Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Environment & Energy

Erich Bloodaxe BSN

(14,733 posts)

3. The online version I took was one of the free ones, not the $50 'official' one, so I'm sure it

Reply to GliderGuider (Reply #2)

Mon Jun 15, 2015, 08:50 AM

Jun 2015

didn't go into serious detail. Indeed, some of the 'scales' I was rating myself on were not what I consider polar opposites. Indeed, I found myself sometimes splitting right down the middle because I identified fairly strongly with both options, not considering them in opposition to each other at all.

I think I 'wanted' to be a type more strongly than I was, and so I probably more strongly identified myself in the past, and now I simply take myself as I am. Interested in everything, not tightly focused in a single direction. The entire world is fascinating, in every aspect, everything is worth learning.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Here's a good reason why the message of ecological danger isn't being absorbed. [View all] GliderGuider Jun 2015 OP

Sort of off topic, but I couldn't remember my 'type', so I went out and took the test again online Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jun 2015 #1

M-B turns out to be substantially more complex than the 4-letter main type. GliderGuider Jun 2015 #2

The online version I took was one of the free ones, not the $50 'official' one, so I'm sure it Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jun 2015 #3

Short term beats long term The2ndWheel Jun 2015 #4