funny, because Charles Xavier is a telepath, the furthest thing from being brain-dead.

     For anyone who hasn't seen the films (shame on you), I'll try to explain Charles' character without spoiling much. 

     Charles Xavier is a mutant, which is a species that possesses superpowers due to a mutation in a certain gene (I forgot what it's called). His superpower is telepathy or the power to read minds and project his own thinking into other people's thoughts. Charles is an exception telepath, if telepaths aren't already amazing enough, whose telepathic range is extremely wide, but such powers doesn't come without a cost. Before he could control his powers, his telepathy caused him to sense and feel other people's emotions and thoughts without regulation. This meant that he constantly heard voices in his head and he felt people's pain and suffering on top of his own. Charles believes that mutants and humans should live as equals and his goal in life is to show and make this co-existence possible.

     There's the premise of my obsession with the character.

     I would think that as a telepath with uncontrolled powers, everyday of my life would be a nightmare. Despite the triviality of most of the situations I've been through, the agony I get from such situations is almost unbearable. Take that kind of pain and multiply by hundreds upon thousands, since as a telepath, you can hear other people's sadness too. When people hate you, you can't unhear it either, because their accusations sound as clear as daylight. Living in the universe of X-Men, where many humans show so much hatred towards mutants, it is inevitable that, even as a child, Charles knew and was able to see the injustice in the world and the cruelty of humans.

     Yet, when compared to Erik Lehnsherr, whose hatred of humans comes from a personal grudge, Charles is ever the optimist, always believing the best of both humans and mutants. Of course, in Days of Future Past, you see that drunken and hysteric Charles, who has turned to drugs and all, but even then, he shows care and concern for humans beyond what they deserve - considering the humans are trying to kill them and all. 

     I don't understand why many people like Magneto more than Professor X. Yes, I often like the villains more than the goody-two-shoes, but I think in the later movies that have shown Charles in his youth, you see the vulnerable side of Charles. You see his struggles, having his dreams fall apart around him and being abandoned by his only family and best friend. Yet, you think to the old Charles and how he still continues to live his dream of harmonious relationship between human and mutant.

     The key difference between him and Magneto is that Charles' hatred of anything is directed at himself, while Magneto takes it out on people around him. While Charles seems like a desperate and pitiful creature at the start of Days of Future Past when Logan just arrived, it is important to note that as much as he is abusing himself, Magneto is instead taking his brand of hatred out on humans and shedding blood everywhere. 

      It's an inspiration, really, that I draw from Charles Xavier as a character. That no matter how the world seems to be against him the whole time - destroying the school he created, Raven and Erik leaving him after Erik broke his spine with a bullet, his inability to control his overly strong telepathic powers leading him to alcoholism, etc - in the end, Charles never let go of his ideals. Magneto's ideals are very much shaped by his anger and hatred, and while Charles seems more naive (which I doubt because...he's a telepath), his ideals make him a much more likeable character.

      So it's the appearance of the character. He has beautiful blue eyes and while he is less masculine-looking than Michael Fassbender, James McAvoy has a sweeter appearance, in my opinion at least. It's also his superpower. Telepathy is by far my favourite superpower and while I understand the dangers and cost of it, it doesn't deter me from wanting a power like that. Of course, in X-Men, a telepath is also an empath, since there seems to be no distinction between reading thoughts and emotions. It doesn't matter to me if it'll make me feel the pain of others...no, that is actually a gift. 

      But more than anything, it is the personality of Charles Xavier that makes him a character that I'm just utterly obsessed with. Although I'm not going to turn to drugs or alcohol any time soon, since I'm experiencing nothing as painful as he seemed to be going through between First Class and Days of Future Past. I want to be able to hold as much faith as he has towards his dreams, so much so that even in his darkest times, they are still present within him. 

     Also, have I mentioned how as a powerful telepath, he is capable of enslaving humankind by bending their thoughts? But Charles is no such person. He uses his telepathy to understand others and guide them, but never purposefully intrudes upon others' thoughts. Perhaps once, he used to manipulate people, out of care for them, but after the events of Days of Future Past, he also came to understand that while he can guide others to a good path, sometimes they have to find it themselves. That makes me like him even more. He is a mutant with the ability to dominate the world in the blink of an eye, but attempts to achieve his goals through other less intrusive means. His high morals, present even in his darkest times, makes me like him even more.

     Charles is a character who is arrogant, as in when his younger self was first introduced, but possesses understanding and acceptance beyond a normal person's - helping and believing in humans despite all he probably knows about their hate of mutant-kind. He holds himself to high morals and never imposes his ideas on people, even though it is extremely easy for him to do so. All he has to do is to introduce that suggestion into a person's thoughts. He can even make Magneto (without his helmet of course) believe that Charles' cause is his cause, but he doesn't, because he believes in leaving other's free will intact.

     I believe I've ranted enough. Despite all the apparent dislike I have for Magneto, I do believe that Charles is probably able to make him a better person, if the circumstances were different. That's the reason why Cherik - Charles x Erik - is one of my favourite shippings of all time. Sure, there isn't romance between them in the movies, but there is a brotherly love between them that is extremely apparent. You can even see that in the first few movies, in their older selves. Take for example, these quotes from the movies.

So Apparently Your MBTI Can Change...

     I signed up for an MBTI testing (those paid ones from legitimate organisations) about two months ago and today, I finally received my results through email.

     And...my MBTI changed? I'm no longer an INFP apparently. It doesn't surprise me at all, though. I have constructed some theories on why I have changed, but since they are not a concrete theory yet, I'll wait until I give it more thought. Of course, it's without a doubt that a person can't just get up and decide to change their MBTI one bright morning. Despite the various faults the MBTI system possesses, it is still a relatively accurate analysis of a person's personality. While a person may seem two-faced, everyone's core personalities should remain relatively stagnant.

      Still, it's not quite as shocking as one may think and I think that's partly attributed to how INFP is, in the first place, an extremely unstable MBTI. An absolute idealist who is an introvert - that seems like the formula for failure in life. INFPs are the types to suffer a lot, mostly because they tend to idealise everything in the world and that's attributed to their Dominant Feeling function. When this function betrays a person and causes him/her great pain and regret, it is quite natural that the person would deliberately distort their world-view to avoid the same mistakes.

     Only 1 of the 3 letters changed, but from the MBTI functions post I've made previously, the change actually happened in 2 out of the 4 functions - in the Dominant and Inferior functions. I think I have given enough hints, so let's just move into the revelation...which isn't a big deal anyway.

    So what's my MBTI now?

     I went from being an INFP to an INTP. No big deal right? Except, the reversal of the Dominant Function and the Inferior Function is actually a pretty big deal. It's not an exact reversal, mind you, since the direction (extroversion/introversion) of the functions actually do change. My Dominant Function went from being Introverted Feeling to Introverted Thinking and my Inferior Function went from Extroverted Thinking to Extroverted Feeling. Everything else is still the same.

INFP: Introverted Feeling (Fi)

Seeks harmony of action and thoughts with personal values. May not always articulate those values.

INTP: Introverted Thinking (Ti)

Seeks internal consistency and logic of ideas. Trusts his or her internal framework, which may be difficult to explain to others.

     Before anyone's brains move to argue against the legitimacy of this test and the change it indicated. Let me just explain why I think this shift is absolutely normal. There's a personal reason, which isn't really that important, and a more theoretical one. It's a theory I have quite a bit of confidence in.

The Personal Reason: It took me quite a while...a very long while, in fact...to fish myself out of an emotional shit-hole that I dug for myself. As the extremely proud individual I am, on the inside at least, I am adamant to not commit the same mistake again. I have come to the conclusion that before I decide to make any emotional commitment about anything, I need to weigh carefully the costs of that commitment and the possible benefits I can reap. Basically, a cost-benefit analysis. Applying that to the situation I got myself in previously, I realised how insanely rash my actions were and thus, the determination to change and an extreme abhorrence of any situation like the previous one. In short, avoiding emotional commitment like the plague, because it's more often than not not worth it.

The General Reason: The Feeling and Thinking function basically describes a person's preference in decision-making. Preference meaning what you would choose if you had any control over the situation. A person who prefers Feeling rely more on emotions and a person who prefers Thinking rely more on logical analysis. My theory is that as a person grows older, it is very common that they become more inclined towards Thinking. While emotions remain important in some ways, people begin to realise that without logical analysis and thinking before making a decision, the decision is often rash and is something that would be heavily regretted. The only professions that would go against this theory would be nurturing careers, like being a Kindergarten teacher, where the process of nurturing strengthens a person's preference for Feeling. Most professions push individuals to think more.

      So being an INFP was a stage in maturing, I should say. The idealism isn't exactly childish, because it does help me build values and discover myself. The INTP was established when I became obsessed with making theories about random things, which is actually an extension of my previous obsession with discussing values. The intangibility of values made the topic stale and uninteresting after a while, so I turned to theory-forming and debating on those. I have many theories I wish to share, but alas, I am still a P, not a J, so plans will have to wait.

     I'll probably post more about the INTP when I have time...let's say Wednesday. I may change my mind, but that's the set date for now. A few extracts below from 16 personalities, which is a good website for people just starting to get to know their MBTIs.

     "The INTP personality type is fairly rare, making up only 3 precent of the population, which is definitely a good thing for them, as there's nothing they'd be more unhappy about than being "common". INTPs pride themselves on their inventiveness and creativity, their unique perspective and vigorous intellect. Usually known as the philosopher, the architect, or the dreamy professor, the INTPs have been responsible for many scientific discoveries throughout history."

     "They love patterns, and spotting discrepancies between statements could almost be described as a hobby, making it a bad idea to lie to an INTP. This makes it ironic that INTP's word should always be taken with a grain of salt - it's not that they are dishonest, but people with the INTP personality type tend to share thoughts that are not fully developed, using others as a sounding board for ideas an theories in a debate against themselves rather than as actual conversation partners.

      This may make them appear unreliable, but in reality, no one is more enthusiastic and capable of spotting a problem, drilling through the endless factors and details that encompass the issue and developing a unique and viable solution than INTPs - just don't expect punctual progress reports. People who share the INTP personality type aren't interested in practical, day-to-day activities and maintenance, but when they find an environment where their creative genius and potential can be expressed, there is no limit to the time and energy INTPs will expend in developing an insightful and unbiased solution."

     "They may appear to drift about in an unending daydream, but INTPs' thought process is unceasing and their minds buzz with ideas from the moment they wake up. This constant thinking can have the effect of making them look pensive and detached, as they are often conducting full-fledged debates in their own heads, but really INTPs are quite relaxed and friendly when they are with people they know, or who share their interests. However, this can be replaced by overwhelming shyness when INTP personalities are among unfamiliar faces and friendly banter can quickly become combative if they believe their logical conclusions or theories are being criticised."

     It seems to me like an INTP is an INFP who found her place in the world and finally decided that idealism isn't going to get her anywhere. I'm speaking personally, of course, but I think that's quite true for most INFPs. It's quite painful to live in such blinding idealism. Might as well settle down and learn to focus your extremely active mind on theories rather than fantasies, eh?

"It's obviously wrong! I mean, you can't just assume that ___! Do you feel me? No? Really? Let me explain...please...LET ME EXPLAIN!"

Astrological Birth Chart and Explanations

     Many people I know don't believe in Astrology, probably because the term has become one that refers to those daily Horoscope things that are not untrue, but vague enough that it applies to everyone. Those things are nonsense and aren't based on actual Astrology at all. That said, I'm not sure whether I want to believe in that either, but after discovering that there's more to Astrology than your Sun sign (determined by conventional dates) and reading actual studies, I'm inclined to entertain my doubts.

     How did I start being interested in this? Well, I went to this Astrological website and did this birth chart thing. Turns out, while my Sun Sign, which corresponds to my biological birthdate, 18 May (yes, by Chinese law [whether it applies now, I don't know], my biological and legal birthdates are different), is Taurus, half of my other birth chart signs lie in Gemini. If you know anything about those inaccurate personality descriptions of these two signs, you would be surprised. After all, Taurus is the Fixed Earth sign, meaning it is the most stubborn and stable, while Gemini is the Mutable Air sign, which makes it the most erratic and spontaneous sign. How can be both?

     Firstly, the birth chart is complicated and is calculated based on your birthdate, time of birth and location of birth. Simply put, these data help determine the position of different planets in regard to your location at the exact time of your birth. Here is my birth chart:

     I know this makes absolutely no sense to whoever is viewing this for the first time. Some of these are irrelevant, such as Jupiter, Saturn, etc, which are slow-moving planets and thus have little influence on the birth chart. The important ones are boxed up in red and I'll go through them briefly, before examining my birth chart.

This little stupid-looking dot here is the Sun and some may recognise it as the ancient scripture that the Chinese used to write the word "Sun (日)". Like I explained, the Sun sign corresponds to whatever you see on your daily horoscope. You can easily find your Sun sign online. 

The Sun sign reveals much regarding people's essential personality, particularly their inner selves. It reveals the part of our personality that is our basic self, or who we are when we are alone. In other words, our essential personality is our most basic, broad, inner traits.

The Moon sign helps define our emotional development or express the unconscious side of our personality. It explains why we do what we do. This is where we retreat for comfort, childhood memories and peace. This can also be the place where anger, hate, jealousy and fear may be found.

The moon also influences our senses depending on its placement in the birth chart. Most people wil have their Moon in a sign that is different from their Sun. This is why many people with the same Sun sign can be so different from one another. Moon signs may actually be a much more accurate description of what a person is like.

This female sign thing is your Venus sign, and if you are aware, Venus is famously known as the Goddess of Love. Venus represents the qualities of love, romance, sensuality, culture, beauty, affection and social appeal. It influences how one attracts love as well as how one acts in a relationship.

Sometimes, a person's Venus sign will be the same as their Sun sign (mine is not), but it may also be different. Your Venus sign is never more than two signs away from your Sun sign (mine is just next to it). By reading your Love sign interpretation, you may find answers to why you act so different than your Sun sign dictates when you are in love. You'll notice when you fall in love that these attributes become more noticeable (this does not bode well for me).

While Venus signs are in charge of romance, Mars signs take charge of basic sexual attraction, tempered only by the astrological houses they are placed in. They will influence how sex is approached. Mars makes us assertive, forthright and adventurous. It can also make us impulsive, rash, impatient and forceful. Success or frustration can both be products of your Mars sign influence.

Mars is energy, action and desire - the animal instinct. Unlike the Sun, which is the embodiment of creative energy, Mars is raw energy. It's divisive, scattering energy in an outward direction. It represents how a person goes after their goals, their drive and energy, their initiative. courage and combativeness.

     While they are other signs, these 4 are usually more interesting and commonly spoken of. Now that that's done, let's place these signs in a specific context - my birth chart. Take note that all the 4 signs, except Mars, are zodiac signs. Mars on the other hand, considers the "House" in which it lies, which is the number wheel. Also, my Moon sign is more accurate than my Sun, in my opinion.

SUN in TAURUS

     You spend your fortune and your energy advisedly. You are realistic and you distrust revolutions, sudden changes and love at first sight. You are very attached to your roots and you create a steady basis for yourself. You may be considered to be stubborn and you grant your confidence after thorough reflection only. "Resistance" is a Taurus' keyword. This sign is believed to be untiring, hardworking and stable to the utmost. People readily credit you with the ability to remind everyone of the necessities of concrete situations and to moderate people's excesses. In principle, you are apt for long-term management, you can protect the foundations of an activity as the reliable guardian of assets and the guarantor for stability. Your distrust is a quality here: it is safer to take advantage of past experiences rather than to rely on very hypothetical sporadic strokes of luck. However, it is important that you learn to question yourself and to respond to new opportunities in a timely manner.

      How is this me again? Hardworking and stable are not qualities of mine. I am extremely laid-back about work and avoid it at all cost. I am quite unstable, on the inside (perhaps why my Moon is in that particular sign), but I can maintain a stable and calm facade on the outside. All in all, I really don't think my Sun sign fits me, which is why I've denied its truth for so long.

MOON in GEMINI

     You easily adjust to all kinds of situations because your outgoing nature integrates the characteristics of your environment very quickly. You communicate your emotions, you share your pleasures, your joys...and your sorrows. You lunar sign belongs to the Gemini-Sagittarius axis that is decidedly open on the external world. You display strong assimilation abilities and you readily adopt your entourage's habits. Besides, your life setting does not necessarily have the stuff side that others may need to feel safe. You put up with rhythm changes and your balance is not upset for unforeseen events and contacts. On the contrary, you loathe solitude and you are very comfortable when you have to exchange and to relate to others. There is a danger that you should very cautiously avoid: your adaptation capacity must not turn you into a chameleon and it is important that you pay due attention to your needs and your personal rhythms.

     And this is exactly why I seem to swing insanely fast between adapting and stubbornness, friendliness and hostility, the want for communication and need for solitude. My Moon and Sun, as you can see, are in direct conflict and while Taurus makes me stable, reliable, down-to-earth and unchanging, Gemini makes me adaptable, flighty, needing company (I like sharing my theories and having them discussed) and two-faced...or multi-faced as my senior calls it. As a person who gets bored easily, it's easier for me to relate to my Moon sign than my Sun sign.

VENUS in GEMINI

     Your balance is based on your sensuality. For you, love is a game. Your affective attitudes are very diverse and open to a variety of forms of love. Sensuality is a field for your experiments and a world to explore. Your emotions and your sensitivity allow you to grasp information about the people and the environment around you. Love is your renewed source of amazement. It is not a duel but a discovery, that of the "soul mate" and of total connivance. You are cerebral and harmony between two persons is your main concern - How do they blend their ways of thinking, of living and of loving? How is the possible to achieve fusion and to become an indivisible unit? Your inquiring mind also influences your sentimental life: you look for fantasy and amazement and often, you arouse them in your partner. You desire for freedom and does not get on well with the unavoidable constraints of life together. It is certain that your fantastic affectivity always on the alert charms and amazes your partner. However, your curiosity and your desire for discovery may cause a need to see something else and look for fresh air (which does not always mean a new partner, fortunately).

     I...really cannot deny this...at all. The idea of love interests me, appeals to me and at the same time, scares me. The notion of perfect harmony brought about by adaptation between two partners, the intellectual harmony of having someone to constant discuss my theories with...it's nice. And then I suddenly remember that I have to spend the rest of eternity with that person and it's like a leash, and I turn the other way. Come on, I have things I want to do, you can't tie me down! So in the end, I'm probably this person who goes through many relationships, by my own will or not...though I need to learn to tone down on the emotional attachment.

MARS in HOUSE VIII

     With Mars in the 8th House, you seem to be meant for confrontation and crises. This configuration predisposes to challenges and heroic actions. Struggles may go as far as self-sacrifice, which may involve your interests and in pathological cases, your own life. The Tradition mentions psychic powers and inner magnetism on which willpower has little control...passion. You are fascinated by romantic relationships where love and hate are entangled.

     Wow, makes me sound real cool, that's all I can say about this.

MBTI Stuff #3

Types Present With a Locked Door

ENFP: "BUT WHAT IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE DOOR???? Monkeys??? Jesus?? Cupcakes? Food? AHHHHHH"

INFP: "I wonder how the key got lost...where is it now..."

ENFJ: *asks everyone nearby where the key is*

INFJ: "How-how could this be...?"

ENTP: "I could pick the lock...but could I also find a better solution? Would it be cool to kick it down? But physics might not allow for it...hmmm..."

INTP: *picks the lock*

ENTJ: *takes the knob off the door

INTJ: "Not worth it"

ESFP: "Um...this door is locked. Moving on!"

ISFP: *paints the door*

ESTP: *kicks the door down* "KARATEEEE"

ISTP: *cuts down the door and uses the wood to make a battering ram in case another locked door is encountered*

ESTJ: "This is of no concern to me."

ISTJ: "The door is probably locked for a reason."

ESFJ: "Oh, no! What if someone's trapped inside???"

ISFJ: *slides food under the door in case an animal is on the other side of the door*

Types Getting Pulled Over

ENFP:

 ENFJ:

ENTJ:

ENTP:

ESFJ:

ESFP:

ESTJ:

ESTP:

INFJ:

INFP:

INTP:

INTJ:

ISFJ:

ISFP:

ISTJ:

ISTP:

Types as Greek Gods/Goddesses

ESTP: Ares, God of War (that's cool)

ISTP: Hephaestus, God of Fire, Metalworking and Crafts

ESFP: Aphrodite, Goddess of Love and Beauty

ISFP: Poseidon, God of the Sea

ENFP: Artemis, Goddess of the Hunt, Wilderness and Animals (I like Artemis too)

INFP: Apollo, God of Music, Poetry and Archery (my favourite God in Smite too)

ENFJ: Hermes, God of Travel and Communication

INFJ: Athena, Goddess of Wisdom and Intelligence

ESTJ: Zeus, God of Law, Order and Weather

ISTJ: Hera, Goddess of Marriage and Empires

ESFJ: Demeter, Goddess of Agriculture and Growth

ISFJ: Hestia, Goddess of the Hearth and the Home

ENTP: Dionysus, God of Wine, Parties and Chaos

INTP: Hypnos, God of Sleep

ENTJ: Nike, Goddess of Victory

INTJ: Hades, God of the Underworld