[INFP] Hello, I am an INFP

[Alternative Solution]

Alright, so I've been thinking about all this type stuff, and I'm feeling very lost. I want to understand myself, and other people, but it is difficult to get everything on target. I have plenty of scattered ideas about who I am and what my purpose is, but I feel like there's nothing I know for sure.

I'm probably not making any sense. I'm not even sure exactly what I want. Basically, I want to better understand myself, and maybe asking questions here is a good way to do it.

Now, I am pretty sure I am an INFP, though I could be an INTP. Actually, as far as I know, I could be any type. The more I learn about this stuff, the more confusing it is.

So here's what I'll do-- I'll just go through each letter (I-N-F-P) and ask questions about them. Maybe we'll find that I am not the type I thought I was.

---

So we'll start with Introvert. I've always considered myself an introvert. Most people would say I'm quiet, and I'm definitely not a social person. I'm pretty certain that I am an introvert (big time), but I'm a little confused as to what it is to be an introvert because I remember seeing on this forum that somebody said being an introvert means you process thoughts internally. According to that person, this is all that the 'I' means. This seems strange to me because I thought most people process thoughts internally. I mean, they're thoughts. Thoughts are usually an internal thing.

Of course, sometimes people do find it helpful to talk things out with another person. Even I find that helpful sometimes.

So if I did that often, would that mean I'm an extrovert even if I'm an unsocial loner?

Perhaps you see where my confusion is coming from. If you need me to elaborate, let me know.

---

Alright, so then there's iNtuition. Again, I'm pretty sure that this fits me quite well. Compared to most people, I believe I have an abstract way of thinking, and I am interested in abstract things like psychology and philosophy. However, I do sometimes do things that involve the senses. Pretty much ever day I will either listen to music or watch TV. I don't believe either of these things (especially the latter) serve only to stimulate the senses, but they do more so than other things, such as reading a book on philosophy.

So does my TV watching and music listening mean that I might be a sensor?

----

Like I said, I am pretty sure about the INP, but I think I'm pretty in between as far as F vs T. The problem here is that it's hard to know what is a feeling and what is a thought. Feelings are usually considered more irrational, but thoughts can be also be irrational. Sometimes I have to wonder if what I'm feeling is an actual emotion, or if what I'm thinking is actually a feeling.

And sometimes it seems like other people are too emotional, which suggests that I may be more of a thinker.

Either way, I believe I'm in pretty between here, so I'm not as concerned about it.

---

One of the most confusing ones for me is the J vs P. I believe I am an INFP, but so many descriptions I've read seem to be saying that P types are more carefree, while J types are more rigid and uptight.

I don't know that I would describe myself as rigid and uptight, but I am certainly not carefree. I always seem to be tormenting myself about something.

For me, I don't necessarily feel more comfortable keeping my options open. I am incredibly indecisive, but I don't really want to be. It isn't that I can't make a decision. It's just that I can never be sure of the decisions I make. Once I do something, I look back and wonder if I made the right decision.

Take this whole journey to decide my type. I would like to come to some final decision about what it is, but even when I think I know what it is, I continue searching because I don't know for certain.

So is this constant search to know the truth more characteristic of a P type of a J type?

---

Another thing I've noticed about myself is that when I feel very unsure of myself, I will sometimes look externally for the answers. That's pretty much what I'm doing right now by asking a forum for help.

What does this mean? Is this an extrovert trait?

The problem is that if what I find does not line up with what I actually believe, I will STILL continue searching until I find some sort of synthesis.

For instance, I believe that I am an INFP, but am not sure. If people were to tell me that I am actually an ISFP (or anything other that INFP/INTP), I would not just take that as truth and disregard my original belief that I am an INFP. Instead, I would continue searching until I know the truth internally-- until I actually believe for myself. Still, I do reach out externally for guidance. Again, that is basically what I am doing right now.

Ahh! See how we're going on all kinds or crazy circles?!

I think I'm done rambling. I apologize for the incoherency of this post. Hopefully you get the gist of it.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to listen to some Tool and read a book on philosophy.

Thanks for reading.

~ Alternative Solution

 

[Amethyst]

Like I said, I am pretty sure about the INP, but I think I'm pretty in between as far as F vs T. The problem here is that it's hard to know what is a feeling and what is a thought. Feelings are usually considered more irrational, but thoughts can be also be irrational. Sometimes I have to wonder if what I'm feeling is an actual emotion, or if what I'm thinking is actually a feeling.

And sometimes it seems like other people are too emotional, which suggests that I may be more of a thinker.

Either way, I believe I'm in pretty between here, so I'm not as concerned about it.

Sounds like a thinking type to me, although not too sure. Mind giving more examples on what makes you think otherwise?

One of the most confusing ones for me is the J vs P. I believe I am an INFP, but so many descriptions I've read seem to be saying that P types are more carefree, while J types are more rigid and uptight.

I don't know that I would describe myself as rigid and uptight, but I am certainly not carefree. I always seem to be tormenting myself about something.

For me, I don't necessarily feel more comfortable keeping my options open. I am incredibly indecisive, but I don't really want to be. It isn't that I can't make a decision. It's just that I can never be sure of the decisions I make. Once I do something, I look back and wonder if I made the right decision.

Take this whole journey to decide my type. I would like to come to some final decision about what it is, but even when I think I know what it is, I continue searching because I don't know for certain.

So is this constant search to know the truth more characteristic of a P type of a J type?

You sound like a P...INTP, perhaps?

 

[JocktheMotie]

Yes, usually a P type cannot come to a comfortable conclusion unless they "see it for themselves." You talking about how you like to see yourself believe something internally before it can be accepted indicates that you're most likely a P.

In terms of Thinking vs. Feeling, yeah sometimes it can get a bit murky. Ultimately, you're going to evaluate things and construct your worldview based on rather impersonal criteria if you're a Thinker, but if you're a Feeler that criteria will be more personal and include things like personal values, ethics, etc.

 

[OrangeAppled]

It will help you to know the cognitive functions behind the 4 letter dichotomies, especially the different between Ti & Fi (since you seem INxP).
Also, know that introverted feeling (Fi) is considered a rational cognitive function, and is not simply emotion.

These descriptions really helped me:

The introvert of feeling-type finds support and guidance by shaping his own feeling-attitudes in accordance with an inner ideal. Here the activities of feeling are hidden, and from the outside there is, as a rule, little to tell us that we are dealing with a person of feeling-type. Feeling aims more especially at an inner harmony, trying to discover what under various circumstances should be the right relationships between people if life is to be beautiful and well balanced. Reality, however, reveals in most cases that this ideal is not attained, and introverted feeling is particularly vulnerable in regard to such experiences. This vulnerability — which may become as intense at that of the sensitive plant — is one of the most characteristic peculiarities of this type.

Just as with the introvert of thinking-type, we find here, too, a marked contrast between inner security on the one hand, and uncertainty in external behavior on the other. But whereas with the introverted thinker this opposition gives rise to thought concerning the problems of life, with the individual of feeling-type it leads to deep feeling, and to a strange mixture of inner tenderness and passionate conviction. These people are absolutely certain as to the soundness of their ideals, but this is accompanied by a helpless feeling that it will never be possible to realize them in this world. They do not, however, reject the world, for feeling means the making of ties and is directed towards social contacts. In spite of ever-repeated collisions with the world and with other people, they can never give up their wish to love them both.

They conceal their sensitiveness behind a mask, which may be childish or simple, or again conventional, remote, or it may be friendly. But behind this mask the search goes on for someone who will understand, and for a community which will embody their ideals. However disappointed they are, they still in their innermost being believe implicitly in what their feelings tell them. Even if they are not able to express it clearly in words, they are inwardly quite certain as to what accords with them and what does not. Outwardly, their feelings are not very obvious, for when these are affected, these people tend to withdraw into themselves, and if they do express anything, it will only be much later, after they have had time to work it all over within themselves.

In ordinary life their mask conceals what they really are. But there is, nevertheless, something very individual about them, sometimes remarkably so, which will come to expression particularly in certain moments, in relation to certain people. This happens more especially in two situations: when they achieve real contact with another person; and when, in a state of high emotional excitement, they stand up for a threatened ideal.

In the first case, a very profound relationship of mutual understanding may suddenly come into being, all the wealth of their minds being unlocked to the confidant; sometimes this contact will later be broken off just as suddenly and unexpectedly, in defense of their own vulnerability. And where his feelings are aroused, the person who appeared to be so impersonal, remote and somewhat insignificant may suddenly burst out with a personal point of view, expressed with such conviction and such force of feeling that it compels respect.

Such people may also resist with extreme obstinacy anything that does not accord with their sentiments. This resistance may be justified, in so far as it is based on a motive of fine feeling; but the means used to give it emphatic expression is ill-suited to the external world, and in this respect incorrect. The consequence is that they are nearly always misunderstood, and they tend more or less to resign themselves to this situation. This contrast between a clear intention, directed towards harmony, and uncertain modes of expression, giving rise to misunderstandings, is found again and again in the lives of these people.

In childhood they are gentle and dreamy, and somewhat reserved, but with occasional violent outbursts of emotion. In familiar surroundings they can be unrestrainedly gay; but more often they are likely to exhibit violent resentment if circumstances do not correspond to their feelings, and it then seems to them that harshness and indifference prevail in the world. As a result, they seem to show signs of disappointment at a very early age, and a certain distrust of life. Owing to their inability to express themselves clearly, and to bring their ideals to reality, there may arise a feeling of impotence and inferiority. They are apt to seek the fault in themselves, and may suffer much from a sense of guilt on this account. Here, also, feelings have a tendency to extend their influence, with the result that their whole being may be plunged into depths of unhappiness; but at other times a genuine emotional contact with someone will once more fill them with a quiet and enormous delight. Now they will look at the world again with new eyes, and a feeling that is almost religious will embrace both nature and man.

Later, also, the happiness of these people will depend on the emotional attachments which they are able to make, though they find it less necessary than do extraverts of this type to be in immediate touch with other people. The expression of other people's feelings in poetry and music, and the realization, through the reading of stories and biographies, of the depths of their spiritual experience, may have the effect on these people of making them feel more at home in the world. In this way, there develops in them a life of the spirit, which is carefully concealed from strangers, and which may be expressed, for instance, in a secret piety, or in poetical forms, which are revealed only with great unwillingness.

This feeling-type is particularly found among women. Whereas the woman of extraverted feeling-type has it in her to create an atmosphere of harmony around herself, in the introverted woman of this type all the riches of her mind will be developed into a love which is inwardly directed towards the highest ideals of harmony. Without saying or doing much, such a woman will emanate a feeling of rest and security. It is difficult to describe an influence of this kind, expressed as it is in such indefinite forms. But on the immediate environment it may be very effective. A mother of this type may have an even greater influence on her children than the devoted and radiant mother of extraverted feeling-type. These women are often able to implant and foster something of their own ideals in their children, exercising in this way a quiet force which helps to keep a respect for moral authority alive in the world.

All the modes of expression for the deeper impulses of the spirit in religion and art find great support in such people. Whether they are artists or scientists, they are still primarily attracted by problems of the emotional life. They express themselves in such occupations with great care and precision. Here again the persistence and devotion of the individual of feeling-type become evident. When they do give form to their inner feeling — in a poem, for example — they will carefully weigh every expression; at the same time, they will often neglect generally accepted social forms, which for them have no significance; or they will employ conventional and simple forms as a mask, from behind which a more genuine and finer feeling

Although in these persons the will, under the direction of strong moral conviction, represents an important factor in the psyche, it is less evident than in the other rational types, owing to the fact that the controlling activity is directed more inwards, and will occasionally come quite unexpectedly to light. feeling is expressed more indirectly. It is most evident in the strong sense of duty characteristic of these people, and in their faithful discharge of their duties. Their activity frequently suffers as a result of moods of discouragement. When this is so, they lose themselves in pessimistic feelings, giving up their efforts to make themselves better understood, or to alter things in their environment. After a time they recover from such moods, since they tend, as a rule, to regard them as a fault in themselves.

This contact with their own moral judgment represents an essential factor in the lives of feeling-introverts. They are not bound by the judgments of others — as is the feeling-extravert — for the standard by which they judge their own behavior is an inner moral law, intuitively felt to be binding. While the extravert of feeling-type will repress, for the sake of harmony, things both in himself and in the external world which do not accord with his ideal, the feeling-introvert will remain more aware of such conflicts. In him, however, the limiting and excluding activity of the demand for harmony may be detrimental in a different way, everything not consonant with that harmony being regarded from a negative point of view, as opposed to what is ideal and good. It is impossible for these people to see the world or themselves objectively, and their continual comparison of things with ideal requirements gives them an exaggeratedly critical point of view. Since this also applies to their own lives, there is an undermining of their own self-confidence, as well as of their confidence in the world, which may seriously affect their happiness in life. It is necessary for these people to recognize that things which do not exactly accord with their ideals may yet have a value which may be developed.

In these cases, also, the instinctual life is to a very large extent subordinated to the regulating force of feeling. Since the relationship between moral conviction and instinctual impulse is here worked out more within the mind, there is less danger of pretence for the sake of the external world than with extraverts. Instinctual feelings are subordinated to the ideal. At the same time, there may be a too forcible suppression of the instinctual life, in which case it will lead not so much to a split in the emotional life as to a certain joylessness, and to the feeling that life is passing without bringing any true fulfilment. There is too often a need to associate all pleasures and joys with some moral value, and to condemn them if this higher satisfaction is not obviously found in them.

Intuition is also subjected to the authority of introverted feeling. Intuitions here bear more on the inner aspect of feeling than on its expression in other people. They may give form to the laws of feeling, but in images rather than in concepts. Where intuition is developed, it is of great assistance in finding expression for introverted feeling, both in practical life and in art. Intuition may also provide a link with religious life, which, in this case, will be specially developed in its feeling-aspect: inner moral unity with God and with his fellow-man has greater significance for the man of feeling-type than ecstatic experiences or philosophical problems. The dominance of feeling is revealed in the constant search for a harmonious relation and in the weight given to views on morality, love and justice.

Thought is, as a rule, not very essential in the lives of these people. They accept the thought-forms as taught to them, and make conscientious use of them; but this is not vital to them, as the judgment of feeling is. In their thought-processes, they argue from preconceived attitudes of feeling, and frequently do not embark on any logical thinking at all, leaving the realm of logic to others to deal with.

Dr. J. H. van der Hoop, Lecturer in Psychiatry, Amsterdam, Conscious Orientation

The introvert of thinking-type also takes his systematized experience as his guide; but here the emphasis falls on the inner aspect, thus on the need for objective order and on laws and principles, according to which experience is generally systematized. Abstraction of that part of conscious experience which is revealed as constant and subject to general rules is regarded by the introverted thinker as something of vital significance. He tries to arrange the opinions which he takes over from others in a system of his own. In doing so, he will take up a more critical attitude in regard to the thought-material which he is taught than do extraverted thinkers, and his aim is to follow the guidance of his own opinions and convictions. In consequence, we find a most careful working-over of his own experience, but a tendency to leave out of his reckoning facts and points of view which are not known to him. While the strength of the extraverted thinker lies in his easy application of systematized knowledge, the introverted thinker is particularly good at comparing systems and principles. He feels at home among abstractions, and there are many fine shades of meaning in the world of his ideas. Also, as he is more skilled in introspection, he is better able to examine mental facts than is the extraverted psychologist.

Hence we see here a living contact with ideas, and subtle reflection and consideration, side by side with difficulty in expressing and applying what has been thought out, and a certain aloofness from the world of facts in general. There is thus in these people a contrast between their consciousness of the objectivity of their judgment, and their difficulty, of which they are equally conscious, in defending this judgment and securing its recognition by others. This produces, even in children of the type, a peculiar attitude. They are often reserved, somewhat timid and uncertain, and seem not to feel at home in the world. On the other hand, they will, at the same time, manifest an obstinate, somewhat pedantic decisiveness. They have not the cool logicality of the thinking extravert, but take up a more fanatical stand, which may easily degenerate into dogmatism and extreme pedantry. In general, both children and adults of this type are, as a result of their introversion, difficult to convince that they are mistaken. Their inner, logical reasoning makes them feel that they are right, and they may take up an attitude to the external world also, which might be expressed as follows: "That is my opinion, even if I can't prove it; whether you agree or not, it will not change it to the slightest degree."

At an early age they have learned that the fact that they inwardly regard something as true does not in the least mean that others will accept it. As a result, their attitude is, in general, more skeptical in regard to the validity of any truth than is that of a thinking extravert, and they are more inclined to allow for the existence of differing views, even when these do not entirely tally with theirs or with those of prevailing authorities. At the same time, however, this gives rise to a feeling of aloofness in regard to any generally recognized system of truth, for this often seems to them something quite unattainable. On the other hand, they never cease to be surprised that what seems so obvious to them should not be equally clear to others. Occasionally such people will go to great pains to express themselves as objectively and clearly as possible, but sometimes they give up the attempt and simply present their views in the form in which they arose. In the difficult language of some philosophers we find the effect of both influences sometimes in strange combination. As a result of this somewhat skeptical and resigned attitude in regard to form, the judgments of introverted thinkers have often about them something cautious, cold or stiff-necked. It is as if they already reckoned on difficulty in convincing others. Jung says of this type: "Even if he goes as far as giving his thoughts to the world, he does not deal with them as a careful mother would with her children, but he exposes them as foundlings, and at the most he will be annoyed if they fail to make their way."

This inner conflict between certainty as regards conviction, and uncertainty as to how to maintain and apply this conviction in the world, intensifies thought concerning personal conflicts and problems. Hence many philosophically disposed persons belong to this type. They aim at having, at least inwardly, a foundation of pure ideals and definite principles for the ordering of their lives. Such people make, as it were, endless preparations for life; they constantly renew their efforts to perfect their equipment, so as to be equal to the fight for existence. This they do, not only in the big problems of life, but also in ordinary practical matters. They like to have a systematic view of the whole situation before entering on any new ground. In order to be able to adapt themselves, they need to have order in their life and work, and they love making programs. When traveling, they eagerly study maps and guide-books, or they may even try to master the language of a foreign country, before ever they go there. Such people like to be able to foresee all the possible difficulties which may arise in their business or work, so as to be able to take precautions against them in good time. Occasionally this leads to the most elaborate reckoning with every important practical detail. Ford seems to me to be a good example of the potentialities in practical adaptation characteristic of the type, with his elaborate preparations down to the smallest detail coupled with a theoretical justification of all his ideas. In a mind less clear and with less insight into what is essential, this preparation may, however, lead to much fussiness and complexity, and in such cases much energy and attention is wasted in warding off imaginary dangers.

These thinking people are also found more especially among the male sex. Great philosophers, such as Kant, belong to them, and also many mathematicians and psychologists. Or they may be found in all kinds of practical and applied sciences, and taking leading roles as careful organizers, legislators or contractors. On occasion, however, they are unable to get over certain unpractical traits, and will then cause difficulties with their fanatical exactitude in details, or by everlastingly insisting on their pet principles in any discussion or practical undertaking. This makes co-operation with them in any large combine somewhat difficult. Socially, also, they are somewhat surly. Their attitude to others is more or less studied, seldom absolutely spontaneous. Here again, their systematic thinking stands between them and the world. Their words are usually carefully chosen and weighed, and thus are a kind of mask. People of this type are usually aware of this; but they see no possibility of adopting any different attitude. One usually learns to know them better in a smaller circle, where they will be more spontaneous, and even cordial or original; but even so, with a tendency to be awkward as a result of over-sensitiveness or irascibility. It is more easy to see them as they really are in some sphere in which they have begun to master the technique.

As among the extraverted thinkers, here, also, we may find keen concentration of will and constant activity. Since the introvert finds the motives for his aspirations more within himself, he is less dependent on external stimuli. This is counter-balanced, however, by greater susceptibility to inner difficulties, which, accordingly, may damage his working capacity. And while his independence of circumstances gives him great perseverance, even where initially no success is to be looked for, it may also happen that he will squander his best powers on something impossible from the practical point of view, without realizing this in time.

If the instinctive life manages to gain some influence, it will be conducted along definite paths by a controlling reason. As a rule, introverted thought finds support in the perceptual aspect of instinctive experience, since this represents its objective aspect. This type of thinker is, however, in philosophy, natural science and psychology, more inclined than the extravert to speculate on the nature of perception and the object. In addition, he is, as an introvert, more in touch with the subjective side of instinctual life. He is more conscious of the inner struggle between instinctual drives, and here also he will seek to create order with his reason, in which case it will depend on his principles as to how he will do this. The theorizing idealist, full of his ideal of the purity of love, and despising as filthy anything remotely associated with sex, will, in the inflexibility of his system, be not far removed from those who defend licence on the principle that nature must not be denied. Both attitudes are in point of fact calculated to evade the practical complications of the problem, and to keep it, so to speak, at a distance. The introverted thinker will sometimes have a great deal to say on such subjects; but he is not, for all that, better, or more skilled, in practice.

Intuition may also influence people of this type to a greater or less degree, giving them something original, which is, however, subdued, since it can only be permitted to play any part in their life after it has been carefully tested. Intuition also reveals to them the schemata and principles according to which thought may classify experience. But the immediate results of personal vision, both in regard to the internal and the external world, tend rather to be mistrusted, unless it is obvious that they will fit into the system. These results may, however, give rise to alterations and extensions in the system. Nevertheless, fine inspirations frequently remain unfruitful, owing to the ponderous way in which they are dealt with.

Feeling, again, gives rise to the chief difficulties in people of this type. Anything which conforms to their principles and views is allowed; but even this cannot easily find expression, owing to deficient familiarity with current modes of expression. As a result, people of this type will often display a strict conventionality, or else a childish disregard of these modes. Inwardly, their feelings, moods and impulses cause them much more unpleasantness than they do to the extraverted thinker, the latter being less aware of them. An introverted thinker, when in love, feels awkward, uncertain and ridiculous. He will try and talk himself out of his feelings, or else make endless preparations to give expression to them, which is, naturally, scarcely conducive to spontaneity.

Dr. J. H. van der Hoop, Lecturer in Psychiatry, Amsterdam, Conscious Orientation

 

[Alternative Solution]

It will help you to know the cognitive functions behind the 4 letter dichotomies, especially the different between Ti & Fi (since you seem INxP).

Also, know that introverted feeling (Fi) is considered a rational cognitive function, and is not simply emotion.

These descriptions really helped me:

Thanks for the info! I haven't read the entire thing yet, but so far it's been very informative. Do you know if there are descriptions of the other cognitive functions that go along with these? or did this person just write about Ti and Fi?

 

[OrangeAppled]

Thanks for the info! I haven't read the entire thing yet, but so far it's been very informative. Do you know if there are descriptions of the other cognitive functions that go along with these? or did this person just write about Ti and Fi?

Yes, there are descriptions for the other functions, but I do not have them on hand to copy/paste.

You can read them here though:
Conscious Orientation: A Study of ... - Google Books

You might also look into the original descriptions on functions/types by Carl Jung.
This translation is not the best/clearest, but it is free & online:
Classics in the History of Psychology -- Jung (1921/1923) Chapter 10