# Thread: Self Analysis and conclusions - seeking feedback.

1. Originally Posted by TenebrousReflection
The only specific one that comes to mind (which was about 5 or 6 years ago) was having a classmate that was working and going to school at the same time and struggling in several classes, so I offered to help however I could - it wasn't exactly tutoring, but I wasn't doing their assignment either, I was trying to help them understand the material and complete the assignments at the same time.
Fe response, possibly linked to Ni. The goal is to help them become a better person, rather than dominant Fe where you want to ease their struggling.

I have a lot of natural curiosity, so whenever I am exposed to a new system, I try to figure out how it works and understand it as best I can (the analytical part).
Ti response. May I ask you a question? When you first examine a problem, what approach do you take?

Most of the time, my first guess is the right one (Ni?) and when its not I resort to trying to think of possible causes and solutions (I think I'm using Te or Ti to find and identify the problem and Ne to solve it).
First part looks like Ni, second could be a mix of Ti, Ni and Ne. Need more data. Te is much more procedural. If you go through a method in your head for how you would go about solving something, then it's Te. But somehow I doubt that's what you do.

I enjoy playing board games and strategy games, and I do the same thing there. I observe and learn how the system works then once I'm comfortable with my understanding of the rules/mechanics of the system, I try to think of unexpected things to do with it that will keep my opponents wondering what I'm doing. In a case like that, I'm analyzing the rules and the problem solving is finding a way to use the rules to accomplish unexpected results (I don't care about winning so much as confusing my opponents, but sometimes victory is a result anyway )
Ni, Ti, Ne. Understanding by observation is Ni with some help from Ti or the reverse. Thinking of unexpected things to do is Ne. Although Ni can probably do it as well, it's just slower and more deliberate.

I think my curious and analytical nature is a lot more noticeable then my problem solving since problem solving only comes up when there is a problem, but my ability to analyze and understand things is more apparent because I find inconstancies and/or flaws that others don't see and can also sometimes find alternative/unexpected ways to use things. I think this may be Ne working subconsciously
Either Ne or Ni. Do you just see the connections or do you build up a model of the thing in your head?

(at least it makes sense in it being the auxiliary process for an INFP and I'm solving problems by asking "what results will xyz action bring" and doing that until I have a solution instead of approaching it from a "this is the problem, whats the best way to solve it" that Te would probably use).
That sounds awfully like what I do. For a given problem, I let my mind wander until it brings up an idea (either Ni or Ne... although it's mostly Ni. Ne only comes in when I see something physical in the environment.). Then I ask myself "What would it do to the system?" Run the scenario over in my head. (Visualization in my head I would attribute to Ni, figuring if it'll work is Ti). If the system involves people, then Fe will help in puzzling out people's reactions to that action.

Having concern for the feelings of others is more subconscious to me. Unless I know something specific will bother someone, I don't make an attempt to alter how I communicate with them on the basis of avoiding hurting them. I may not even know its happening, but I think its probable that I may occasionally end up hurting or offending others through well intentioned criticism because I value understanding and clarity and someone else might rather be wrong and not know it than be questioned about it.
Not all Fs are afraid of pushing something simply because it might offend others. For example I will deliberately provoke somebody if I think that will be beneficial in the long run. The end goal is what matters. That's probably more prominent in Js than Ps. The main difference between F and T is that a F would unconsciously take emotions into consideration more than a T would.

This goes back to earlier questions, but to me, making someone aware that I am there if they want to talk and giving them alone time if they don't want to talk is the approach I most often take when someone is upset. Unless I know specific things that I expect to work to cheer someone up, I am just as likely to make them more aggravated if I try to cheer them up without understating them and the situation that brought them to that point.
That statement points to introverted feeler.

Originally Posted by TenebrousReflection
Perhaps an order of importance would be appropriate to answer the question

Feelings of close friends > My own feelings > Feelings of everyone else

In all cases, I am concerned with the potential effect (both intended and unintended) my words and actions may have on others and in general want to have a positive effect when I can, when there is a potential conflict, the above order of priority takes effect.
No questions about that one... Fe!

I would not say it affects my self image with the exception of the views of friends and those who's opinions I have come to value. To use the above example, I would say that my priorities used to be different.

Feelings of close friends > Feelings of casual/distant friends > Feelings of acquaintances > My own feelings > Feelings of everyone else
It could simply be a developmental phrase. I used to be the same way myself... putting other people's needs ahead of my own until people started taking advantage of me (auxillary Fe). Now, I'm at a stage where I'm a little more critical (development of that tertiary Ti). It could very well be Fi as well though, it's hard to say.

Overall feel for me is still INFx... although I want to lean towards INFJ now.

2. Ti response. May I ask you a question? When you first examine a problem, what approach do you take?
Evaluate the problem, how much does it bother me / how serious is it.
Does problem affect me emotionally or cause mental unrest?
(If yes, then evaluate if a quick solution is needed, or a well planned long term solution would be preferable)
Does the problem present any immediate risk/danger?
(if yes, instinct will kick in (hopefully) and further planning cannot be speculated)
Is there anything else that has priority over it?
(if yes, ignore problem and come back to it later)
(else)
What additional implications does the problem present?
(is it a simple problem, or one that might have various chain reactions)
Consider multiple solutions and the implications of each possible solution
Weigh the good and bad of each solutions against the desired outcome.
(Unless a solution has a very bad potential outcome, the potential positives carry much more weight than potential negatives)
If problem requires immediate (same day) response, go with solution that "feels like the one I'll be least likely to regret".
If problem does not require immediate attention, evaluate feelings about most likely solutions, then sleep on it and See if feelings changed with sleep or remained constant.
If feelings remained constant, go with solution that "feels like the right thing to do" (may not be applicable if its something where no values conflicts exist)
(if problem is important but does not require immediate action, I will often continue to dwell on it for a week or more before making a decision).

I probably left out a step or more in there, but I think thats a rough approximation of how I look at problems before I go about actually trying to solve them.

First part looks like Ni, second could be a mix of Ti, Ni and Ne. Need more data. Te is much more procedural. If you go through a method in your head for how you would go about solving something, then it's Te. But somehow I doubt that's what you do.
For looking for possible solutions, its more of quick evaluations until I find an idea that seems good, then I will try to step through it in my mind looking for potential flaws and oversights (find new potential problems and evaluate them).

Either Ne or Ni. Do you just see the connections or do you build up a model of the thing in your head?
If I concentrate on it, I can conceptualize devices, but I think "see the connections" would be more accurate, but I don't "see" them so much as just feel compelled to explore alternate ideas. Its like someone will be explaining how something works, and an alternate idea/use will just pop into my head and I feel the need to explore where that idea might lead to, or I'll be taking a walk daydreaming as I go and some new idea will make me say "well, what would the result of this option be?".

That sounds awfully like what I do. For a given problem, I let my mind wander until it brings up an idea (either Ni or Ne... although it's mostly Ni. Ne only comes in when I see something physical in the environment.). Then I ask myself "What would it do to the system?" Run the scenario over in my head. (Visualization in my head I would attribute to Ni, figuring if it'll work is Ti). If the system involves people, then Fe will help in puzzling out people's reactions to that action.
A lot like above. Thinking of the last time i went shopping, when I look at an object, I start asking "what could i use this for" but sometimes I see something and instantly know "ah ha!, I could use this to for _____" (regardless of whether or not it happened to be its intended use).

It could simply be a developmental phrase. I used to be the same way myself... putting other people's needs ahead of my own until people started taking advantage of me (auxillary Fe). Now, I'm at a stage where I'm a little more critical (development of that tertiary Ti). It could very well be Fi as well though, it's hard to say.
To me its not really a matter of feeling taken advantage of so much as reaching a point where I realized even though I like helping others and feeling useful, it had no impact on my long term emotional well being, and eventually decided I needed to re-evaluate my priorities.

(edit/append: 26 Oct 07)
I wanted to clarify that a bit. I still feel a strong need to do things for others and it still affects my immediate and short term feelings, I just am a lot more selective of who I do things for because I find doing things for close friends or others who have some meaning to me makes more of a difference to me (the meaningfulness of the acts is proportional to the meaningfulness of the person the act is done for). When I do things for others, I prefer it to be my choice (as opposed to them asking me for something) and when that is the case, I will put a lot of time and effort into those activities (trying to be innovative and creative with my ideas to the extent that the act will allow).

Overall feel for me is still INFx... although I want to lean towards INFJ now.
In a recent post by Bluewing on INFPs, I found a lot of information that seemed to fit me very well and some stuff that I could not reconcile as well.

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.

*** I can see that referencing that post with comparatives and contrasts is going to be a long project and I'm getting very sleepy, I'll come back and edit this post later to append more thoughts ***

(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.

3. How are INFPs under stress?

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•