• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

[MBTI General] Difference Between INFPs and ISFPs

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
My ISFP BFF and I are sort of similar. He is far more optimistic than me, and far more present in his immediate environment than I am. He loves dancing, and all that stuff, and is a much more tactile person than me. He teases me about my conspiracy theories, and ridiculous theories, and how at parties I always end up where the brainy people are, shooting off one of my mad cap theories.
He's much more down to earth, but we are both really silly. God, he makes me laugh. We are both really "arty" though. He's more tolerant and mellow than I am, but when he cracks he really goes to town, where as I just fizz and fume, then it's over. He's kinda naive some times about people (that's an age thing I think), and some times gets take advantage of, because he's so mellow and easy going. It annoys me, that people mistake him for an easy target. He's a bit more lovable than me too. Every one loves him. He can some times be less driven than I am (and whine more), then he'll decide to do some thing and it's like some one lit a fire up his ass.

I can see the contrasts made here between my ISFP step-dad and some ISFP friends I have with myself.

I have to say that ISFPs appear much more docile, but can have grotesquely ugly tempers. And man, they can get on a moral high horse also. I know a few who have that "self-denying" attitude sometimes mentioned for Fi-doms - it's like the reverse of the stereotypical SP hedonism. They've become so aware of that tendency in themselves that they go overboard in keeping it in check.

While I am quiet and sometimes seen as "sweet" or just timid, I am more often accused of being aloof than the ISFPs I know. Maybe it's because I am less "present" in the moment, so the ISFPs are literally less detached. I also get accused of being argumentative because I'll take an analytical approach - I want to explore a perspective and the other person sees it as slightly antagonistic. It's not on the NTP level, but there's still that Ne occasional tendency to open up cans of worms inadvertently because you want to explore an issue from many angles. I've seen ISFPs become antagonistic, but it's more a facet of anger than a discussion style taken the wrong way.

I find ISFPs more realistic in an almost yielding to reality sort of way; but I'm not sure that is truly optimistic either. They either have accepted reality and are making the best of it, or they are painfully aware of how far removed it is from their Fi ideals and they are quite depressed or even angry about it. INFPs have cynical moments and moods, but the idealistic aspect is more apparent. It's not optimism either - just a refusal to give up hope for the future; the status quo is not so easily accepted. As a consequence, the ISFP may seem more content with the present, as they focus on working with what exists, and the INFP may be more discontent with the present, focusing on creating ways to change what exists.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
I'm not sure which side of the fence I'd sit on there, I definitely wouldn't be as dismissive as that guy sounds, I like delving into why people do things and complex things are interesting.

I'd side close to the NF, but not necessarily the complexity. I share some part of the underlying philosophy/value system, but I don't care to convince some other guy on my stance. Some subjects are cool to get into, especially if they're untapped, but usually those discussions go nowhere. That's why I don't talk about politics much either. Funnily, I dated girls who turned out to be strippers (when I didn't know), but I still hate strip bars. I would actually talk to them, not some guy, and if it was in my power, I'd hook them up in safer jobs (then again, some strip clubs are safer than others.. then I might have to convince them on some general disapproval of their job. I wouldn't make some eloquent philosophical argument though). It could be a mix of concrete and ideal with me. :thinking:

I still could be ISFP myself. My problem is not really lining up in neat Keirsey-like ways. I have too much N apparently for some ISFPs and too much F that veers on the "idealist" side.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
I don't think the point of the analogy was that divisive or intended to imply NFPs wouldn't work in the sex industry. I think the point was that S's usually concern themselves with concrete things while N's concern themselves with complexities that aren't physical while an S wouldn't bother. => That an S would not concern themselves with the psychological ramification (positive or negative: all of it) of sex work while an N would on instinct. You can't tell me that you, even though you are involved in sex work, only take it as face value. We all know the difference between S and N and that was a perfect analogy. If it isn't "real" the S doesn't care.

I get sore at S's for not even considering these kinds of complexities ("who cares? the girl is naked and I like it" kind of shallowness they display when confronted with complexities) and I got exactly what he was talking about. Again, I don't think the analogy was intended to be divisive or negative towards sex work.

It's also kind of untrue. Sure, there are extreme Ss who are like that, but my ESFJ ex hates strip clubs and he stands on principle about it, which is kind of bizarre considering his relationship with me. I also know an ISFJ who has moral opinions about this sort of thing (and no, it's not because he was raised with religion and is brainwashed, because he's actually an atheist.)

You REALLY think Ss never question things? REALLY? Have you ever had a conversation with a really intelligent ISTP like Gish? I don't think AyoitsStepho - an ISFP - is that "shallow" either.

There are shallow stupid people in the world. To assume all Ss are like that is doing them a complete disservice.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I'd side close to the NF, but not necessarily the complexity. I share some part of the underlying philosophy/value system, but I don't care to convince some other guy on my stance. Some subjects are cool to get into, especially if they're untapped, but usually those discussions go nowhere. That's why I don't talk about politics much either. Funnily, I dated girls who turned out to be strippers (when I didn't know), but I still hate strip bars. I would actually talk to them, not some guy, and if it was in my power, I'd hook them up in safer jobs (then again, some strip clubs are safer than others.. then I might have to convince them on some general disapproval of their job. I wouldn't make some eloquent philosophical argument though). It could be a mix of concrete and ideal with me.

I still could be ISFP myself. My problem is not really lining up in neat Keirsey-like ways. I have too much N apparently for some ISFPs and too much F that veers on the "idealist" side.

I still could be ISFP myself. My problem is not really lining up in neat Keirsey-like ways. I have too much N apparently for some ISFPs and too much F that veers on the "idealist" side.

This is actually quite Fi - you won't find me discussing politics or religion 'round these parts much either, or much in person, unless it's with someone I trust a LOT. You'll see both IxFPs reluctant to push their beliefs onto others, or feel the need to guard them so closely that they are extremely selective about who they share them with, key word being "share". Instead of talking, I think we tend to walk the walk. As mentioned above, this can be truer of ISFPs even. INFPs may inadvertently seem argumentative when they feel they are just exchanging ideas (no emphasis on right vs. wrong necessarily), but the more deeply held, the less apt they may be to discuss them.

Fi in itself is idealistic - Gifts Differing says it of both IxFPs, and actually refers to all the F types as having strong ideals (which they do). Jung's description of Fi applies to ISFPs also. It's Se that adds that concrete aspect to ISFPs, and Ne which amps up the idealistic aspect of INFPs.

And Keirsey sucks - if I went by Keirsey, to be an INFP I'd have to be some Mother Theresa type who is entirely selfless and almost spineless (which I am not - for better or worse), and my artistic inclinations would indicate I am an SP (which I am not).
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
This is actually quite Fi - you won't find me discussing politics or religion 'round these parts much either, or much in person, unless it's with someone I trust a LOT. You'll see both IxFPs reluctant to push their beliefs onto others, or feel the need to guard them so closely that they are extremely selective about who they share them with, key word being "share". Instead of talking, I think we tend to walk the walk. As mentioned above, this can be truer of ISFPs even. INFPs may inadvertently seem argumentative when they feel they are just exchanging ideas (no emphasis on right vs. wrong necessarily), but the more deeply held, the less apt they may be to discuss them.

Fi in itself is idealistic - Gifts Differing says it of both IxFPs, and actually refers to all the F types as having strong ideals (which they do). Jung's description of Fi applies to ISFPs also. It's Se that adds that concrete aspect to ISFPs, and Ne which amps up the idealistic aspect of INFPs.

And Keirsey sucks - if I went by Keirsey, to be an INFP I'd have to be some Mother Theresa type who is entirely selfless and almost spineless (which I am not - for better or worse), and my artistic inclinations would indicate I am an SP (which I am not).

I know Fi is idealistic and concerned with issues of good and evil, just like others. I just couldn't convince some of the more popular ISFPs here of it (not to mention some NFs who are Keirsey-ists as well, who said I wasn't "hedonistic" enough for SP), and I ended up getting retyped. It's kind of that simple. It puts me in type limbo though if there's this much disagreement.

Needless to say, the OP here (Noon) is a refreshing face that I've gotten to speak to a bit. An ISFP with Ni.

As for Fi, there's a specific section in Lenore Thomson's book that explicitly states this about ISFPs, and points out how Keirsey equated them too much with ESFPs, just to keep his temperment theory in tact. I can't seem to convince anyone of it though:

Indeed, the behavior distinctions between ISFPs and INFPs have led David Keirsey and Marilyn Bates, in Please Understand Me, to dispute the idea that ISFPs are Introverted Feelers at all. As mentioned in chapter 19, Keirsey and Bates believe that ISPs should be classified together with ESPs as "SP" types.

[..] Although the outward behaviors of ISFPs and INFPs are unquestionably influenced by opposing Extraverted preferences, Keirsey and Bates have been led by the demands of their tempermental theory to ignore the IFPs inner motivation. Introverted Feeling is a way of looking at life, a lends ground by direct experience of good and evil, but it has to be adjusted for immediate outward conditions, rather like a camera.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I know Fi is idealistic and concerned with issues of good and evil, just like others. I just couldn't convince some of the more popular ISFPs here of it (not to mention some NFs who are Keirsey-ists as well, who said I wasn't "hedonistic" enough for SP), and I ended up getting retyped. It's kind of that simple. It puts me in type limbo though if there's this much disagreement. Secondly, I don't care enough to get mean about it. It's the only way it seems like it's going to work unfortunately, so I decided to not be an ISFP.

Needless to say, the OP here (Noon) is a refreshing face that I've gotten to speak to a bit. An ISFP with Ni.

As for Fi, there's a specific section in Lenore Thomson's book that explicitly states this about ISFPs, and points out how Keirsey equated them too much with ESFPs, just to keep his temperment theory in tact. I can't seem to convince anyone of it though:

Indeed, the behavior distinctions between ISFPs and INFPs have led David Keirsey and Marilyn Bates, in Please Understand Me, to dispute the idea that ISFPs are Introverted Feelings at all. As mentioned in chapter 19, Keirsey and Bates believe that ISPs should be classified together with ESPs as "SP" types.

[..] Although the outward behaviors of ISFPs and INFPs are unquestionably influenced by opposing Extraverted preferences, Keirsey and Bates have been led by the demands of their tempermental theory to ignore the IFPs inner motivation. Introverted Feeling is a way of looking at life, a lends ground by direct experience of good and evil, but it has to be adjusted for immediate outward conditions, rather like a camera.

I'm with Thomson on this one. I think this misunderstanding of where the idealistic aspect originates in IxFPs is what leads to MANY mistypings of ISFPs as INFPs. There are many other stereotypes which lead to these mistypings also....

For some IxFPs, confusion over the S/N preference may be because our percieving functions are "back to back", so to speak. The aux & tert functions are both perceiving. It may be hard for some to tell if they are NeSi or SeNi because of that (I wrote something similar in puremercury's type thread, but it didn't seem to help him...ah well :tongue: ).
 

Quinlan

Intriguing....
Joined
Apr 6, 2008
Messages
3,004
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
9w1
I understand the frustration with the different theories, I suppose you can be different types depending on the framework you're comparing yourself to. I mostly relate to Jung's introverted feeler, then the Berens function order (which might be complete bollocks), then to the various descriptions you find around the net, don't really know much about Lenore Thomson's stuff and probably last and least is Keirsey's party animals (Artisans). I don't think my behaviour really defines how I see myself that well, I relate to all of the temperaments on some level.

It's interesting though when you start bringing in the tertiary function, you get:

Fi
Se+Ni = Pseudo Ne

Fi
Ne+Si = Pseudo Se

Essentially the same type, so it gives you the flexibility to rationalise just about any person or any behaviour into any type, which seems dodgy to me and not unlike what astrologers do.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
I understand the frustration with the different theories, I suppose you can be different types depending on the framework you're comparing yourself to. I mostly relate to Jung's introverted feeler, then the Berens function order (which might be complete bollocks), then to the various descriptions you find around the net, don't really know much about Lenore Thomson's stuff and probably last and least is Keirsey's party animals (Artisans). I don't think my behaviour really defines how I see myself that well, I relate to all of the temperaments on some level.

It's interesting though when you start bringing in the tertiary function, you get:

Fi
Se+Ni = Pseudo Ne

Fi
Ne+Si = Pseudo Se

Essentially the same type, so it gives you the flexibility to rationalise just about any person or any behaviour into any type, which seems dodgy to me and not unlike what astrologers do.

I probably should think more on it. I should add that I'm not exactly activity, present tense, or "scenery" oriented. Sometimes, sometimes not. I do like discussing ideas.. I'm just selective. That kind of stuff can go in circles sometimes. This is where the sensor part comes out and I say "What can we do about it?" Not to shoot it down, but to focus on a goal, if there is one (which could be either J or S maybe?). And if there isn't, I want to talk about something else. Then I'm sort of N-like, in the sense that I want to be a librarian :tongue: I'm considering devoting more time to writing fiction too. I conceptualize stories/characters/worlds. It could still be a Ni thing. And as a fan of stories, I don't necessarily have a preference for fantasy or realism either. I was annoyed seeing that one thread awhile back where someone mentioned an ISTP who only liked realism. That's pretty extreme. My mind shifts towards theme and archetypes behind stories. Not just the "concreteness of the setting". It's all good. On the sensor side, I like the "sensuous" aspect of playing my guitar in a way, and I like sports, but uh.. I don't think it's remarkable. I'd like to think anyone can be a little dynamic.
 

Quinlan

Intriguing....
Joined
Apr 6, 2008
Messages
3,004
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
9w1
I probably should think more on it. I should add that I'm not exactly activity, present tense, or "scenery" oriented. Sometimes, sometimes not. I do like discussing ideas.. I'm just selective. That kind of stuff can go in circles sometimes. This is where the sensor part comes out and I say "What can we do about it?" Not to shoot it down, but to focus on a goal, if there is one (which could be either J or S maybe?). And if there isn't, I want to talk about something else.

Maybe it's more of an Fi thing? I know I ask myself a lot what is the point of this? What is the value in discussing or carrying on with this course of action? In group work I am the guy always trying to steer people back to the end goal, asking is what we're doing now adding value to the end product? If not move on. I suppose the ISFP will always wonder "What's the value in this? How will it improve my day to day life?" and the INFP might ask "What is the value in this? How will this improve things in the future (or some other abstraction?)?"

Then I'm sort of N-like, in the sense that I want to be a librarian :tongue: I'm considering devoting more time to writing fiction too. I conceptualize stories/characters/worlds. It could still be a Ni thing. And as a fan of stories, I don't necessarily have a preference for fantasy or realism either. I was annoyed seeing that one thread awhile back where someone mentioned an ISTP who only liked realism. That's pretty extreme. My mind shifts towards theme and archetypes behind stories. Not just the "concreteness of the setting". It's all good. On the sensor side, I like the "sensuous" aspect of playing my guitar in a way, and I like sports, but uh.. I don't think it's remarkable. I'd like to think anyone can be a little dynamic.

I was thinking about the fantasy thing and how it might appeal to SPs and I was thinking about often when I draw I will draw fantasy characters and I think the appeal there is that there are no limits to a fantasy character, you have complete freedom because the thing does not exist in reality and SPs love freedom.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
Maybe it's more of an Fi thing? I know I ask myself a lot what is the point of this? What is the value in discussing or carrying on with this course of action? In group work I am the guy always trying to steer people back to the end goal, asking is what we're doing now adding value to the end product? If not move on. I suppose the ISFP will always wonder "What's the value in this? How will it improve my day to day life?" and the INFP might ask "What is the value in this? How will this improve things in the future (or some other abstraction?)?"



I was thinking about the fantasy thing and how it might appeal to SPs and I was thinking about often when I draw I will draw fantasy characters and I think the appeal there is that there are no limits to a fantasy character, you have complete freedom because the thing does not exist in reality and SPs love freedom.

I can't say that I don't like freedom, of course, but that might not be it for me exactly. I'm sort of bringing some of those things back into reality (or want to). Not seeing fantasy as a realm of escape or a place that's unconfined, but also as a realm of inspiration. There's a lot of symbolism or underlying principles in stories worth taking to heart and emulating in real life. That, or they provide some inspiration to help me think how I can be creative on my own too. Like it's so damn brilliant it gets your own creative juices flowing.

To make matters more confusing though, I'll quote Thomson again. She says it is Fi in general who latches on to the universalism and principles found in a lot of stories. Not just INFPs who are fantasy oriented.

IFPs feel precisely this kind of tension when they try to adapt the objective world to their inner one. It's as though some unformulated answer that would reveal the interconnectedness of the universe were trapped inside them, and all of the questions people ask are too small, can't contain what they have to give. This is one reason IFPs turn to achetypal imagery--media figures, Gothic or Athurian romance, goddesses--to represent their deepest values.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I understand the frustration with the different theories, I suppose you can be different types depending on the framework you're comparing yourself to. I mostly relate to Jung's introverted feeler, then the Berens function order (which might be complete bollocks), then to the various descriptions you find around the net, don't really know much about Lenore Thomson's stuff and probably last and least is Keirsey's party animals (Artisans). I don't think my behaviour really defines how I see myself that well, I relate to all of the temperaments on some level.

It's interesting though when you start bringing in the tertiary function, you get:

Fi
Se+Ni = Pseudo Ne

Fi
Ne+Si = Pseudo Se

Essentially the same type, so it gives you the flexibility to rationalise just about any person or any behaviour into any type, which seems dodgy to me and not unlike what astrologers do.

There's most definitely a "mimicking" effect at times which can make it hard for a person to work out what type they are, especially when they get too focused on behavior. Patterns can be helpful, but they can also lead to stereotyping.

I think NeSi and SeNi are different attitudes, and they can be untangled to find which you prefer, but stereotypes regarding behavior & interests have to be put aside.

I probably should think more on it. I should add that I'm not exactly activity, present tense, or "scenery" oriented. Sometimes, sometimes not. I do like discussing ideas.. I'm just selective. That kind of stuff can go in circles sometimes. This is where the sensor part comes out and I say "What can we do about it?" Not to shoot it down, but to focus on a goal, if there is one (which could be either J or S maybe?). And if there isn't, I want to talk about something else. Then I'm sort of N-like, in the sense that I want to be a librarian :tongue: I'm considering devoting more time to writing fiction too. I conceptualize stories/characters/worlds. It could still be a Ni thing. And as a fan of stories, I don't necessarily have a preference for fantasy or realism either. I was annoyed seeing that one thread awhile back where someone mentioned an ISTP who only liked realism. That's pretty extreme. My mind shifts towards theme and archetypes behind stories. Not just the "concreteness of the setting". It's all good. On the sensor side, I like the "sensuous" aspect of playing my guitar in a way, and I like sports, but uh.. I don't think it's remarkable. I'd like to think anyone can be a little dynamic.

Sooo much of this is about evaluating meaning, and it comes down to Fi.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
Sooo much of this is about evaluating meaning, and it comes down to Fi.

Fair enough. I just want to hold back and be no type for awhile. It's difficult to have to live up to either one, in the stereotypical sense. I don't speak too concretely. Like I see Jeffster asking anyone confused on ISFP if they speak "concretely" and I would easily answer "No." It takes no energy for me to juxtapose 3 or 4 ideas and not see them as seperate, but as bound together by some similarity - and deliver a point that way. Or relating a discussion on Heidegger to a Frosted Flakes commercial I saw once (OK, I'm screwing around now, but you get the point ;) ). Whether it means I'm S or N isn't important so much that people understand that I'm not just speaking "what is". I wouldn't even be at this site if I wasn't so frustrated with people like that all around me, all my life. If I'm an SP, things would still probably be more fun if I knew more NTs and NFs.
 

William K

Uniqueorn
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
986
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
I can't say that I don't like freedom, of course, but that might not be it for me exactly. I'm sort of bringing some of those things back into reality (or want to). Not seeing fantasy as a realm of escape or a place that's unconfined, but also as a realm of inspiration. There's a lot of symbolism or underlying principles in stories worth taking to heart and emulating in real life. That, or they provide some inspiration to help me think how I can be creative on my own too. Like it's so damn brilliant it gets your own creative juices flowing.

To make matters more confusing though, I'll quote Thomson again. She says it is Fi in general who latches on to the universalism and principles found in a lot of stories. Not just INFPs who are fantasy oriented.

IFPs feel precisely this kind of tension when they try to adapt the objective world to their inner one. It's as though some unformulated answer that would reveal the interconnectedness of the universe were trapped inside them, and all of the questions people ask are too small, can't contain what they have to give. This is one reason IFPs turn to achetypal imagery--media figures, Gothic or Athurian romance, goddesses--to represent their deepest values.

Hmmm, considering that I own a couple of hundred fantasy/scifi books, I should have some reasons for liking them, right? :)

Let's see
- The freedom thing is one part of it. Though it's not just the belief of the fantastical like magic and unicorns exists, but also the fact that the world doesn't have to follow the laws of physics as we know it. Why have just 1 sun when you can have 2 or 3?
- The idealist in me of course enjoys the "underdog/unknown rises to be a hero" narrative that exists in many fantasy tales. Or the tales of redemption where the fallen can rise again.
- Also, in many cases, the 'bad guys' in the story are not humans. Perhaps I'm just tired of reading about the evil that people do to other people in the news that I have this need to escape to a place where people have to band together to overcome an alien threat that threatens to wipe them out.
- Oh, and they usually have cool-looking cover art :D
 

Vamp

New member
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
579
MBTI Type
ENFP
It's also kind of untrue. Sure, there are extreme Ss who are like that, but my ESFJ ex hates strip clubs and he stands on principle about it, which is kind of bizarre considering his relationship with me. I also know an ISFJ who has moral opinions about this sort of thing (and no, it's not because he was raised with religion and is brainwashed, because he's actually an atheist.)

You REALLY think Ss never question things? REALLY? Have you ever had a conversation with a really intelligent ISTP like Gish? I don't think AyoitsStepho - an ISFP - is that "shallow" either.

There are shallow stupid people in the world. To assume all Ss are like that is doing them a complete disservice.

Not being concerned with things that aren't "real" DOES NOT equal shallow. :doh:
This is about letting the mind wonder to things that aren't right infront of you or at all provable. Abstract concepts, theories. ...Ns tend to do that for no reason instead of just taking in the stuff that is there infront of them and leaving it at that (sort of like you deduced the previous poster's message to be "sex work is bad" when that wasn't infront of you). Way to turn it into "Ss are stupid" which is NOT what I was saying at all.

I know one confirmed ISFP, he is my mirror so i know very well Ss aren't a different species.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
It's too bad the cognitive processes test doesn't use the same wording as this old one (it's broken btw, but worth looking at): Understanding the Eight Jungian Cognitive Processes / Eight Functions Attitudes

It might be possible to help work out where you fit by looking back and forth at the questions and the function definitions here (these definitions put P and J functions in tandem.. it's unique):

Cognitive Processes and Tandem Dynamics

---
I want to say I'm more Fe/Ti, not Fi/Te. Maybe it's because I like the Golden Rule :D The perception definitions are harder to pin down.

Anyways, I don't know if this was appropriate to put here. I just meant to show those links if anyone wanted to double check where they'd place themselves.
 

wolfy

awsm
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
12,251
Hah! You know, this friend of mine did exactly that. No response at all. He was just eating a sandwich. And it was a straight question, something about some practical matter, like, "when do you think this thing could be ready". The question was repeated a couple of times, even... And, whew, the stuff I hear about this one incident... my SJ friend still keeps talking about it...

He was eating a sandwich. You have your answer right there. Usually I have no trouble answering questions and kind of enjoy saying whatever. But don't ask me a question when I am eating a sandwich. There is more important business on my mind.
 

Southern Kross

Away with the fairies
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
2,910
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
so/sp
I'd side close to the NF, but not necessarily the complexity. I share some part of the underlying philosophy/value system, but I don't care to convince some other guy on my stance. Some subjects are cool to get into, especially if they're untapped, but usually those discussions go nowhere. That's why I don't talk about politics much either. Funnily, I dated girls who turned out to be strippers (when I didn't know), but I still hate strip bars. I would actually talk to them, not some guy, and if it was in my power, I'd hook them up in safer jobs (then again, some strip clubs are safer than others.. then I might have to convince them on some general disapproval of their job. I wouldn't make some eloquent philosophical argument though). It could be a mix of concrete and ideal with me. :thinking:

I still could be ISFP myself. My problem is not really lining up in neat Keirsey-like ways. I have too much N apparently for some ISFPs and too much F that veers on the "idealist" side.
This is actually quite Fi - you won't find me discussing politics or religion 'round these parts much either, or much in person, unless it's with someone I trust a LOT. You'll see both IxFPs reluctant to push their beliefs onto others, or feel the need to guard them so closely that they are extremely selective about who they share them with, key word being "share". Instead of talking, I think we tend to walk the walk. As mentioned above, this can be truer of ISFPs even. INFPs may inadvertently seem argumentative when they feel they are just exchanging ideas (no emphasis on right vs. wrong necessarily), but the more deeply held, the less apt they may be to discuss them.

Fi in itself is idealistic - Gifts Differing says it of both IxFPs, and actually refers to all the F types as having strong ideals (which they do). Jung's description of Fi applies to ISFPs also. It's Se that adds that concrete aspect to ISFPs, and Ne which amps up the idealistic aspect of INFPs.

And Keirsey sucks - if I went by Keirsey, to be an INFP I'd have to be some Mother Theresa type who is entirely selfless and almost spineless (which I am not - for better or worse), and my artistic inclinations would indicate I am an SP (which I am not).
Maybe it's more of an Fi thing? I know I ask myself a lot what is the point of this? What is the value in discussing or carrying on with this course of action? In group work I am the guy always trying to steer people back to the end goal, asking is what we're doing now adding value to the end product? If not move on. I suppose the ISFP will always wonder "What's the value in this? How will it improve my day to day life?" and the INFP might ask "What is the value in this? How will this improve things in the future (or some other abstraction?)?"
I've never fully connected with this whole concept of INFPs withholding personal views. I'm very opinionated and outspoken.

OK so when I think about it I do hold back if I feel uncomfortable in the situation or with the people, I make vague, non-committal statements but that is more shyness than anything. And I suppose sometimes when someone is expressing a view I don't totally agree with, I do often try to relate by reiterating that viewpoint with a relevant argument to back them up and make them feel understood. But once I'm relaxed, just try and stop me expressing my opinion. I rarely try to cram my opinion down someone's throat; this only happens when the person involved has a belief that is so wrong and backwards to me, that it offends me and I feel the need to correct it. :D

Back on topic: I do feel ISFP are a little more wary of owning their opinions. They seem keen to test the water first because they are so worried someone might disagree; and that if others disagree they feel inclined to believe themselves wrong, not the other person. INFPs are much more stubborn and possessive of their views, its all, "I believe this, so what?".
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
Back on topic: I do feel ISFP are a little more wary of owning their opinions. They seem keen to test the water first because they are so worried someone might disagree; and that if others disagree they feel inclined to believe themselves wrong, not the other person. INFPs are much more stubborn and possessive of their views, its all, "I believe this, so what?".

Hmm, yeah.. that's not exactly me at all. Sometimes I'm worried about hurting other people though (it's more about them than me). And this is kind of both coming from a state of paranoia and lessons learned from the past.. so I need to think more if that's Ni or Si. I'm not afraid of speaking my opinions, but I've learned to be diplomatic about it (Fe/Ti?). Unless it's obvious that I need to do something.

As for philosophical subjects, it's not that I don't understand them.. or that I don't want want to own up to any of my thoughts. If it came to a discussion about the complexity of stripbars, I'd simply say it's pathetic. I'm being partly "theoretical" and partly speaking from what I've observed. I've never been one of those guys who paid a stripper anything. Yet I have taken them out. That's ironic and sad. That's my take on it. Why waste your time paying strippers for nothing when you could be elsewhere, meet a girl, and she could be happen to a stripper! Without any of pandering involved. I'd not recommend either though. As for the strippers themselves, they should find better jobs. Those places are either creepy, dangerous, or even if they're nice, there's not that much future in it. I met a couple of young ones who were already messed up.. but I knew a pretty good looking older ex-stripper (who was 42 at the time), and she had nothing going for her. She had a fun life in LA, had some funny photos with two of the biggest manwhores ever (Charlie Sheen and Gene Simmons), so you know she'd be around.. but when I met her, she was slaving as a bartender in a crappy club. So... there ya go, I guess. Saying I didn't care to discuss the subject wasn't the right way to put it really. I just mean the downfalls are so obvious that there's not much to discuss.
 
Top