Differences between ENFP and ENTP

[jenocyde]

Jeno - there's no misunderstanding of the sources. The problem is the very lack of agreement across psychologists on how empathy is defined - that is the only consensus across fields.

Perhaps one of the reasons why we can see the concepts so differently is that I'm concentrating more on neuro and social psychology and you're looking more at child psychology that define the terms quite differently.

I am not focusing on child psychology, and I linked you to my previous post which spanned disciplines. But sure, we can agree to disagree.

Pushiness implies insisting the other person work on it too when they're no longer interested in working on something. That would be counter-productive. Interpersonal relationships simply can't be tackled when one party isn't willing. The motivation has to be there at both sides.

Again, semantics. Pushy to you seems to mean persevearing when someone is not interested in working with you. Pushy to me comes way before that, at the engagement level. I am always willing to work with someone if their approach is "not pushy".

Having said that, I think our disappointment is that likened to ENTPs and debate. I've heard ENTP friends online and offline say they're disappointed when people don't want to continue debating a subject that they're interested in. It takes two. Similarly, ENFPs are likely disappointed when people are not motivated to continue working on an interpersonal relationship, whatever the relationship may be (friend, family, partner). It's different types of engagement but the perseverence reflected is similar. In either case, one person can't make a difference to the outcome. Pushiness in the emotional realm would actually be quite contrary to an ENFP's perception of people and their prerogative to make individual choices.

I really don't care if someone chooses to engage me in conversation or not. My disappointment comes from not being able to complete a task that I feel I should be able to complete. This is the severest of let downs for me. It dials into my very self worth. Which is why I asked about the ENFP parallel, since you guys are so people focused.

But if I am talking (or "debating" as everyone calls ENTP talking) to someone and they call me pushy, I am usually pretty stunned. I have no idea why I am perceived that way but I can be. To me, as long as you keep talking, you want to keep talking. You wouldn't if you didn't. I would never speak about anything if I was asked not to. *shrugs*. I guess I am not aware of how people can perceive me either.

Correct me if I'm wrong...

ENTPs have a good intuition about everything BUT people.

I don't find that to be the truth at all. I study people the same way ENFPs do - just with a different motivation, therefore focusing on different things.

 

[jenocyde]

ENTPs
---------
- seem to trust books and theories a lot more.
- have a more intelligent and grand style of silliness.
- can't play chess as well, or at least in my experience (maybe less strategic)
- are more open about their ideas (ENFPs hold back)
- are more social (or habitually social)
- converse more about the social stuff
- more technically precise

ENFPs
--------
- ask more questions about relationships.
- are more diplomatic but also subtly strong minded about what they want or don't want
- converse more about the personal
- are as interested in seeing the exceptions as the rules
- have blitz mode (look laid back most of the time, but occasionally go hyper and achieve the ridiculous) (ENTPs do it a bit also, but the ENFP one is like an alter ego level of transformation)
- talk more psychologically than technically. ie. approach, way of seeing things, etc.
- have a more rule breaking, reality twisting type of silliness.

argh, that's probably completely arbitrary .

Some of this is very accurate - I am a horrible chess player after about 30 minutes. I don't think I am all that social, though. And I only trust books and theories from those I respect, and even still I go back and fact check.

 

[ergophobe]

Again, semantics. Pushy to you seems to mean persevering when someone is not interested in working with you. Pushy to me comes way before that, at the engagement level. I am always willing to work with someone if their approach is "not pushy".

Yes, I didn't get this part and was attaching pushy to the decision to continue to engage someone who had decided otherwise. Could you explain how this may apply while you are still working with someone?

I really don't care if someone chooses to engage me in conversation or not. My disappointment comes from not being able to complete a task that I feel I should be able to complete. This is the severest of let downs for me. It dials into my very self worth. Which is why I asked about the ENFP parallel, since you guys are so people focused.

Do I understand you better now?

Persevering not so much in continuing to engage someone when they don't want to but persevering in continuing to engage someone to resolve an interpersonal issue until a certain level of resolution has been achieved (success) that both desire. If both people desire it and we are unable to achieve it, it is a HUGE personal letdown and I will assume the majority of blame at my end. It's really hard to move on. Speaking for myself, my own self-worth is very much connected to my ability in my professional field of choice (I have clear indicators of how to guage this) and my understanding of people in the interpersonal realm (unclear indicators of how to guage this). I have tended to see it as connected to an ability to resolve conflict. My self-worth is connected to understanding people I know and intuitively guaging what they need and utilizing this to engage them best and resolve conflict with them. If I failed to do this well, inspite of my best efforts with someone who wanted the same - it is pretty devastating. I would question my self-worth in the area.

Example:
Students complaining about grades is a normal part of my job. I like to ensure the student understands the rubric I used and why they received the grade they did based on those factors so that they learn from the experience. If there wasn't an error on my part or other objective reason for why we see the question differently (very possible), there's a good explanation for the grade. At the positive end, it's very rewarding. Students continue to work with me on papers for other classes - ones they don't take with me because I will give them feedback willingly and in detail. On the negative end, this perseverence when not met with success - this shared understanding, makes me really sad. It's a personal failure. It's not always helpful either. In some cases, it would have been best to stop trying with some people (particularly rude and disrespectful ones) for my own benefit.

But if I am talking (or "debating" as everyone calls ENTP talking) to someone and they call me pushy, I am usually pretty stunned. I have no idea why I am perceived that way but I can be. To me, as long as you keep talking, you want to keep talking. You wouldn't if you didn't. I would never speak about anything if I was asked not to. *shrugs*. I guess I am not aware of how people can perceive me either.

I don't think you're pushy at all in conversation online (no more or less than I am when I am interested in a subject). I would willingly call myself assertive in conversation. That is perceived as wanting to debate, regularly here and in real life. I have been told so about myself and have been similarly surprised and disappointed. Response: "What do you mean? I thought we were both interested in this and taking it as far as we could to get a better handle on the subject."

I was actually referring to an old conversation on the ENFP thread perhaps where the term used by both ENFPs and ENTPs was debating and I remember some ENTPs saying it felt dissatisfying to them to stop a conversation/debate until it had run its course.

 

[jenocyde]

Yes, I didn't get this part and was attaching pushy to the decision to continue to engage someone who had decided otherwise. Could you explain how this may apply while you are still working with someone?

Just something along the lines of agreeing to take time to think about things and then get back to each other on a certain day. But then getting "just checking in" emails and texts or whatever constantly up until that day. This could either be personal or professional. I find it annoying and pushy. And me wanting to work with someone has no bearing on this. I could sincerely want to resolve things, but not after I feel like I'm being badgered. So, for me, choosing to end a project (or relationship) is most often the result of the approach, and not the project itself.

Persevering not so much in continuing to engage someone when they don't want to but persevering in continuing to engage someone to resolve an interpersonal issue until a certain level of resolution has been achieved (success) that both desire. If both people desire it and we are unable to achieve it, it is a HUGE personal letdown and I will assume the majority of blame at my end. It's really hard to move on.

What if only one person desires it and can't achieve it because the other person doesn't want it? Do you still take on the blame?

I have tended to see it as connected to an ability to resolve conflict. My self-worth is connected to understanding people I know and intuitively guaging what they need and utilizing this to engage them best and resolve conflict with them. If I failed to do this well, inspite of my best efforts with someone who wanted the same - it is pretty devastating. I would question my self-worth in the area.

This is shocking. I could never imagine tying my self worth in another person, just because I know that person. That must really suck and bring about all sorts of destructive thoughts.

I don't think you're pushy at all in conversation online (no more or less than I am when I am interested in a subject). I would willingly call myself assertive in conversation. That is perceived as wanting to debate, regularly here and in real life. I have been told so about myself and have been similarly surprised and disappointed. Response: "What do you mean? I thought we were both interested in this and taking it as far as we could to get a better handle on the subject."

I was actually referring to an old conversation on the ENFP thread perhaps where the term used by both ENFPs and ENTPs was debating and I remember some ENTPs saying it felt dissatisfying to them to stop a conversation/debate until it had run its course.

People online are different than in person. Here, I can type what I want to say with no interruptions. In person, I will talk over someone who cuts me off, so maybe that is seen as pushy. But I think it's rude to cut someone off mid-sentence.

Also, I don't hold on to debates after I've made my point. If I had made a clear point and the debate continues over the same point, I am often just repeating myself and asserting the same thing in a different way. That is what hell is like for me. I am usually the first one out in a debate, especially when there is no progress or shared understanding being made. In general, I am very clear and to the point - so there is never a need to drag anything out. If someone hems and haws, I have little patience for him/her and I barely mask it. I guess that adds to me being seen as pushy (e.g. asking someone to get to the point...)

 

[ergophobe]

ENTPs
---------
- seem to trust books and theories a lot more.
- have a more intelligent and grand style of silliness.
- can't play chess as well, or at least in my experience (maybe less strategic)
- are more open about their ideas
- are more social (or habitually social)
- converse more about the social stuff
- more technically precise

I highlighted the ones that hold for me. I don't hold back with ideas and I'm an ENFP. I do trust books and theories (research) but from reliable sources and when backed by empirical evidence. I'm likely not very technically precise unless I have to be to make a point. I used to play chess competitively way back in middle school but it's been a VERY long time. I wouldn't take it up again until I read more about it to get better. I do, however, have an ENTP friend who loves chess, is very strategic and is constantly looking for chess partners.

ENFPs
--------
- ask more questions about relationships.
- are more diplomatic but also subtly strong minded about what they want or don't want
- converse more about the personal
- are as interested in seeing the exceptions as the rules
- have blitz mode (look laid back most of the time, but occasionally go hyper and achieve the ridiculous) (ENTPs do it a bit also, but the ENFP one is like an alter ego level of transformation)
- talk more psychologically than technically. ie. approach, way of seeing things, etc.
- have a more rule breaking, reality twisting type of silliness.

argh, that's probably completely arbitrary .

The bolded ones apply. I'm really interested in the big picture but I do like to look to highlight they grey areas - 'tis true. I'm not very diplomatic and pretty straightforward in expressing my views. The blitz mode is SO true. I'm looking to set one off now I would clearly identify as silly but am unsure what type of silliness would hold. All types, I dare say!

Edit: I think I am far more diplomatic about expressing my views in real life than online but do hold back from doing so.

Correct me if I'm wrong...

ENTPs have a good intuition about everything BUT people.

Why do you think ENTPs do not have good intuition about people? In your experience, as an ENTP and having observed others, any particular reasons to believe this may be the case? Thanks!

 

[ergophobe]

Just something along the lines of agreeing to take time to think about things and then get back to each other on a certain day. But then getting "just checking in" emails and texts or whatever constantly up until that day. This could either be personal or professional. I find it annoying and pushy. And me wanting to work with someone has no bearing on this. I could sincerely want to resolve things, but not after I feel like I'm being badgered. So, for me, choosing to end a project (or relationship) is most often the result of the approach, and not the project itself.

Thanks for clarifying - good to know. I'll keep this in mind and check to see if I do this too. For me, I like to take the time to think about personal issues in particular because it's a bit of work to detach and the detachment is so important for objectivity. I don't like to respond immediately and in the instances I do, I often regret what I've said but I can't take it back. Being pushed would lead to this. I won't give up on the project but I won't respond in the manner I would have liked to. I think agreeing on a mutually acceptable date is a great idea!

What if only one person desires it and can't achieve it because the other person doesn't want it? Do you still take on the blame?

Yes, I won't pursue it anymore but it will still be a personal failure. I will spend far too long trying to figure out what was wrong with the approach I took that made the person give up/not want resolution. I will be saddened by it and take most of the blame but recognize that the person did not desire the same goal.

This is shocking. I could never imagine tying my self worth in another person, just because I know that person. That must really suck and bring about all sorts of destructive thoughts.

I know, I admire this about you lot. I read this as a positive influence of ENTP-ENFP friendships/relationships in one of several MBTI books I've devoured this year. ENTPs help ENFPs not take things so personally, especially the fallout of interpersonal relationships/conflicts. It does suck a lot. I don't allow it to get too destructive for most interactions because of a short attention span but if it was an important relationship and I had made the decision to make an emotional investment in the friend/ family member/partner then it's a hard and long battle to let it go. It's not productive. I'd rather not do it but it's hard to not question myself and harm self-image at least temporarily from it.

People online are different than in person. Here, I can type what I want to say with no interruptions. In person, I will talk over someone who cuts me off, so maybe that is seen as pushy. But I think it's rude to cut someone off mid-sentence.

Also, I don't hold on to debates after I've made my point. If I had made a clear point and the debate continues over the same point, I am often just repeating myself and asserting the same thing in a different way. That is what hell is like for me. I am usually the first one out in a debate, especially when there is no progress or shared understanding being made. In general, I am very clear and to the point - so there is never a need to drag anything out. If someone hems and haws, I have little patience for him/her and I barely mask it. I guess that adds to me being seen as pushy (e.g. asking someone to get to the point...)

True on the online versus offline persona.

In general, I don't do the stopping even if I have to repeat my point constantly as long as I'm enjoying it and getting something out of it. If it's respectful then I'll continue to see it as my inability to explain myself the way I'd like to so I'll keep trying to do that better, at least in my mind. If I'm not enjoying it because of disrespect or a perceived inability on the conversation partner's end to see the point I am making, I'll leave. I also wouldn't pursue a debate if I thought the person's personal convictions would be involved and I didn't know them or think they would perceive it as an attack. Not always (esp if it's a subject that affects me and an issue I care about) but I hope I do this more now than before.

 

[Kasper]

Correct me if I'm wrong...

ENTPs have a good intuition about everything BUT people.

Why do you say that? Understanding people is my favourite past time, it's one of my strengths, caring about and connecting with them however, not so much.

 

[bighairything]

ENTPs
---------
- can't play chess as well, or at least in my experience (maybe less strategic)

Interesting. As an ENFP, I rely very heavily on intuition, and have a rather strategic, positional style of play. This is because while I'm aware of the "trees of variations" and the like, I have great difficulty holding them all in my head. I also make a lot of blunders.

 

[BlahBlahNounBlah]

Why do you say that? Understanding people is my favourite past time, it's one of my strengths, caring about and connecting with them however, not so much.

Agreeing with this.


With little information, I can understand and predict most people's behavior. This is part of my attraction to novelty. And it can be boring to be able to read people so rapidly. I like people whose behavior I have difficulty predicting.

 

[BlahBlahNounBlah]

ENTPs
---------
- seem to trust books and theories a lot more.
- have a more intelligent and grand style of silliness.
- can't play chess as well, or at least in my experience (maybe less strategic)
- are more open about their ideas (ENFPs hold back)
- are more social (or habitually social)
- converse more about the social stuff
- more technically precise

I don't trust anything a lot more than anything else. I look at everything critically. But I do enjoy theories.

I'm very silly.

I'm great at chess.

I'm very open about my ideas (less on the internet than in real life, because it can often feel like a waste of my time online)

Social varies.

Sure, why not?

I try to be precise, but not INTP precise. I don't care if others aren't.

I'm diplomatic, but not ENFP diplomatic (some people aren't worth an attempt at diplomacy).

And I often talk psychologically, but the reasons don't seem to be the ENFP reasons.

 

[BlueScreen]

I don't trust anything a lot more than anything else. I look at everything critically. But I do enjoy theories.

I'm very silly.

I'm great at chess.

I'm very open about my ideas (less on the internet than in real life, because it can often feel like a waste of my time online)

Social varies.

Sure, why not?

I try to be precise, but not INTP precise. I don't care if others aren't.

I'm diplomatic, but not ENFP diplomatic (some people aren't worth an attempt at diplomacy).

And I often talk psychologically, but the reasons don't seem to be the ENFP reasons.

Yeh, it was all generalisations from ones I know. ENTPs definitely have the capacity to be amazing at chess (or anything) for example. I'd just found ENFPs were more often into it and good at it.

The trusting books and theories was by comparison to ENFP. We tend to like some form of empirical evidence to support anything we are going to believe. So only really get half way to being true academics.

Another thing I've noticed in ENTPs I know is they are very quick when it comes to understanding people and motivations. The only difference I see in this area is we focus on different parts. Some people situations they can sum up far more clearly, because as impartial as we try to be, we play too close to the fire.

Yep, you guys are very different to INTPs. I feel you are more accurate in the technical sense than we are though when speed thinking. With ENFPs you need to do an error check on the first draft, because you get strange artefacts appearing from whatever whacked out approach we decided to use. IRL I get corrected by INTPs on being precise all the time. The ENTPs I know hardly ever do. They seem more interested in exploring ideas.

On the diplomatic part, we are too diplomatic. I'm trying to grow out of it as I get older.

 

[SillySapienne]

An ENFP can be very sensitive and easily discouraged by other people.

Absolutely, especially by those we care about.

An ENFP needs to be in contact with people and influence them in a positive way.
As an ENTP I like people but mostly I just want to study them to figure out the human condition

All of the above is true for me.

An ENFP could freely offer both sympathy and empathy but would find sympathy easier.
As an ENTP I'm uncomfortable with sympathy but can offer empathy.

Hell no, I don't do sympathy that well at all.

If I feel your pain, I feel it, if I don't, I don't and I won't feign that I do.

An ENFP would be more excited about meeting new people.
As an ENTP I’m more excited about new ideas.

Both are true.

An ENFP wants to feel loved and supported.

Who doesn't?

As an ENTP I want to feel respected and admired.

Ew, on being admired, but who doesn't want to be respected?

An ENFP sees things as right vs wrong and ethical vs unethical.
As an ENTP I see things as correct vs incorrect and logical vs illogical.

Yes, yes, yes, and yes.

An ENFP can be quite expressive.

An ENFP is more likely to adapt their emotional expressions to those they’re interacting with.

Sure. I think this is subconscious.

An ENFP likes to resonate with what someone else is saying and is more likely to argue using persuasion.

Sure.

As an ENTP debating is sport and I have no problems switching sides, I’m more likely use facts.

I switch sides to better understand the other, but I always stick to arguing what's right.

An ENFP would have strong ethics.

My moral compass is damn near unwavering.

 

[BlueScreen]

Agree with above .

 

[entropie]

ENTPs are harder workers

 

[Kasper]

Yeh, it was all generalisations from ones I know. ENTPs definitely have the capacity to be amazing at chess (or anything) for example. I'd just found ENFPs were more often into it and good at it.

I love strategy games but not for the game itself but the challenge and head games the other person can give me. Normally when I play strategy type games I kick anyone's butt who takes me on so they're not that interesting for me, I tend to find them boring after a short amount of time and let them win so the game is over, the one exception is an ENTP friend, never has there been a more intense standoff over a chess board, I'm not used to playing someone who is so clearly playing more than 3 moves in advance. If I could get that more often I might like it, till then you ENFPs can have chess.

 

[Aleksei]

An ENFP can be very sensitive and easily discouraged by other people.
As an ENTP its damn near impossible to offend, upset or discourage me.

I'm more ENTP there. It's not impossible, but it's very difficult to rattle me.

An ENFP needs to be in contact with people and influence them in a positive way.
As an ENTP I like people but mostly I just want to study them to figure out the human condition.

Definitely more ENFP there. I love influencing people (not necessarily in a positive way ), and being the center of attention.

An ENFP could freely offer both sympathy and empathy but would find sympathy easier.
As an ENTP I'm uncomfortable with sympathy but can offer empathy.

More ENFP here as well.

An ENFP would be more excited about meeting new people.
As an ENTP I'm more excited about new ideas.

I'm excited about meeting interesting new people, and I'm more excited about ideas when I can share them but I still get excited about them. Toss-up, really.

An ENFP wants to feel loved and supported.
As an ENTP I want to feel respected and admired.

I want both, more or less equally. Lean a tad bit towards admiration though.

An ENFP sees things as right vs wrong and ethical vs unethical.
As an ENTP I see things as correct vs incorrect and logical vs illogical.

I see both, although in many cases I don't care so much for the ethical side of things, and I often analyze ethical perspectives in a very dispassionate manner.

An ENFP can be quite expressive.
As an ENTP I can be less expressive.

Whether I'm expressive or not generally depends on the situation, my mood, etc. Can't really answer this one properly.

An ENFP is more likely to adapt their emotional expressions to those they're interacting with.
As an ENTP I'm more likely to mirror emotional expressions.

More F there.

An ENFP likes to resonate with what someone else is saying and is more likely to argue using persuasion.
As an ENTP debating is sport and I have no problems switching sides, I'm more likely use facts.

I generally argue through a combination of facts, persuasion and pointing out logical flaws in my opponent's proposition (mostly the latter). I use all four of my cognitive functions while debating.

An ENFP would have strong ethics.
As an ENTP many of mine are bendable.

I'm very T on ethics. I am a thoroughly corrupt individual.

... then I got bored, we both do that.

Yes we do.

 

[You]

Moderate
Answer​

An ENFP can be very sensitive and easily discouraged by other people.
As an ENTP its damn near impossible to offend, upset or discourage me.

An ENFP needs to be in contact with people and influence them in a positive way.
As an ENTP I like people but mostly I just want to study them to figure out the human condition.

An ENFP could freely offer both sympathy and empathy but would find sympathy easier.
As an ENTP I'm uncomfortable with sympathy but can offer empathy.

An ENFP would be more excited about meeting new people.
As an ENTP I�m more excited about new ideas.

An ENFP wants to feel loved and supported.
As an ENTP I want to feel respected and admired.

An ENFP sees things as right vs wrong and ethical vs unethical.
As an ENTP I see things as correct vs incorrect and logical vs illogical.

An ENFP can be quite expressive.
As an ENTP I can be less expressive.

An ENFP is more likely to adapt their emotional expressions to those they�re interacting with.
As an ENTP I'm more likely to mirror emotional expressions.

An ENFP likes to resonate with what someone else is saying and is more likely to argue using persuasion.
As an ENTP debating is sport and I have no problems switching sides, Im more likely use facts.

An ENFP would have strong ethics.
As an ENTP many of mine are bendable.
​

I know there's an ENTP vs ENFP thread floating around but it seems the fluff vs content ratio is about 17:1, I'm all for fluff but old fluff is boring, so y'all get a new thread.

 

[skylights]

false for me:
An ENFP would be more excited about meeting new people. / As an ENTP I'm more excited about new ideas.

• i think i'm usually more excited about new ideas. i love new people but they come along with anxieties too. an idea can't reject me...

An ENFP wants to feel loved and supported./As an ENTP I want to feel respected and admired.

• well, preferably, i'd like both.

  feeling loved and supported is very important by someone I respect and admire.

  

 

[guesswho]

True for me:
As an ENTP I like people but mostly I just want to study them to figure out the human condition.
As an ENTP I�m more excited about new ideas.
As an ENTP I want to feel respected and admired. (But I also want to be loved and supported)
As an ENTP I see things as correct vs incorrect and logical vs illogical. ( Not very fond of ethics and morals, these 2 words always kinda pissed me off)
As an ENTP I�m more likely to mirror emotional expressions.
As an ENTP debating is sport and I have no problems switching sides, I�m more likely use facts.
As an ENTP many of mine are bendable.

What I do not get is the following sentence:

As an ENTP its damn near impossible to offend, upset or discourage me.
I can get upset, discouraged.
I am discouraged when people do not believe in my ideas, or in me in general.
I don't really get offended by stuff.
But in the end I get bored. And I stop writing.

Notice how there's an "I" in all the sentences lol, with one exception, where I used "me". Weird how self centered I am.