Welcome back to the Sunday Q&A. Last week we pulled back the curtain on internal frameworks, today it's a different kind of self-discovery: personality tests.
Specifically, Myers-Briggs.
It's easy to write these off as internet horoscopes, but every so often one actually holds up a mirror. So today we're going letter by letter through the four that stuck.
Q: When did you first come across MBTI, and what did it tell you?
Tan: I think it was 2024. I was curious where I'd land, and I came out as ISTJ. Going through it letter by letter, it was scary accurate. Honestly kind of funny.
Q: Let's start with the I, Introversion. For you that's not really about being quiet, it's more about how you move through a room. What does that actually look like?
Tan: I'd call myself an introvert because I'm the person giving you glances if I want to talk to you or join in, not the type to just walk up and say something.
It gets worse if I find someone attractive. I'll straight up pretend to be busy, act as unavailable as possible, while deep down I'm stealing glances and low-key hoping someone calls me out on it.
But once someone breaks that first barrier, I'm good to go. I'll get everyone talking and keep things entertained, I don't think I'm boring. It's just that some energies feel like a lot, and I need room to breathe. I'm very aware of how I'm coming across, especially with people I don't know well yet.
Q: That's a pretty honest answer, sounds less like antisocial and more like managing that awareness just costs energy, so you need to recharge. Next letter: S for Sensing. Facts and concrete reality over abstract theory. Does that track for you?
Tan: Definitely. Funny enough, for someone who's basically a master of disguise and secretly wishes people could just read my mind, I really value people who are clear. It's so much easier to deal with someone when they mean what they say. I lean on things that have already been proven, if someone pitches me an idea, my first question is "who's actually done this" or "show me an example." Facts over feelings, basically. The world just runs better that way.
Q: "Facts over feelings", that's the Sensing mantra right there. Which leads into T for Thinking: decisions driven by logic instead of emotion or social pressure. Where does that show up, even when it's a little blunt?
Tan: Ha, this might sound bad, but yeah, if you ask me what I think, you're getting the most logical answer for the situation, whether or not the situation actually wants that.
I'm not that strict with myself, though. Sometimes I drift and let feelings take over, but I always end up filtering it back through logic eventually. Emotions are fine, but they're irrational. I've done some genuinely reckless stuff while running purely on emotion, and it's only after the fact that I look back like, how did that even happen.
Q: We've all had those "how did that even happen" moments. Last one, J for Judging. Not judgmental of people, just a strong pull toward structure and schedules over winging it. How does that show up day to day?
Tan: Yeah, I'm a judge through and through. I love structure, and it pairs pretty naturally with the sensing side. I also judge character, small things decide pretty fast whether I want to be close to someone, no matter what else is going on.
Like, someone spitting in public, or throwing trash around, I don't care how great they are otherwise, that's a line for me.
I love a clear plan. If someone gives me a timeline and sticks to it, great. Any last-minute miss without a heads-up basically tells me the plans are off.
Q: To wrap up, do you see these four letters as a fixed box, or something looser?
Tan: More of a snapshot that turned into a blueprint. I don't think it's changing much at this point, and honestly I've built a lot of how I live around being ISTJ. It gave me a good read on myself, and I've kept building from there.
Reader Mailbag
A reader asked last week: "Do dilemmas, and the delayed decisions they cause, build character?"
Tan: Honestly, no. To me a dilemma is just an internal back-and-forth using tools you already have, trying to work through a contradiction. Solving it once doesn't mean it won't come up again, it's a loop, not a one-time fix. So I don't really count that as character development. It's just the system I already have, running.
Thanks to everyone who subscribed this week, it genuinely means a lot to have you here.
Got a question for a future Sunday post? Deep philosophical riddle or something completely mundane, doesn't matter. There's now a Submit a Question page on the site if you'd rather drop it anonymously. No names, no pressure.
See you next Sunday.