I'm an INTP, but I don't know if if could really call it my 'natural' personality type. That's the thing I'm suspicious about this Myers-Briggs-theory, at least when the personality disorders are concerned; In a way the point of defining 16 different personality types is to 'accept differences' in people - and it's a great tool of understanding differences in human behavior - but when it boils certain traits (like being introverted) down to a certain 'type' of personality, it naturalizes certain tendencies of an individual - tendencies that in fact might not be as much natural behaviors than they are symptomatic. It's in a way fatalistic to say things like "I'm an INTP", like I was absolutely born to be an INTP, when the truth is that I can't really say what kind of person am I because of all the defenses and compensations we all build on top of our character. People answer certain questions themselves, and then they get the result about what 'type' of personality they represent. This 'type' is then taken as something 'real' when it's not. It's just a generalization derived from the answers we ourselves have given. It isn't information about our personality (and it certainly doesn't take all the personality disorders into count) but a certain profile we may fit into or not. It doesn't matter in a way, because we are what we are and if I answer some questions about my sociability, for example, in a manner that is consistent with the profile of an introvert - the test will suggest I'm dominantly introverted. I should have been able to know that already if I was the one giving the information. The result only sums it up tautologically, backing it up with some general description about how 'we' act or feel. The test couldn't have taken into consideration the fact that I act like an introvert because I have an avoidant personality disorder. Is that me, then? Of course this is almost a philosophical question.
I could use my 'INTP'-personality as an example to clarify what I mean: I find 'myself' from the description of 'INTP', that's 'me'. But: being 'introverted' is very much a consequence of circumstances of my life history, and now it's an unhealthy state of mind, a learned mechanism which has become instinctual for me and it causes me trouble. I wouldn't want to be introverted and I know I could be extroverted also if I didn't have all these unconscious fears etc. - in a way it doesn't feel like my 'true nature' and in fact I wasn't that introverted as a child. And being primarily a 'thinker' is also a coping mechanism for me. I could say that I've had so much trouble with my emotions that it has turned into a constant thinking in my attempt to get over my mental distress. I doubt I would connect to life primarily through thoughts if I wouldn't have had such a great need for them due to my emotions. So, in a way there are more layers to personality than just one, and although Myers-Briggs is a valid description of this certain layer of myself, I can't say it's a description of 'me'. The most innate character can be the most hidden.