Monday, April 30, 2018

Your ACTUAL Hogwarts House (According To Your Myers Briggs Personality Type): A Response to The Things.com


Hey, everyone.

So, I know this is kind of late. It was my intention to have it out earlier this week. Technically, last week. Things really get busy around here on weekends for some reason. I never get anything done. And my internet decides to be a f*cktard and things that should take 15 mins end up taking more than an hour.

Anyway, today's topic is one that I've been sitting on for a while. Since back in December I think. Basically, TheThings.com wrote an article called "Your ACTUAL Hogwarts House (According To Your Myers Brigs Personality Type)." Now, what makes TheThings.com experts at MBTI, I have no idea, but considering I've never seen them write any other MBTI articles and they get quite a few things obviously wrong here, I don't think they know MBTI very well. But before we really get into this rant, I want to remind you all of my Patreon. If you believe that I'm doing God's work helping to further MBTI theory, then I sure would appreciate the support. $1 a month really helps me out, but anything more than that would be even more appreciated and I have all sorts of goodies offered to those who do.

All right, then...

Hogwarts Houses

For those who don't know how the Hogwarts houses from Harry Potter break down, it's like this, and this is more or less a direct quote from Pat Boivin of the Super Best Friends Zaibatsu: "You can be a real cool guy, a huge nerd, a racist, or some assh*le called Hufflepuff." Basically in Harry Potter, the students are "sorted" via the Sorting Hat into "houses" which act like fraternities/sororities while students attend Hogwarts. The four houses are Gryffindor, Ravenclaw, Slytherin, and Hufflepuff.

Each house is known for specific official and unofficial traits. Gryffindor is typically for the bravest of the brave and sometimes braggarts. Your heroes end up here. Ravenclaw is for the wise, smart, and intellectuals. Got a high IQ, love puzzles, and would rather mete out wise sayings than going out on Saturday night? Welcome to Ravenclaw. Slytherin is generally regarded as the "bad guy" house because most of the villains in HP come from Slytherin, but also because people who go to Slytherin are so ambitious, they're typically ambitious to an amoral fault.

As for Hufflepuff, ain't no gives two sh*ts about Hufflepuff. TheThings.com tries to argue that the most loyal and cooperative people go here, but JK Rowling herself said that everyone should want to be in Hufflepuff because it's the happiest of the four houses. It's the happy-go-lucky, wastefully cheerful house in a sense. And as an INTJ, I ain't got time for that. Not to mention, in one of the books, the Sorting Hat quotes the founder of Hufflepuff as saying, "I'll take the lot," and even singing that Hufflepuff "took the rest" whereas Slytherin wanted the most cunning, Gryffindor the bravest, and Ravenclaw the most intelligent. Basically, Hufflepuff is the catch all for people who have no notable traits.

ISTJ

Sorry that I needed a whole paragraph to sh*t on Hufflepuff. But going back to TheThings.com, not only am I pissed about how wrong they got INTJs, but I'm also a little ticked about what they got wrong about ISTJs. The writer says ISTJs would be Hufflepuffs because how important loyalty and cooperation is to them, and I have to call BS. While it is true that ISTJs have Si as their dominant function which makes them very conservative on many things, that doesn't exactly mean they believe in community. Not to mention, their auxiliary function is Te which while being rational, it is very opinionated. Take my Old Man for example: I'm pretty sure he's an ISTJ. He does things by the book, but he's very opinionated to the point of never believing himself wrong. And those types of people don't do well in "community" although they may believe in the essential principle.

Now, for those of you well versed in HP and MBTI, you're probably wondering why I haven't mentioned the fact that ISTJs are like Spock which means they should be Ravenclaws. But TheThings.com does have a primary and secondary house for each personality. They call ISTJs "Huffleclaws" since they admit to the fact that they would make great Ravenclaws. However, given that I practically live with Spock, I can tell you that Spock wouldn't have any friends in Hufflepuff. He might not have any in Ravenclaw, preferring to call them acquaintances or equals, but I don't think the arrogant ISTJ would admit to any Hufflepuff being his equal. It's not likely at the least. What's really funny is that I found another source, this time an image, that I more agree with in terms of the housing.



As you can see, ISTJs are put in Slytherin with a secondary mention to Ravenclaw. I'd probably have that the other way around and say that ISTJs are Ravenclaws first and Slytherins second, possibly even Gryffindors if their conservative "tried and true" methods are under attack, but this image is much more accurate than TheThings.com. The only way I could see an ISTJ going to Hufflepuff is if he's truly unremarkable as far as his smarts go and he doesn't really believe in fighting for tradition. But at that point, that might not be an ISTJ.

INTP, ENTJ, and ENFP

Before getting to the main even of INTJs, I want to take a quick look at INTPs, ENTJs, and ENFPs. TheThings.com listed INTPs as being Ravenclaw first and Slytherin second. The image I have disagrees on the secondary choice and chooses Gryffindor. I think we can all agree on the Ravenclaw part, but Slytherin versus Gryffindor requires some attention.

TheThings.com places INTPs in Slytherin due to their adaptability as one of the qualities that Dumbledore mentions that Salazar Slytherin, the founder of the house, valued was resourcefulness. While this is possible, I think an INTP is more likely to use their Prospecting trait within their auxiliary function Ne, meaning they're more capable of flexible thinking than flexible doing. This is a perfect match for Ravenclaw, but not necessarily for Slytherin.

Now, I know an INTP--my sister--and she's a very opinionated and passionate person. When it comes to politics or something stupid happening in the world of social justice, she will rally and rant like you've never seen a person rally and rant. Like, she'll rant to me about it, and then she'll rant to my Old Man when he gets home from work. She definitely seems to have a very developed Ti and Si, making her a loner who believes in and argues logically for "tried and true." In public and social situations, she can get along with just about anyone, but in private, she's very much an individual. This is all fantastic for Ravenclaw, but when she gets in a fighting mood to defend the status quo, she could definitely be a Gryffindor. So, I again have to agree with the image.


Going onto ENTJs, TheThings says they're pure Ravenclaw with no chance at being anything else. The image however says ENTJs are Slytherins first and Ravenclaws second. While we can all agree that ENTJs could be Ravenclaws because they're so analytical, but when you factor in the fact that they're all entrepreneurs and dynamos on top of that, things get a little murky. I could see them being Slytherins due to their entrepreneurial ambitions, but I think ENTJs could also be Gryffindors. It takes a lot of bravery to start a business yourself, and it takes even more bravery to do it again and again when it fails which does happen. 66% of small businesses close within their first 10 years. To face such odds and go through with it anyway, and to try again after you fail, that's a combination of tenacity and balls. Personally, I'd feel more comfortable calling ENTJs Gryfferins or Slytherdors than anything else.

Now, onto ENFPs. Here, both the image and TheThings agree with each other. They both place ENFPs in Gryffindor first and then Hufflepuff second. TheThings writer argues that ENFPs belong in Gryffindor because they always seek to do the right thing. True, ENFPs do posses Fi which is associated with strong personal morals, but I have to say, so what? INTJs also have Fi, and although it's their tertiary function versus ENFPs for whom it is their auxiliary function, there's no such thing as an INTJ hypocrite--there just isn't. INTJs and ENFPs alike have a very strong sense of self. And if having a strong sense of morality is all it takes to get into Gryffindor, then shouldn't anyone with an Fi function be able to get into Gryffindor?

As for their Hufflepuff side, TheThings says that ENFPs would be a shoe-in here because they're so supportive and able to connect with people. While it's possible that Hufflepuffs have this strong sense of community, it's never really mentioned in HP. Another problem is that ENFPs are known to be on the fence about whether they're introverted or extraverted. Many ENFPs consider themselves introverted and they've even been called the most introverted of the extraverts. So, just because an ENFP can connect with people, that doesn't mean that people are connecting with an ENFP. I have heard that ENFPs can be very guarded about themselves and feel as if no one really knows or gets them. And as Dumbledore said, "It's not our abilities who make us who we are, but our choices." So if an ENFP doesn't choose to let people in, is she really connecting to people, and doesn't this hurt the case for Hufflepuff?

TheThings also says that ENFPs are imaginative and creative which somehow is attributed to both houses, but I don't understand how and the writer doesn't explain. To be honest, if a personality is Intuitive and possesses either Ni or Ne in their dominant or auxiliary functions, I think they should be considered for Ravenclaw. I think whoever wrote the article really overlooked the effect(s) of Intuition on wisdom and intelligence. So, where would I put ENFPs then? I think they probably belong in Hufflepuff, but I see no reason for them not to be able to get into Ravenclaw.


INTJ

Finally! We get to the reason why I originally wanted to write this damn post. Anyway, TheThings says that INTJs are all-around Slytherins with no potential to be anything else. Um, excuse me, but what the f*ck did you just say!? At least the image gets it right and says they're Ravenclaws first and Slytherins second. But going back to TheThings, holy sh*t, is the writer's argument all over the damn place. This is where it really breaks down and I have to stop myself from smacking an idiot.

TheThings says that INTJs are "pure Slytherins" because while we do have original minds, we have an "innate understanding of what makes people tick" which I don't understand how that's an INTJ trait or a Slytherin trait. Is this person trying to say that both INTJs and Slytherins use or manipulate people? If not, and what the writer is actually saying is that INTJs have the ability to read people, then why isn't this seemingly very social quality not make us a perfect match for the sociable Hufflepuffs? I mean, hell, I know why an INTJ would never be a Hufflepuff, but the article writer doesn't seem to know what the hell they're talking about.

Going on, the writer accuses INTJs of not being analytical because they're not Ravenclaws (WHAT A BUNCH OF BULL SH*T!!!!!), but at least, according to the writer, we are "extremely adaptable" and can work around anything. This is true; INTJs can do anything. However, that's not the point. INTJs know this. We know we can do anything we set our minds to, but the problem is that we are selective about what we set our minds to because we have very personal and refined tastes. Yes, we are flexible, but only when we give a damn. The rest of the time, we do what we feel like.

Next, TheThings (man, I hate typing this stupid website's name) says that INTJs "want to be the best at whatever it is they're doing, especially if it's something they're passionate about." This is another point that requires some clarification. INTJs do want to be the best, like no one ever was. However, it's not a case of especially if it's something we're passionate about, it's a case of only if it's something we're passionate about. Sure, I did want to be the best bowler at my friend's birthday party a few weeks ago, but that feeling has subsided. I do however still want to be the best version of myself that I could be which includes being the best writer there ever was. Our desire to be the best at something we're not passionate about is generally a passing fancy, or only exists when we're engaged in that activity. If we never touch it again, we don't give a rat's ass.


Finally, TheThings says that we're some of the most loyal people you'll ever meet. This is true; no argument from me. However, how this is a Slytherin trait is beyond me because I was under the impression that loyalty was a Hufflepuff trait according to what the article writer said about ISTJs. Not to mention, loyalty was a big deal in HP, and in HP, all of the most important characters were Gryffindors, so what in the hell is this person talking about? I'm not saying that loyalty can't be a trait of other houses, but it should really only be a central trait of one or two.

So then, where would I place INTJs? Well, that should already be obvious. My first choice for INTJs is Ravenclaw with my second choice being Slytherin, but why? Well, I've taken the tests and quizzes online about which house I belong to at Hogwarts. I've even taking the one on Pottermore, and get this, depending on my attitude at the time, I can get either Ravenclaw or Slytherin. How does this happen? It comes down to one question: What do I value more: wisdom or ambition? On those days where I value wisdom, I get put into Ravenclaw, but on days I choose ambition, I'm put into Slytherin. I've even taken that test What Is Your Hybrid Hogwarts House and I got Slytherclaws, which I agree with wholeheartedly, even more so than Ravenclaw or Slytherin alone.

"Intelligence without ambition is a bird without wings."
Salvador Dali

INTJs are wicked smart, intuitive, analytical, and sometimes when we speak, we sound like an old sage offering advice to young whipper-snappers who don't know their own asses from a seven dollar hat. But on the flip-side, we are ambitious, we don't have patience for people, we have a habit of trying to force our ways via pure willpower, and at our worst, we could be a Voldemort type villain--all the fixings are there.

Conclusion

Holy hell, this was longer than I expected. I apologize, but TheThings really got me riled up. It especially breaks my heart because the writer of the articles claims to be an ENFP. ENFPs and INTJs are kindred spirits, so we should be able to understand each other, so it breaks my heart that this ENFP doesn't understand INTJs. Although, I have heard that some people aren't totally honest with themselves when they take the MBTI test and varying tests yield varying results, so perhaps the article writer isn't a real ENFP. I hope to God he or she isn't. Especially if it's a she.

Anyway, my real conclusion is that INTJs have the potential for being both Ravenclaws and Slytherins. My personal feeling is that we pull closer to Ravenclaws, especially when you consider that we have a huge thing for eldritch knowledge, which you might think is a Slytherin trait, but we don't intend to use it to take over the world, so go, go Ravenclaw. As for the others, I don't really care if I'm wrong, but being an INTJ, I'm probably not.

For my next two posts, because it's spring and because I wrote a romance book, Tales of Romance: Unlike Lovers (buy it here!), I'm going to delve into the questions of whether or not INTJs believe in love and what they think about while and after making out. So, don't miss those. But first I have to get another post out on how to give the perfect hug because I've been sitting on that for a while. But regardless of what comes out first...

Keep writing, my friends.

More About Bryan C. Laesch:


Amazon: My Author Page
Facebook: Bryan C. Laesch, Bawdy Scholar
Patreon: Bryan C. Laesch
Twitter: BryanofallTrade
Youtube: Bryan C. Laesch, Bawdy Scholar

Wednesday, April 25, 2018

Do INTJs Like to Travel?


Hey, everyone.

So, I've been feeling really creative lately. Lots of ideas coming in for the blog, to expand my web presence, and for my stories. Speaking of which, my newest book Tales of Romance: Unlikely Lovers dropped on Friday. I don't have the sales figures, but it seems like it received a warm reception. Unfortunately, I can't bask in it as I need to get ready for the release of my next two projects: a poetry dealie and a beginner's guide to traditional archery. But if you're my INTJ blog loyalists, you likely don't care about that. Anyway...

Do INTJs like to travel? I put this question to you, my audience. Do INTJs like to travel? Well, it's an interesting question actually that has a multi-faceted answer. But before I get into it, I want to remind you all of my Patreon. If you think I've got what it takes to make it to the big leagues, I'd appreciate your support. $1 helps greatly, but I have nice rewards at every level in case you want to give me more. I'm easy!


Do INTJs Like to Travel?

So, do we? Well, it's rather difficult to say based on MBTI alone. It really doesn't give any insight into this peculiarity. For myself, I have all sorts of mixed emotions about travelling. In fact, they're so mixed that I haven't been able to write a concise post about this yet. This is my third attempt! So, I'm going to try to keep this direct, and hopefully, other INTJs will feel or think the same as me.

It is my personal feeling that most INTJs don't have a strong desire to travel. There are places they'd like to see and go, but they're places that have special meaning to INTJs. For instance, I'm a history buff, so I'd like to visit the sites of famous battles: Gettysburg, Abbeville, and Normandy. I would also travel to notable churches, cathedrals, and monasteries as if I was on a pilgrimage. I would also like to see the homelands of my ancestors and maybe touch base with some distant relatives in Poland or Italy.

However, all these reasons are very personal to me. Even northern Michigan--been there, done that--but there are places I'd like to go back to because of fond memories I have. I have no real desire to see ancient ruins like Machu Picchu, and I have no desire to go so far out of my comfort zone that I suffer from culture shock. Some might think that's a brilliant adventure, but I'd probably lose my mind.

The other problem is that some places these days are quite dangerous what with ANTIFA and Islamists, like in France, Germany, England, Belgium, and Sweden, and some areas I just don't care to see like China or India. Partially because China is communist and they don't allow free worship, and India is very dirty, but also because they're really far and I just don't care. And some places are dangerous without the benefit of Islamists, like Brazil and Mexico. Do you see what I'm saying here? There just aren't all that many appetizing places to go.

I might be able to make an exception for the Florida Keys, but only as a honeymoon destination because who doesn't want to f*ck in a crystal clear blue lagoon. But without a wife to go with me, I'll just be staring at the local girls in their bikinis and the only ones who are likely to give me the time of day are the types who give every white, money-laden tourist the time of day... if you know what I'm saying.

On a side note, I un-ironically love the hell of the Beach Boys' "Kokomo."
And not just because of the one really hot chick in the neon pink bikini.
 
As for the United States, the political climate of our country has made just about every blue state extremely unappetizing. Texas, the Carolinas, and Louisiana could be fun, but only because I want to meet a real Southern belle and Louisiana is haunted as hell. Seems like the only things that will get me out of the house these days are boobs or ghosts. And I didn't grow up with terrible horror flicks where the girls are nude every 12 seconds.

The real problem however is this: as an INTJ, I have a very expansive imagination. I know I do. And I know that I've been disappointed by things because they didn't meet my expectations. So why travel to a place only to be disappointed in it, or to run the risk of being disappointed? Especially if it costs an arm and a leg to get there. My imagination can come up with far better places to visit than any that are actually on Earth. Most of the places I want to go either excite and challenge my imagination or stimulate my intelligence. And if I'm not there with someone I really like or respect, I'd rather be alone, but that can be awfully dangerous in a foreign country, especially if you don't speak the language.

Conclusion

So, that's basically what it's about when it comes to travelling INTJs. A location has to run a gauntlet of inquiries before I even consider it as a place to visit. Chiefly amongst those inquiries are questions of the political and social atmospheres of the place, and if it passes those, the location then needs to be able to meet my intellectual pursuits or challenge my imagination. It's almost no wonder that my favorite places to go, or that I have been, are places with cemeteries, churches, castles, mountain ranges, lakes, and forests. Some may argue that Machu Picchu can excite my imagination and intelligence, but the place is just too damn strong with the tourists for my taste. Oh, crap. I hope that doesn't make me a hipster.

Well, that's it for this week, everybody. I know it was short, but I didn't have as much to say about this topic as I thought I did. Actually, I had a lot to say, but every time I did, I lost focus on the point about INTJs' intelligences and imaginations. Not to mention it was just me bitching about the state of affairs in other parts of the world. This is supposed to be about INTJs and travelling, and I'm over here getting political.

Anyway, I'm sorry this was late. Hopefully, I can get another blog post out this week which will be more of a rant on MBTI and the Harry Potter houses. Look for that on Friday or Saturday. Until then...

Keep writing, my friends.

More About Bryan C. Laesch:


Amazon: My Author Page
Facebook: Bryan C. Laesch, Bawdy Scholar
Patreon: Bryan C. Laesch
Twitter: BryanofallTrade
Youtube: Bryan C. Laesch, Bawdy Scholar

Friday, April 20, 2018

Tales of Romance: Unlikely Lovers Out Now!

 
Hey, everyone.
 
It is with great pleasure that I introduce my newest book as well as my first attempt at the romance genre: Tales of Romance: Unlikely Lovers. Just like my Tales of Horror anthology, Tales of Romance features three unique #romantic short stories: Cuddle Buddies, Bipartisan, and Reunion.

In Tales of Romance: Unlikely Lovers, love is put to the test against these impossibilities. While everyone is looking for love, it’s not so easy to find. So who would think romance could be found in the arms of a perfect stranger, in the company of a hardened enemy, or even amidst a forsaken crush?

And for the first time ever, I have included a preview of one of my coming attractions—Psyche: Nostalgia.  

Kindle copies are just .99 cents this weekend only! Get your copy today!



Keep writing, my friends.

More About Bryan C. Laesch:


Amazon: My Author Page
Facebook: Bryan C. Laesch, Bawdy Scholar
Patreon: Bryan C. Laesch
Twitter: BryanofallTrade
Youtube: Bryan C. Laesch, Bawdy Scholar


Can You Pigeonhole Yourself through MBTI?

So, here’s a question for all you MBTI nerds: do you fear that knowing your personality type will pigeonhole you into acting a certain...