INFP profile

[Jennifer]

I find the reading interesting, but it's raising questions in my mind: Namely, why are all the type descriptions (not just yours) focused on what seems to be "immature" members of the type?

I suppose it is for ease of exploring the raw basic personality before any functions become developed -- we are clarifying how all the functions generally originate and interact with each other -- but in terms of identification, the systematic description is only useful to recognize raw/immature people of the type in question.

Namely, when you began talking about Te, well, my mind leaps to INFPs I know who actually have a mature Te developed. They are still clearly INFP, running off Fi+Ne as their main function combination; but their Te is mature enough that sometimes they have even confused themselves about how best they should spend their efforts.

(Recently one told me he had not really understood why he was getting frustrated being an organizational leader, because he did that sort of thing so well... but his real heart was in the personal interaction with others and helping to actualize them and affirm/encourage them. Very personal ministry, rather than "behind the scenes / get things done" activity.

He felt vindicated and "released" when I described to him the sort of person he seemed to be to me, function-wise, and how it made a great deal of sense for him to want to be more personal, because that is what I saw as his strength, and the organizational skills were definitely something he had, but they were not really his main desire in how he wanted to relate to others.)

In any case, why are INTPs always assumed to have a lousy Fe? Yes, they start that way; but if you're trying to recognize an *adult* INTP with some relational experience, the Fe will have to become a notable part of the description, not constantly described as a weakness and to coach people in what "flaws" to look for... because perhaps the INTP is now more well-rounded. And the same goes for the rest of the types..

Maybe we need "stages" for types, very much like butterflies, with a larval stage and some intermediate, then a final actualized stage flitting about.

[SolitaryWalker]

Originally Posted by Jennifer

In any case, why are INTPs always assumed to have a lousy Fe? Yes, they start that way; but if you're trying to recognize an *adult* INTP with some relational experience, the Fe will have to become a notable part of the description, not constantly described as a weakness and to coach people in what "flaws" to look for... because perhaps the INTP is now more well-rounded. And the same goes for the rest of the types..

Maybe we need "stages" for types, very much like butterflies, with a larval stage and some intermediate, then a final actualized stage flitting about.

Very few of us tend to be proficient with our inferior function. As for stages, I believe i did refer specifically to undeverloped Te for the INFP--and how this shows--the self impose delirium. And the well developed, where the INFP sees the world with a sober eye.

The underdeveloped part is accentuated because the Te acts like an underdeveloped function most of the time, rather than as developed. That is due to the fact that we tend not to be good with our inferior function. We can have a few runs of success here and there, but the energy from quality inferior function work, even if we are capable of this, is drawn away in favor of the higher up functions.

[SolitaryWalker]

Any further ideas?

[Athenian200]

Originally Posted by BlueWing

Very few of us tend to be proficient with our inferior function. As for stages, I believe i did refer specifically to undeverloped Te for the INFP--and how this shows--the self impose delirium. And the well developed, where the INFP sees the world with a sober eye.

The underdeveloped part is accentuated because the Te acts like an underdeveloped function most of the time, rather than as developed. That is due to the fact that we tend not to be good with our inferior function. We can have a few runs of success here and there, but the energy from quality inferior function work, even if we are capable of this, is drawn away in favor of the higher up functions.

Yes, I agree. I really didn't understand her. She's always trying to oversimplify things, reduce divisions, and make everything more "natural and interconnected." It can result in some really weird ideas, but it works like she's just smoothing things over to the point that you can't distinguish them anymore. I don't if she's just trying to reduce conflict, justify something, or what, but it really confuses me. I'm sure it isn't intentional, but I just don't get how she communicates.

The entire point is, you can/should only use your weaker functions in ways that serve the higher ones. If you try to liberate them too much, they'll either wear you out, or cause you to do something you regret. But of course that doesn't mean they shouldn't be developed at all, just that they should be used minimally/in moderation.

[TenebrousReflection]

Originally Posted by BlueWing

My INFP profile has now been revised and enlarged.

Any takes on this? INFPs?

P.S

Keep in mind, the last section of the profile is in post 9.

These are comments I posted in another thread (a self analysis thread) based on what you had originaly. I'll need to re-read the revised version, but suspect much of these will still hold true. Overall, when I read your parts on Fi and Ne I felt it was one of the closest descriptions I've read to how I think. The part on Si had some similarities, but maybe just because its a lower function and I don't understand it as well. But he part on Te did not feel like me at all.

Originally Posted by Bluewing

An Extroverted Feeler would wish to make an emotional attachment under all circumstances, whilst the Introverted Feeler would experience intense reservations unless they thought that what they have inputted would truly be appreciated. This seems to evince that the function of Introverted Feeling gives one a more direct access to the essence of pure feeling than extroverted. For this reason the INFP tends to be more aware of whether or not their input has been appreciated on the level it deserved to be. Their longing for harmony first and foremost leads them to make intense emotional attachments to ideas that they are compelled by from a person-centered perspective. And since they are unable to remove themselves from the situations that their minds place them in, they very much envision themselves as having the basic emotional human needs. Therefore they not only wish to affirm others, but tend to find the reciprocation of this to be necessary.

I sometimes find I've made an emotional attachment to someone without planning to do so, but in those cases, its usually because I saw/felt some special quality in that person that set them apart from everyone else. I don't make an effort to emotionally connect to everyone I meet, its usually something I feel shortly after meeting someone that compels me to seek a more meaningful relationship with them or to consider them "just an acquaintance" if I don't feel any connection to them. Feeling "understood" by someone is one of the things I value, and indirectly if someone can make me feel understood, I think that equates to appreciation as used above. To me, I think its important to appreciate someone for who they are as a unique individual - to appreciate the qualities about them that set them apart from others.

(edit/append: 26 Oct 07)
The concept of wanting to feel appreciated is something I struggle with. I do have such desires, but that often feels selfish to me and so I tell myself and sometimes others that "having done what I thought felt right was the only important part", but I'd say I'm being at least somewhat deceitful/delusional in not accepting my internal desire to feel appreciated, but much like actions taken for others, the meaningfulness of appreciation is proportional to how important the person in question is to me - appreciation by strangers is nice, but comparatively trivial, while feeling appreciated by friends is a lot more meaningful to me. What I'm appreciated for also has weigh in that consideration. Being appreciated for "something anyone could have done" is a lot less meaningful to me than being appreciated for something I put my heart and mind into (I want to be appreciated for the things that make me different, and likewise prefer to value and praise others for their unique qualities so that they know someone appreciates them for who they are, not merely what they do for others.).

Though perhaps the salient reason why the Introverted Feeler differs from an Extrovert in this regard is that the Introverted judging function tends to set abstract goals, those that cannot be assessed in terms of concrete benchmarks that Judgers tend to employ. Therefore the INFP, must first understand that their mindset is comprehended and accepted by others before they could move themselves out to the open. This, as aforementioned tends to lead to major reservations. For that reason also, they tend to cling to their idealistic visions of ‘kindness and understanding’, that is, simply because they are unable to find a place that is fitting for their high ideals. An INTP can claim to having undergone similar experiences whereas their thoughts are not comprehended because their decision-making faculty is too abstract to be of use to practically minded individuals. As Leanor Thomson once pointed out, that even INTPs with highly developed communication skills struggle to express their thoughts in a way that Extroverted Thinkers could understand, because their ideas tend to have little meaning to them because no clear-cut application to the real world is observable. The INTP however, can explain the essence of their ideas to the Judgers on the theoretical level, as they tend to be objective communicators. Judgers will not be at ease dealing with such ways of thinking, but their affinity with logic will lead them to find common ground with the INTP. However, for the INFP, the dilemma is more difficult. Being more subjectively inclined, INFPs are unable to explain their ideas to Extroverted Feelers from whom they may often look for sympathy. The more the INFP is misunderstood, the more reservations they shall experience. Emotional comfort will derive almost entirely from within. Unlike the INTP who seeks to understand principles of the real world, the INFP will be more than happy removing their grasp from the external world. Possibly even be content with finding harmony in the world they have created. So long, as of course they have found harmony of some kind. Such a retreat will advance the INFP further towards the position John Milton was in, where they would be longing for the perfect world that has no place in the external reality.

I very much relate to those words.

(edit/append: 26 Oct 07)
A lot of ideas that seem clear in my mind are hard to share with others because they would require so many unusual and/or unlikely conditions to exist that even trying to explain what I see could be is problematic because I would also have to go through detailed explanations of how it could be made to be and why I think its a good idea (that also may lead to further misunderstandings). Sometimes I feel strongly in an idea and attempt to enter the world of thinking to try to put structure to the idea to present it in a way that others might understand, but even then, my ideas and intent are often misunderstood. Sometimes explaining them in the form of "let me tell you about this strange dream I had" can work to present an idea without harsh value judgments of others, but since they usually came as a result of active exploration of ideas and playing through scenarios in my head, that creates an authenticity value conflict so I really don't feel comfortable with that approach either.

(Edit/Append: 26 Oct 07 - Continuing above comparison to Bluewing's INFP description)

Fi-Introverted Feeling, bends the Extroverted Intuition inwards and therefore creates the effect germane to Introverted Intuition. This leads the INFP, unlike most perceiving types to merely collect information that is fitting with the goals set by Introverted Feeling, instead of collecting all information as their extroverted cousin ENFP would be more likely to.
...
INFJ, as a dominant Introverted Intuiting type, is likely the most Intuitive type. However, one does not need as much Intuitive power in order to derive profound insights. INFJs often have more intuitions than they can consciously process. INFPs, on the other hand, are often able to consciously process-or apply feeling-oriented judgments to nearly all of their Intuitions. Their raw intuitions in themselves may not link them to direct insights as they would with the INFJs, but this certainly happens after they have applied Introverted Judgment to the contemplated idea.
...
INFPs are able to derive more depth than the INFJs due to the profundity of their conscious assessment. (Introverted Feeling). Thus, whilst INFJs examine all of their Intuitions with a less than profound apparatus (Extroverted Feeling), INFPs examine only small portions of their Intuitions, but examine them thoroughly.

A better understanding of how INFJs experience introverted intuition interacting with extroverted feeling would be helpful here, but the overall description for INFP does seem to fit fairly well with a lot of my thought processes. I focus on one idea is great detail trying to imagine all the possibilities that pertain to it making adjustments/tweaks to it as I run it through my head each time and eventually if I become satisfied with the idea, I either try to figure out of I can make it a reality or just keep it in my mind as a possibility waiting for an opportunity. And I have a few ideas that I've never found a satisfactory end to the scenario for that I just keep around looking for more ideas to apply to them later.

INFPs, are able to understand the subjective thought processes (feelings) of others due to their Fi factor of empathy. Extroverted Intuition accommodates in this regard as it allows for them to see the situation clearly from the perspective of another person.
...
If the INTP strives to concoct a mathematical equation that maps out the ebb and flow of the entire world, the INFP does the same to understand the true essence of human nature and all of our motivations. INFPs are often able to discern the smallest aspects of the human element and understand them thoroughly, as well as INTPs are often able to understand the smallest aspects of complex, impersonal theories. Accordingly, INFPs tend to construct a worldview based on their personal values through careful thought as analogously to how INTPs tend to construct their world-view based on dispassionate reasoning. Thus, the INTP may have a view of the impersonal laws of nature in a fashion much akin to how God may see them, the INFP would have the same relationship to the person-centered situations. Attaining a profound understanding of the inner motives of individuals and human nature by and large, as well as avoiding being ‘stuck in a rut’ and hence having the ability to have a view that is as extensive as it is profound. Though we should take note that because of the INTP’s objective approach to ideas, they wish to understand the world no matter what. However, an INFP must first attain harmony with the external environment in order to attempt to understand it. For this reason, the INFP often tends to focus more on the people and atmospheres that they are most closely in tune with.

This sounds about right to me, but it feels more like something I do unconsciously and just make my decisions based on what information my intuition gives me. I notice this often in cases where I am more detached, such as watching two people I know argue with each other and its clear to me that neither of them is understanding where the other is coming from and whats really important to them, but its clear to me that their disagreement is because of different values and motivations yet they are approaching the situation in the "do unto others" mode in presenting their view not realizing that whats right for them would not be whats right for the other and vice/versa. I'm not sure how much of that comes from just having a basic understanding of type theory and how much comes from how I naturally view the world.

This is especially pertinent to the people they tend to deal with, as they invest most of their energy in those they have bonded close with and seek to attain as much understanding of them as possible. They tend to devote little energy to those that they have not reconciled to on as profound of a level. Needless to say that INFPs, due to their person-centered approach to life find it most important to come to a point of emotional reconciliation with others before they could go further.

This also seems to fit my views. I would also add that I seek greater understanding of anyone I see as a potential new friend in addition to existing close friends. I still try to observe and understand acquaintances as well, but don't put as much active effort into it.

This, furthermore outlines the notion that the INFP can only be persuaded through attunement with the Feeling element, as analogously to how an INTP must be persuaded through attunement with the Thinking element. I.E, logically sound argument. The problem that both of these types incur in regards to diminution of Extroverted Intuition, is that they will tend to make decisions before they have managed to collect sufficient information. And as before mentioned, will not be able to collect information with a truly open-mind as their thoughts are influenced almost solely by the Introverted Feeling to which Extroverted Intuition is a servile lackey. Development of Extroverted Intuition liquidates the dilemma of potential one-sidedness as the auxiliary function becomes emancipated from the serfdom of the superior. Intuition, by property of itself, processes ideas. Thus, in such an event, the INFP will not be afflicted with the malady of collecting only information that is desired by the Introverted Judgment. INPs, as aforementioned tend to explore subjects in great depth with intense focus, whilst the Intuition oriented thinkers (hence, the Dostoevsky example), explore more ideas, yet with less of an intense of a focus. Extroverted Intuition is the most extensive function of all. An INP who has mastered Extroverted Intuition will be able to concoct a worldview that is almost as broad as it is deep. Aristotle and Shakespeare the case in point. Ivory tower academics are examples of INTPs who have not accomplished this task, and Kierkegaard to whose work we can refer to as being stuck in a dimly lit room, is an example of an INFP who has not accomplished the task.

This is an interesting way of looking at things, and I'm not really sure how my mind works in thsi regard, but I think I'm more often guilty of looking for too much information to make a decision than not enough, so maybe I have better control of my extroverted intuition than I realize, or maybe I'm just misunderstanding the idea.

Introverted Sensing will give the INFP more grounding in the real world, one that they truly wish to harmonize themselves with, not the one that their minds have concocted to replace. After Extroverted Thinking has developed as an entailment of cultivation of Introverted Sensing, the INFP will likely be able to view the world with a sober eye. At that point they will likely be able to harmonize themselves with the world as it truly is, and at this point they will be devoid of much inner conflict. The inner conflict follows as a consequence of an INFP having disregarded the external realities in favor of bending the picture to the extent where it would be easier to harmonize with, and the INFP eventually discovering that their attempts to harmonize can not be thought of as legitimate for this reason. Because they only think they have harmonized themselves with the world, but only harmonized themselves with their illusory vision of the world. In order to find true harmony, the INFP must obtain a realistic view of the world, and there is no better way to start this than by attempting to cultivate Introverted Sensing. The most down to Earth and common-sensical function one can encounter. Only this, and not many of their sentimental illusions will pave their way for inner peace. The only true goal in life of an Introverted Judger.

Ok, now this is one of those ideas that I find hard to reconcile. I do think I accept the external world as it is and view it with a sober (and very bitter) eye, to me that means I accept and deal with the limitations of reality, but accepting the truth and being at peace with the truth are not the same thing to me. I look at it as the world being full of problems that need to be fixed, and some of them can be, but a lot of them will probably take centuries (if ever) before they can be fixed. - Only those who attempt the absurd can achieve the impossible - (couldnt find the original source, but heard that quote on the Colbert Report).

Inferior Function: Extroverted Thinking
...

This is the section I found virtualy nothing in common with, yet in Quenk's description of inferior Extroverted Thinking I found many things in common. I can understand things logically, I just don't value logic more than my feelings about something. I never say "this feels logical", I may say "yes, I can see your logic, but thats not what matters to me, I'm just not comfortable with that idea/descision (ie, it does not feel right)" or even "yes, thats logical" if there is no feeling reaction to override it. Logic is not something I feel, logic either is or is not, no feeling involved in it for me, and logic is merely a tool to aid in decision making when I feel its appropriate to the situation.

New comments after reading revision of Si and Te
The new descriptions for Si and Te have more in them that I can relate to, but I still maintain that logic is something i see as something that either is or is not and not somethign that is felt. When I look at a wrench, I say this is a wrench, and I may say it feels like the right tool for the job, but I don't say it feels like a wrench, that just seems like an odd way to look at things to me.

the INFP will befool him/herself into believing that reality is either something they need not take interest in, or it is exactly the way they want for it to be.

I see reality for what it is and am often extremely dissatisfied with it but acknowlede that I have very little power to change most of the things bout it that frustrate me and go agaisnt my views of what could/should be. In me this usually leads to bitter cynicism about those topics. In nearly all cases where I see something I strongly disagree with, I try to envisoon what I think could/shoul be and try to figure out if its possible and what it would take to achieve those goals. If I conclude that its just not possible for me to have an impact, then the bitter cynicism takes hold, but i its somethgin i think I can have an impact on, I will usually try to do somethign about it and at least try to articulate my vision to someone that I think may be in a position to make a difference.

[SolitaryWalker]

Originally Posted by TenebrousReflection

These are comments I posted in another thread (a self analysis thread) based on what you had originaly. I'll need to re-read the revised version, but suspect much of these will still hold true. Overall, when I read your parts on Fi and Ne I felt it was one of the closest descriptions I've read to how I think. The part on Si had some similarities, but maybe just because its a lower function and I don't understand it as well. But he part on Te did not feel like me at all.



I sometimes find I've made an emotional attachment to someone without planning to do so, but in those cases, its usually because I saw/felt some special quality in that person that set them apart from everyone else. I don't make an effort to emotionally connect to everyone I meet, its usually something I feel shortly after meeting someone that compels me to seek a more meaningful relationship with them or to consider them "just an acquaintance" if I don't feel any connection to them. Feeling "understood" by someone is one of the things I value, and indirectly if someone can make me feel understood, I think that equates to appreciation as used above. To me, I think its important to appreciate someone for who they are as a unique individual - to appreciate the qualities about them that set them apart from others.

(edit/append: 26 Oct 07)
The concept of wanting to feel appreciated is something I struggle with. I do have such desires, but that often feels selfish to me and so I tell myself and sometimes others that "having done what I thought felt right was the only important part", but I'd say I'm being at least somewhat deceitful/delusional in not accepting my internal desire to feel appreciated, but much like actions taken for others, the meaningfulness of appreciation is proportional to how important the person in question is to me - appreciation by strangers is nice, but comparatively trivial, while feeling appreciated by friends is a lot more meaningful to me. What I'm appreciated for also has weigh in that consideration. Being appreciated for "something anyone could have done" is a lot less meaningful to me than being appreciated for something I put my heart and mind into (I want to be appreciated for the things that make me different, and likewise prefer to value and praise others for their unique qualities so that they know someone appreciates them for who they are, not merely what they do for others.).



I very much relate to those words.

(edit/append: 26 Oct 07)
A lot of ideas that seem clear in my mind are hard to share with others because they would require so many unusual and/or unlikely conditions to exist that even trying to explain what I see could be is problematic because I would also have to go through detailed explanations of how it could be made to be and why I think its a good idea (that also may lead to further misunderstandings). Sometimes I feel strongly in an idea and attempt to enter the world of thinking to try to put structure to the idea to present it in a way that others might understand, but even then, my ideas and intent are often misunderstood. Sometimes explaining them in the form of "let me tell you about this strange dream I had" can work to present an idea without harsh value judgments of others, but since they usually came as a result of active exploration of ideas and playing through scenarios in my head, that creates an authenticity value conflict so I really don't feel comfortable with that approach either.

(Edit/Append: 26 Oct 07 - Continuing above comparison to Bluewing's INFP description)



A better understanding of how INFJs experience introverted intuition interacting with extroverted feeling would be helpful here, but the overall description for INFP does seem to fit fairly well with a lot of my thought processes. I focus on one idea is great detail trying to imagine all the possibilities that pertain to it making adjustments/tweaks to it as I run it through my head each time and eventually if I become satisfied with the idea, I either try to figure out of I can make it a reality or just keep it in my mind as a possibility waiting for an opportunity. And I have a few ideas that I've never found a satisfactory end to the scenario for that I just keep around looking for more ideas to apply to them later.



This sounds about right to me, but it feels more like something I do unconsciously and just make my decisions based on what information my intuition gives me. I notice this often in cases where I am more detached, such as watching two people I know argue with each other and its clear to me that neither of them is understanding where the other is coming from and whats really important to them, but its clear to me that their disagreement is because of different values and motivations yet they are approaching the situation in the "do unto others" mode in presenting their view not realizing that whats right for them would not be whats right for the other and vice/versa. I'm not sure how much of that comes from just having a basic understanding of type theory and how much comes from how I naturally view the world.



This also seems to fit my views. I would also add that I seek greater understanding of anyone I see as a potential new friend in addition to existing close friends. I still try to observe and understand acquaintances as well, but don't put as much active effort into it.



This is an interesting way of looking at things, and I'm not really sure how my mind works in thsi regard, but I think I'm more often guilty of looking for too much information to make a decision than not enough, so maybe I have better control of my extroverted intuition than I realize, or maybe I'm just misunderstanding the idea.



Ok, now this is one of those ideas that I find hard to reconcile. I do think I accept the external world as it is and view it with a sober (and very bitter) eye, to me that means I accept and deal with the limitations of reality, but accepting the truth and being at peace with the truth are not the same thing to me. I look at it as the world being full of problems that need to be fixed, and some of them can be, but a lot of them will probably take centuries (if ever) before they can be fixed. - Only those who attempt the absurd can achieve the impossible - (couldnt find the original source, but heard that quote on the Colbert Report).



This is the section I found virtualy nothing in common with, yet in Quenk's description of inferior Extroverted Thinking I found many things in common. I can understand things logically, I just don't value logic more than my feelings about something. I never say "this feels logical", I may say "yes, I can see your logic, but thats not what matters to me, I'm just not comfortable with that idea/descision (ie, it does not feel right)" or even "yes, thats logical" if there is no feeling reaction to override it. Logic is not something I feel, logic either is or is not, no feeling involved in it for me, and logic is merely a tool to aid in decision making when I feel its appropriate to the situation.

New comments after reading revision of Si and Te
The new descriptions for Si and Te have more in them that I can relate to, but I still maintain that logic is something i see as something that either is or is not and not somethign that is felt. When I look at a wrench, I say this is a wrench, and I may say it feels like the right tool for the job, but I don't say it feels like a wrench, that just seems like an odd way to look at things to me.


I see reality for what it is and am often extremely dissatisfied with it but acknowlede that I have very little power to change most of the things bout it that frustrate me and go agaisnt my views of what could/should be. In me this usually leads to bitter cynicism about those topics. In nearly all cases where I see something I strongly disagree with, I try to envisoon what I think could/shoul be and try to figure out if its possible and what it would take to achieve those goals. If I conclude that its just not possible for me to have an impact, then the bitter cynicism takes hold, but i its somethgin i think I can have an impact on, I will usually try to do somethign about it and at least try to articulate my vision to someone that I think may be in a position to make a difference.

Thanks for the feedback. It seems like you have managed to gain proficiency with the Extroverted Thinking faculty if you do not identify with the logically maladjusted INFP persona. Our inferior function means that our mind unconscious processes it the least and devotes the least amount of energy. This does render acquiring skill with such a function difficult, though far from impossible.

INFPs who are not competent with Te will strive to avoid it as much as possible. INFPs who do tend to see it as a necessary evil, as they still tend to enjoy it little--yet, they are able to recognize situations that require logical analysis and apply the due procedure.

If you have a good handle on your Te, it is highly likely that you are even more proficient with your Si.

[SolitaryWalker]

Any further takes?

I am looking for constructive criticism. Non-critical feedback is fine too, however.

[GZA]

Sorry that I don't have much to say. All I can really say is that that is really excellent!

[heart]

Originally Posted by BlueWing

....

Thus, despite the Intuitions lacking depth (Extroverted Intuition, and not Introverted, auxiliary and not primary), INFPs are able to derive more depth than the INFJs due to the profundity of their conscious assessment. (Introverted Feeling).

Thus, whilst INFJs examine all of their Intuitions with a less than profound apparatus (Extroverted Feeling), INFPs examine only small portions of their Intuitions, but examine them thoroughly. So hence, we notice that Dostoevksy, an INFJ, had a variety of insights on a myriad of topics. Yet, as a critic of his work, one can argue that they were not as profound as the insights of Shakespeare and Kierkegaard, both of whom were INFPs. As Walter Kaufman once noted, it seems like moving from Kierkegaard to Dostoevsky is much like being blown out of a tiny room on a sailboat into a seemingly boundless ocean. This is a striking picture of the discrepancy between a Judging function and an Intuitive, and INPs who have made a conscious effort to cultivate their auxiliary Extroverted Intuition could likely attest to having experiences that they’d depict as such. It almost seems like Dostoevsky’s work was concocted to the strict end of ridiculing Kierkegaard’s.

Such a remark of course seems to miss the notion that the works of Kierkegaard and Shakespeare emphasized the few explored topics in great depth. Whilst Dostoevsky’s work, asides from several profound insights, seemed to have lacked focus and profundity by comparison. As we notice that Kierkegaard was intensely focused on the phenomenon of becoming and living a Christian, yet Dostoevsky did not have one clear-cut theme to underlie all of his thought experiments, they seemed to be scattered through a myriad of subjects. It appeared to be the case that whilst Kierkegaard had a clearly defined internal focus, Dostoevsky was aimlessly exploring ideas, only hoping to be able to show that they at least tangentially relate to one another.



INFPs tend to be highly proficient decision-makers in the realm of the human element. This does not merely address the province of interpersonal relationships, but also the field of arts and literature. Literature especially tends to be an area where INFPs tend to excel. In this respect it is analogous to science and philosophy for INTPs, as the most influential literary artists and poets were INFPs.

Homer, Shakespeare, Virgil, and Kierkegaard are cases in point. The companionship of Extroverted Intuition with Introverted Feeling makes the INFP gravitate towards experiences that require improvisation. We know that Extroverted Perceiving functions tend to be adept at image manipulation. For this reason, NPs, especially ENPs tend to be the most competent persona builders. An example of this would be Soren Kierkegaard's active use of pseudonyms in expression of his ideas. Though unlike an ENP, he maintained a clear focus on the inner being of his characters and the purpose he pursued in his writings. It often seemed like the essence that underlied such characters was the same, though utilized differently for the sake of different purpose.

Whilst an ENP may have tried to be a different person altogether, had they carried out a task germane to Kierkegaard's, yet Kierkegaard was able to see the distinction between persona and essence of the individual and used personas as means to the end of expressing the essence of one individual that he had in mind. INFPs, are able to understand the subjective thought processes (feelings) of others due to their Fi factor of empathy. Extroverted Intuition accommodates in this regard as it allows for them to see the situation clearly from the perspective of another person.

INFJ and INFP to my view appear very different, although it seems common to present them as very close in presentation.

[anii]

This reminds me of some packing advice I once heard: lay everything you think you'll need for your trip on the bed. And then take away half of it.

I really want to read your post, but it's too long. I'm being serious. Cut it in half then I'll read it.

Brevity is the soul of wit.