Quotes from Isabel Briggs Myers

A basic difference in judgment arises from the existence of two distinct and sharply contrasting ways of coming to conclusions. One way is by the use of thinking, that is, by a logical process, aimed at an impersonal finding. The other is by feeling, that is, by appreciation—equally reasonable in its fashion—bestowing on things a personal, subjective value.

Many destructive conflicts arise simply because two people are using opposite kinds of perception and judgment. When the origin of such a conflict is recognized, it becomes less annoying and easier to handle.

thinking, as primary function, can readily pair with intuition as auxiliary, or indeed equally well with sensation, but…never with feeling.

Another basic difference in people's use of perception and judgment arises from their relative interest in their outer and inner worlds. Introversion, in the sense given to it by Jung in formulating the term and the idea, is one of two complementary orientations to life; its complement is extraversion. The introvert's main interests are in the inner world of concepts and ideas, while the extravert is more involved with the outer world of people and things.

Well-developed introverts can deal ably with the world around them when necessary, but they do their best work inside their heads, in reflection. Similarly well-developed extraverts can deal effectively with ideas, but they do their best work externally, in action.

The preference that seems to have the most influence on occupational choice, the SN preference, determines in large part what will interest people. Sensing

The next most important preference is TF, which determines the kind of judgment that is easier and more agreeable to use. People who prefer thinking are more skillful in handling matters that deal with inanimate objects, machinery, principles, or theories—none of which have any inconsistent and unpredictable feelings and all of which can be handled logically.

In the sample of accountants, 64 percent were ST, and among the finance and

Introverts have less choice about participating in both worlds. The outer life is thrust upon them whether they want one or not. Their dominant process is engrossed with the inner world of ideas, and the auxiliary process does what it can about their outer lives. In effect, the dominant process says to the auxiliary, "Go out there and tend to the things that can't be avoided, and don't ask me to work on them except when it's absolutely necessary.

Most people see only the side introverts present to the outer world, which is mostly their auxiliary process, their second best.

By developing individual strengths, guarding against weaknesses, and appreciating the strengths of other types, life will be more amusing, more interesting, and more of a daily adventure than it could possibly be if everyone were alike.

In effect, the dominant process says to the auxiliary, "Go out there and tend to the things that can't be avoided, and don't ask me to work on them except when it's absolutely necessary.

However, when an environment squarely conflicting with their capacities forces children to depend on unnatural processes or attitudes, the result is a falsification of type, which robs its victims of their real selves and makes them into inferior, frustrated copies of other people.

Unless the introverts with intuition are stoutly skeptical of the mass assumption that a difference is an inferiority, their faith in their type will diminish. They will not trust and exercise their preferences, which, accordingly, will not be developed enough to be beneficial. These people are thus cheated out of the successful undertakings that would give them faith in their type.

Introverted feeling types have a wealth of warmth and enthusiasm, but they may not show it until they know someone well. They wear their warm side inside, like a fur-lined coat.

For many Extraverts, "hell at a party" is "not being able to get in." Many introverts see it as "being there.

The best-adjusted people are the 'psychologically patriotic,' who are glad to be what they are.

It follows that these people [INTJs] cannot be successfully coerced. They will not even be told anything without their permission, but they will accept an offer of facts, opinions, or theories, for free consideration;

Conventional measures of mental ability, such as intelligence tests and scholarship, show some of the very highest records belong to INFP and INFJ types, who relegate thinking to last place or next to last. The preference for thinking appears to have far less intellectual effect than the preference for intuition, even in some technical fields, such as scientific research, where its influence was expected to be most important.

Intuitives tend to define intelligence as "quickness of understanding" and so prejudge the case in their own favor, for intuition is very quick.

They [INTJs] are likely, however, to organize themselves out of a job. They cannot continually reorganize the same thing, and a finished product has no more interest. Thus, they need successive new assignments, with bigger and better problems, to stretch their powers.

They [sensing types] will not skim in reading, and they hate to have people skim in conversation. Believing that matters inferred are not as reliable as matters explicitly stated, they are annoyed when you leave things to their imagination. (Intuitives are often annoyed—if not actually bored—when you do not.)

The sensing types are not in such close communication with their unconscious. They do not trust an answer that suddenly appears. They do not think it prudent to pounce. They tend to define intelligence as "soundness of understanding," a sure and solid agreement of conclusions with facts; and how is that possible until the facts have been considered?

In teaching, the other main problem related to type is the students' interest. Intuitives and sensing types differ greatly in what they find interesting in any subject even if they like, that is, are interested in, the same subjects. Intuitives like the principle, the theory, the why. Sensing types like the practical application, the what and the how.