User Tag List

First 56789 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 140

Thread: ENFP/INFP

  1. #61
    To the top of the world arcticangel02's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    eNFP
    Posts
    892

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    In the temperament analysis I use, I fall into a fifth temperament who "expresses" as an introvert, and "responds" as an extrovert. (It is the one in the upper left of my avatar). Expression is what we "say" we want (so he looks like an introvert aho avoids people) yet responsiveness is what we "really" want, so his wants are the same as an extrovert. That would partially explain this, and it can apparently fall into any NP (informing) type. (ENTP is also said to be an introverted extrovert).
    That's me as well. Tends to be confusing when trying to type myself on the E/I scale. ^^

    Although in general, I have to say that you're not coming across as either ENFP or ENTP. Have you thought about ENTJ? Your Te is very strong, moreso that I would have thought a (even a developed) shadow/tertiary function to be...

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabe View Post
    Dom (adressing dom): does it bother you that xander would write this kind of pompous, patronizing crap about you. You also sound a lot smarter than xander, and you're much more on target, and ironically, despite what xander claims, your posts are much better thought-out than his.
    Woah! Chill out there, Gabe. Those two are friends IRL, and have been for a long time, so you don't have any right to stick your nose in there and judge them.

    I've noticed friendships between ENFPs and INTPs (at least mine, anyway) tend to look funny from the outside. If someone observed half the conversations I have with my INTP, they'd swear we hated each other.
    ANFP:
    Extraversion (52%) ---- Introversion (48%)
    Sensing (26%) ---- iNtuition (74%)
    Thinking (16%) ---- Feeling (84%)
    Judging (5%) ---- Perceiving (95%)

    9w1 so/sx/sp

  2. #62
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by arcticangel02 View Post
    Woah! Chill out there, Gabe. Those two are friends IRL, and have been for a long time, so you don't have any right to stick your nose in there and judge them.
    Thanks kitty
    All opinions are welcome though. I can stand a little heat now and then... you must admit I did stick my chin out just a little
    Quote Originally Posted by arcticangel02 View Post
    I've noticed friendships between ENFPs and INTPs (at least mine, anyway) tend to look funny from the outside. If someone observed half the conversations I have with my INTP, they'd swear we hated each other.
    Ooo I had a pinball analogy for one ENFP. I said he was like a really rapid ball hurtling along hitting everything in it's path. I on the other hand am laughing at him as I roll steadily forward chosing meticulously which pins to hit and when, watching him careen off of one hard surface after another. Of course he's laughing at me going to damn slow and taking so long ruining all the fun of the game as he bounces off another brick wall almost unperturbed by the collision.

    See it occurs to me that between ENFPs and INTPs the gift from the INTP is focus, that ability to really knuckle down and go through the logic (not that ENFPs don't have logic.. just that INTPs seem more focused on making things congruent and workable). The ENFPs gift is summed up in that haunting phrase "I'd rather live life than just observe it"... that still gives me shivers now!
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  3. #63
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabe View Post
    if they were all based on temperment (or whatever you think the 'fundamental particle' is), then the theories would fit much nicer. However, they don't. Just because models look similar-ish (ish-ish-ish) doesn't mean they're going to be relevant to each other, or fit in such a predictably symmetric way. That's almost new age thinking. I mean, your body is made up of 75% water right? So shouldn't water respond to written messages and music? Y'know, water and the human body are *related*.
    Of course they don't fit perfectly, but there are good parallels, at least. The fact that both Keirsey and Berens linked their models (conation and interaction style) to the temperaments (as well as to Social Styles, DiSC and others) shows there are some strong commonalities there. You yourself used as the example NF supposedly being Choleric, though I blieve that was was matched wrongly.
    (And it's not really symmetrical either. Between T/F and J/P, the temperaments and Interaction Styles are reckoned differently according to S and N. That is very asymmetrical, and other people I know prefer to use an all new model, such as SP, SJ, NP, NJ or TP, TJ, FP, FJ, or Myer's original ST, SF, NT, NF. Those are symmetrical, and do not match to the previous temperament theory.
    You are also seriously oversimplifying stuff. There are directing and informing types in each temperment.
    That's the conative (Keirseyan) temperaments. The Interaction Styles are also, technically "temperaments" (and make easier matches with the ancient ones), and they are drawn strictly along directing and informing (along with E/I).
    Temperments correlating with the 5-factor model? Well 1, there's 4 temperments and 5 factors, two, the 5 factors are on a scale of good to bad, and the temperments aren't (that's a huge mess right there. I'll take that alone as a sign that the theories won't fit)
    The five factors are Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Openness and Neuroticism. None are measured as "good" or "bad". The closest to that would be Neuroticism, which is generally seen as being less emotionally healthy, if high.
    We of course know extraversion. Agreeableness would correspond to directing/informing. Conscientiousness would correspond to Cooperative/Pragmatic. Openness would be S/N.
    In the statistical correlations, Agreeableness is matched with T/F and Conscientiousness is matched with J/P. In the Interaction Styles model, this is true for Sensors. For iNtuitors, it reverses. Based on Eysenck's original definition of Neuroticism (ability to experience negative emotions), I would say it to some extent is like the inverse of Agreeableness. Eysenck used the Galenic temperaments, and the "directives" (Melancholic and Choleric) were high N, while the more agreeable ones (Sanguine and Phlegmatic) were low N. I would say the split at the fifth temperament, which is agreeable, yet also high N, because of its need for acceptance. But then that's the FIRO-based temperament theory. For MBTI, another updated version, called TDI, is adding a new scale called "Comfort-Discomfort", which aims to match Neuroticism. Keirsey or Berens do not seem to be attempting to add this to their theories.

    And the number of factors has nothing to do with the number of temperaments. The four Keirsey temperaments use only two of the factors (S/N, and C/Prag), not all four, so it's not like "one factor for each temperament".

    Also 'mastery and competence' doesn't mean controlling a situation or even leadership. That doesn't logically extrapolate itself in any way

    What I'm trying to say is that you are engaging in quite a bit of conceptual stretching.
    I don't think that I exactly said that about "mastery and competence". I had linked it to "Choleric". Yet, the NF's do not seem like power hungry dictators. In fact, in some statistical correlations done between FIRO and MBTI, the NT's and most SP's did have the highest correlations with "expressed Control" (which would indicate a tendency to assuming leadership, or controlling). It seems the focus of the different type and temperament profiles is different, so they may not directly describe those traits. Yet the inclinations may still be there. Again, with the NTJ's it is more evident.
    And don't start falsifying type profiles to fit your theory. Psychological type stands well by itself. All INFPs have very quick tempers as kids, and they still do as adults no matter how emotionally contained they try to be (which is really just an unfortunate adaption to society).
    As kids, it seems many types are a bit more expressive than when they are fully developed. Even the most introverted of all, the Melancholies. And what do you mean by "quick temper". With the INFP, from what I see, both in profiles and dealing with one online, their "temper" may flare up quickly, but it will be after a long period of building up. That's not what I meant by "quick temper", but actually fits the opposite Supine or possibly Phlegmatic temperament better. The Choleric's "quick temper" refers to the fact that they vent so much, nearly constantly, and this is the reputation for the temperament. Though this is more the Interaction area, and NF/NT is conation. So it is not necessarily a quick temper that defines the Choleric, but rather the leadership style. The appearance of 'arrogance', like you are complaining about regarding Xander, and is often leveled at NT's, is one sign of it. In an NTP type with an informing (friendly) Interaction Style (which temppers the more "critical" traits), it will not come out as much as quick temper or controlling.
    "and the Supine has a need for appreciation of his worth, like the NF's core needs of meaning and significance"

    This is the kind of stretch (way past the breaking point) I am talking about. I just read the definition of that. It's not a temperment. It's a one dimensional caricature. Temperment definitions have been changed to relate to psychological type, and if I were to describe the 4 temperments, I'd describe them in terms of psychological type. 'supine' has now relation to psychological type the way the new temperment descriptions do, and I can't even start on how little relation it has to reality. Heart of a servant? What is that? Some rediculous image that exists only in the minds of some old rich white guys.
    Uh, I did not make that name up, I only relayed the basis of it being given to that previously unrecognized additional temperament. Actually, I would have named it something else, myself. But just like the names "Guardian", "Artisan", Idealist",and "Rational" (or Stabilizer, Improviser, Catalyst and Theorist), the names are based on a specific trait of the pattern, used as general descriptors of the temperament. Of course, there is much more to the temperament than just that one description. The behavior patterns were there all along, but did not fit into the other four, so it was probably confused with the others. (Like, it is very reserved like a Melancholy, yet likes people like a Sanguine, and appears amiable like a Phlegmatic). It is also very similar to the Enneagram type 6.
    And, if you are not already pissed off by my tone try to consider that you are still using tons of Te.
    Yet, again, I never said I wasn't using it. But I explained possibly why.

    If I'm supposedly the same type as you, and thus have this Te in the same "puer" position as you (unlike others elsewhere who claimed it brought out their 'witch'), then why is your tone such that you think I would be pissed? Why do you seem to be annoyed?
    I see Xander has rubbed you the wrong way as well. Yet I have not clashed with him like that. To me, the stuff he said that annoyed you just came across as being humorous. (According to his somewhat moderate FIRO scores, which are on his blog, you would expect him to have a bit of a dry, wry humor, like a Phlegmatic, in which some people might not know how it is to be taken).

    Are you sure that it is not Ti you are reacting to, which once again, can appear to be "extraverted" when projected by Ne? People who thought I was ENFP expected me to be similarly miffed by Ti, but I do not seem to have that problem at all (hence a big part of my now questioning the whole idea of being ENFP). And don't try to say "trickster" Ti, again. I do not fit the description of that use of it (remember, that archetype is more about "stress"). I seem to like or at least get along with it, and it is more like Te that has always annoyed me, though I may try to emulate it a lot (in response).

    Also, is the way I use Te really the same way an ENFP uses it? Is this how you use it? I don't think it's accurate to see a person using one function, however much, and just take that and build up his whole type from it. There are many causes of a person's behavior. And even then, cognitive dynamics is only one of several ways to detemine type, and a person can easily mistake what he sees in others.

  4. #64
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by arcticangel02 View Post
    That's me as well. Tends to be confusing when trying to type myself on the E/I scale. ^^

    Although in general, I have to say that you're not coming across as either ENFP or ENTP. Have you thought about ENTJ? Your Te is very strong, moreso that I would have thought a (even a developed) shadow/tertiary function to be...
    At least one or two other people have suggested TJ types, based on all this "Te" they say they see.
    But no, those types are definitely not me. For one thing, the one function that is the most definite with me is strong Ne.
    (which is why others are insisting on an NFP, and yes, I too don't think I'm using it in quite the same way as they do, which is nonpreferred and usually less developed).
    Again, I just think I learned it from my surroundings (which were strongly TJ), and began emulating it. It doesn't even seem really natural to me, but just a strong acquired habit.

  5. #65
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    Eric,
    Oh and I think your type becomes more clear, INFP does fit well.
    Is your assessment based on Te as well? Or just the results I posted.
    When I was first told EFP, I had thought INFP would be closer. That is probably what I look like in person. But people said I was too "enthusiastic" like an extravert. So I'm not even arguing for an introverted type, now.
    Plus understanding NTs and "getting on with them" is more about honesty and being able to not take things personally more so than any other trait.

    Anyhow...much waffling = NF doesn't necessarily oppose NT. (Esp ENFJ and ENTJ!!!)
    But I was thinking based on the functions, with the premise that people with primary functions in another person's shadow will clash. So while an NF may try to get along with an NT, apparently at some point, some of the functions of the NT will get on his nerves (like Gabe and you, now).
    Also you have a certainty I'd associate with the INFP shadow (though that could be more background than personality wise).
    I don't get that. What "certainty" in the INFP's shadow?

  6. #66
    To the top of the world arcticangel02's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    eNFP
    Posts
    892

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    When I was first told EFP, I had thought INFP would be closer. That is probably what I look like in person. But people said I was too "enthusiastic" like an extravert. So I'm not even arguing for an introverted type, now.
    Again, that's exactly how I am. I've eventually decided that I'm borderline - slightly on the extraverted side, but really not one of the other. I still get confused sometimes.

    But I was thinking based on the functions, with the premise that people with primary functions in another person's shadow will clash. So while an NF may try to get along with an NT, apparently at some point, some of the functions of the NT will get on his nerves (like Gabe and you, now).
    Curiously, I get along better with NTPs than I do NFPs, actually. Of course we clash, everyone clashes, but from my experience, NFPs get on my nerves moreso than NTPs. So I'm not really sure if you can use that to suggest your type? Just an idea, though.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    At least one or two other people have suggested TJ types, based on all this "Te" they say they see.
    But no, those types are definitely not me. For one thing, the one function that is the most definite with me is strong Ne.
    (which is why others are insisting on an NFP, and yes, I too don't think I'm using it in quite the same way as they do, which is nonpreferred and usually less developed).
    Again, I just think I learned it from my surroundings (which were strongly TJ), and began emulating it. It doesn't even seem really natural to me, but just a strong acquired habit.
    Alright, fair enough. You know yourself better than we do! How about this then: How to you act around people? Describe yourself in a social situation. How are you at your 'best'? At your 'worst'? People have a tendency to look very T when all they're doing on here is arguing points and debating topics - we tend not to see the F side of people as much. So maybe this will help clear up things a bit?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    If I'm supposedly the same type as you, and thus have this Te in the same "puer" position as you (unlike others elsewhere who claimed it brought out their 'witch'), then why is your tone such that you think I would be pissed? Why do you seem to be annoyed?

    I see Xander has rubbed you the wrong way as well. Yet I have not clashed with him like that. To me, the stuff he said that annoyed you just came across as being humorous.
    See, it struck me as more humorous than anything else, too. So you get two ENFPs with very different reactions, which means nothing, really. Again, I wouldn't use someone else's reaction to a certain type as evidence of your type. There is always more going on than just type and functions.

    Are you sure that it is not Ti you are reacting to, which once again, can appear to be "extraverted" when projected by Ne? People who thought I was ENFP expected me to be similarly miffed by Ti, but I do not seem to have that problem at all (hence a big part of my now questioning the whole idea of being ENFP).
    Well, I know in an ENFP, Ne and Fi often combine to give the appearance of Fe. As an ENFP myself, I am very aware that I don't use Fe much at all, but to others it may indeed appear to be the case in the moment. One could assume that an ENTP would exhibit the same behaviour with Ti and Te, but I don't know that it works like that, considering the differences between the nature of F and T (i.e. F can be misinterpreted, since it has to do with people and relating to them, which is complicated and often multi-layered, wheras T is more to do with facts and logic, and thus less easily confused?) I don't know for sure, I'm just ruminating.

    Also, is the way I use Te really the same way an ENFP uses it? Is this how you use it? I don't think it's accurate to see a person using one function, however much, and just take that and build up his whole type from it. There are many causes of a person's behavior. And even then, cognitive dynamics is only one of several ways to detemine type, and a person can easily mistake what he sees in others.
    Is the way you use Te really the way an ENTP uses it? It's impossible to say for either type, since in your case you've clearly developed the function beyond your natural use of it. So I don't think comparing to other ENFPs/ENTPs who haven't developed Te will be useful.

    Anyway, yeah. Tell me how you relate to people!
    ANFP:
    Extraversion (52%) ---- Introversion (48%)
    Sensing (26%) ---- iNtuition (74%)
    Thinking (16%) ---- Feeling (84%)
    Judging (5%) ---- Perceiving (95%)

    9w1 so/sx/sp

  7. #67
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    Is your assessment based on Te as well? Or just the results I posted.
    It's kind of your results making me look for different things within your mannerisms so far and also as an explanaition of your differences from the INTP type which I was previously looking for.
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    When I was first told EFP, I had thought INFP would be closer. That is probably what I look like in person. But people said I was too "enthusiastic" like an extravert. So I'm not even arguing for an introverted type, now.
    Too enthusiastic, my left arm. Extroverts have as much right to be recalcitrant and cautious twits as introverts and vice versa. Hell in some situations you stick me and my ENFJ mate in a room, he's the quiet reserved one who won't say boo whilst I'm the loud, abrupt and opinionated one!
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    But I was thinking based on the functions, with the premise that people with primary functions in another person's shadow will clash. So while an NF may try to get along with an NT, apparently at some point, some of the functions of the NT will get on his nerves (like Gabe and you, now).
    I have no idea what you mean

    (Actually that's half the interest I find with ENFPs (half being a large large overstatement).. somehow the more I try to be extroverted and transparent [thereby trying to head off the paranoid "I wonder if he really meant that" response] the more toes I tread on. I never cease to wonder at what will be picked up and argued over... often things I didn't even consider. In a way my "interations" with ENFPs have taught me a lot about how other's emotions work... Sounds mean said like that but it's a side thing really. I subconciously learn and try to compensate if I think they may get upset... Also I should mention that this applies to all individuals to some degree and not just ENFPs whom I patronise endlessly. I patronise them as a conplete side quest [kidding])
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    I don't get that. What "certainty" in the INFP's shadow?
    ESTJ. You bear the mark of someone who does question their core thinking but with a proviso that the core thinking is correct unless proven to be non-functional. That's more INFP to my eyes. I've had arguments with INFPs before (no surprise there) and have finished having not made one jot of difference to their thinking except to have annoyed them.. A stubborn species to be sure.

    So anyhow, yeah INFP does fit quite well. Thinking about it you email like an INFP. It would also go some way into reasoning your other type system scores.

    Would I be correct in thinking that you've had long term exposure to a T like environment where a detached point of view is preferable to a personal one?
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  8. #68
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    ESTJ. You bear the mark of someone who does question their core thinking but with a proviso that the core thinking is correct unless proven to be non-functional. That's more INFP to my eyes. I've had arguments with INFPs before (no surprise there) and have finished having not made one jot of difference to their thinking except to have annoyed them.. A stubborn species to be sure.
    I can be like that sometimes, depending on what it is, but not always.
    In an idea like this, I like to test it, and put it out there to see what others think. I do take into consideration the feedback.

    I had even tried on these NFP types at the suggestion of others (which would mess up my theory of how the systems correspond, and in Ti fashion, I did look at revising the model). It's just that learning more about the functions made me reconsider that. I had always had questions, as I see myself as pragmatic and structure focused like an NT, so I'm just trying to get that to match.

    So anyhow, yeah INFP does fit quite well. Thinking about it you email like an INFP. It would also go some way into reasoning your other type system scores.

    Would I be correct in thinking that you've had long term exposure to a T like environment where a detached point of view is preferable to a personal one?
    Yes, as I've been saying, I think I've been very influenced by a heavily Te background. And Fi seems to go with that. Perhaps that's what you sense in the e-mails, though I'm not 100% sure what you're referring to.

    Still, I think that devilish/destructive Ti all the way down on the bottom does not describe me. Of course, you could always say that is the "active shadow" that rose up out of its place, but I really don't think so. Ti activities seem to have always been more natural. Te is what has a more negative, shadowy connotation, and is more associated with stress.
    So it's Fi (which I still did score higher on, though Ti was above Te) that I will look into, to continue to understand better, and see how much I've really used it naturally.

  9. #69
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by arcticangel02 View Post
    Alright, fair enough. You know yourself better than we do! How about this then: How to you act around people? Describe yourself in a social situation. How are you at your 'best'? At your 'worst'? People have a tendency to look very T when all they're doing on here is arguing points and debating topics - we tend not to see the F side of people as much. So maybe this will help clear up things a bit?
    I'm basically quiet and withdrawn. I'll join in if I hear someone discussing something I'm interested in, or have a lot of knowledge on. When I'm being quiet (like at work), I'm usually pursuing interests, either online in the mobile, or some literature or something.
    People around me would say I was more introverted, and more thinking. People closer would say the same, but be aware of my sensitive side. I do like people and social gatherings. Larger ones, I'll be more quiet and stick around with the froup I know better. Groups of friends, then I am more expressive and wanting attention.

    The reason I like the [FIRO-based] five-temperament system (the first one I learned about), and want it to be more know about so much, is because it explained me perfectly.
    This is the fifth temperament I have been mentioning, in the social area (Inclusion). It is withdrawn, yet likes people and wants to be included. That is why it was associated with a "servant", which Gabe did not understand. They do like to "serve" people (being nice, doing kind things, etc), because their basic need is to gain acceptance, and they lack the confidence to express to others like the outgoing Sanguine, who uses their expressive charm and readily approaches people. So I can attest to the "servant's heart", though, yes, it is basically a "Christianeze" term.

    However, in the area of leadership and responsibilities (Control), I'm the familiar old "Choleric", which is the diametric opposite of my social temperament. I want things my own way, will want to bear influence and control, and don't want to be controlled by others. So I have this angry, aggressive streak at times. Yet, the social area does modify this tendency, because I realize if I push people too much, I will not get the acceptance of that need area. And the Control area keeps me from being a total doormat, or waiting to be invited to things and too afraid to ask. Hence, my shutting people out to focus on interests (including these discussions), and then jumping in with them when I hear them bring up something of interest.

    It is often a confusing weighing of options. And I think that it is this combination that is giving me both I/E and T/F ambiguity. The temperament + Interaction Styles = 16 types approach is a four × four temperament system. The fifth one does not fit in as well. The closest thing on the Interaction level is Behind the Scenes, but that is correlated with Phlegmatic. Phlegmatic was regarded as "introverted" and "agreeable" (or people-focused), but in the five temperament system, its behavior is actually measured as moderate in both scales, and the new temperament takes its place. So this new temperament is even more shy, yet at the same time, more wanting of people. This "want" is called "responding as an extrovert". And someone has said that the "extraversion" scale in MBTI includes wants and not just expression. So that, plus my more aggressive "Control", would explain why I might come out as an E type. Also, it seems the greater "want" increases "Feeling" traits as well. You are so focused on what people think of you, being accepted, etc. That, however, clashes with the Control, which is described as both intuitive, and UNfeeling.
    Yes, Keirsey linked the iNtuitive Feeler to Choleric, but he used a different criterion, and it does not match the sense in which I'm Choleric, though it would appear to justify my being an NFP type. But the "Choleric" aspect of my personality is the opposite of the NF with its need for connection with others. It does seem to match the NT better, though, and some people do say that I'm like an INTP, and I would probably look like one if you saw me. But it's the cognitive dynamics that don't seem to match.
    So what it looks like to me, is that I may have started out more Ti-ish, but then because of my circumstances, I overdeveloped Te and with it, Fi. My "Inclusion" was already more susceptible to increasing a "feeling" focus, in that environment than a normal "Behind the Scenes" would have been. A Phlegmatic/Choleric would have been less likely to be that affected, because the Phlegmatic is not fazed by things like that as much. From what I've seen, "pure" INTP's like Xander seem to fit that combination better (His FIRO scores are close enough to that).

    I go into this stuff so much, again, because I have found it to explain behavior so much, but the MBTI and cognitive functions do as well, and I like how they can possibly fit together. (Just like all the people trying to harmonize MBTI with Enneagram).

    Curiously, I get along better with NTPs than I do NFPs, actually. Of course we clash, everyone clashes, but from my experience, NFPs get on my nerves moreso than NTPs. So I'm not really sure if you can use that to suggest your type? Just an idea, though.
    See, it struck me as more humorous than anything else, too. So you get two ENFPs with very different reactions, which means nothing, really. Again, I wouldn't use someone else's reaction to a certain type as evidence of your type. There is always more going on than just type and functions.
    OK.
    Maybe I allowed myself to become too influenced by a supposed 'expert', who does use the archetypes (and shadows) to explain practically all behavior and personality clashes.

    Well, I know in an ENFP, Ne and Fi often combine to give the appearance of Fe. As an ENFP myself, I am very aware that I don't use Fe much at all, but to others it may indeed appear to be the case in the moment. One could assume that an ENTP would exhibit the same behaviour with Ti and Te, but I don't know that it works like that, considering the differences between the nature of F and T (i.e. F can be misinterpreted, since it has to do with people and relating to them, which is complicated and often multi-layered, wheras T is more to do with facts and logic, and thus less easily confused?) I don't know for sure, I'm just ruminating.
    I was wondering if Ne did the same thing with Fi. The Ne+Ti effect I had seen someone else mention on the Spam Pudding board (I PM'ed elfinchilde who was over there, asking her to join this discussion, but she hasn't answered. She breaks those cognitive process test answers down so thoroughly). That might partially explain what you all are seeing in me. You may see "thinking" being 'extraverted" towards you, but the internal use of it is there as well, and I had my models and frameworls of this stuff all worked out before I began trying to share it.

  10. #70
    Senior Member Gabe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    590

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    Of course they don't fit perfectly, but there are good parallels, at least. The fact that both Keirsey and Berens linked their models (conation and interaction style) to the temperaments (as well as to Social Styles, DiSC and others) shows there are some strong commonalities there. You yourself used as the example NF supposedly being Choleric, though I blieve that was was matched wrongly.
    (And it's not really symmetrical either. Between T/F and J/P, the temperaments and Interaction Styles are reckoned differently according to S and N. That is very asymmetrical, and other people I know prefer to use an all new model, such as SP, SJ, NP, NJ or TP, TJ, FP, FJ, or Myer's original ST, SF, NT, NF. Those are symmetrical, and do not match to the previous temperament theory.
    That's the conative (Keirseyan) temperaments. The Interaction Styles are also, technically "temperaments" (and make easier matches with the ancient ones), and they are drawn strictly along directing and informing (along with E/I).
    The five factors are Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Openness and Neuroticism. None are measured as "good" or "bad". The closest to that would be Neuroticism, which is generally seen as being less emotionally healthy, if high.
    We of course know extraversion. Agreeableness would correspond to directing/informing. Conscientiousness would correspond to Cooperative/Pragmatic. Openness would be S/N.
    In the statistical correlations, Agreeableness is matched with T/F and Conscientiousness is matched with J/P. In the Interaction Styles model, this is true for Sensors. For iNtuitors, it reverses. Based on Eysenck's original definition of Neuroticism (ability to experience negative emotions), I would say it to some extent is like the inverse of Agreeableness. Eysenck used the Galenic temperaments, and the "directives" (Melancholic and Choleric) were high N, while the more agreeable ones (Sanguine and Phlegmatic) were low N. I would say the split at the fifth temperament, which is agreeable, yet also high N, because of its need for acceptance. But then that's the FIRO-based temperament theory. For MBTI, another updated version, called TDI, is adding a new scale called "Comfort-Discomfort", which aims to match Neuroticism. Keirsey or Berens do not seem to be attempting to add this to their theories.

    And the number of factors has nothing to do with the number of temperaments. The four Keirsey temperaments use only two of the factors (S/N, and C/Prag), not all four, so it's not like "one factor for each temperament".

    I don't think that I exactly said that about "mastery and competence". I had linked it to "Choleric". Yet, the NF's do not seem like power hungry dictators. In fact, in some statistical correlations done between FIRO and MBTI, the NT's and most SP's did have the highest correlations with "expressed Control" (which would indicate a tendency to assuming leadership, or controlling). It seems the focus of the different type and temperament profiles is different, so they may not directly describe those traits. Yet the inclinations may still be there. Again, with the NTJ's it is more evident.
    As kids, it seems many types are a bit more expressive than when they are fully developed. Even the most introverted of all, the Melancholies. And what do you mean by "quick temper". With the INFP, from what I see, both in profiles and dealing with one online, their "temper" may flare up quickly, but it will be after a long period of building up. That's not what I meant by "quick temper", but actually fits the opposite Supine or possibly Phlegmatic temperament better. The Choleric's "quick temper" refers to the fact that they vent so much, nearly constantly, and this is the reputation for the temperament. Though this is more the Interaction area, and NF/NT is conation. So it is not necessarily a quick temper that defines the Choleric, but rather the leadership style. The appearance of 'arrogance', like you are complaining about regarding Xander, and is often leveled at NT's, is one sign of it. In an NTP type with an informing (friendly) Interaction Style (which temppers the more "critical" traits), it will not come out as much as quick temper or controlling.
    Uh, I did not make that name up, I only relayed the basis of it being given to that previously unrecognized additional temperament. Actually, I would have named it something else, myself. But just like the names "Guardian", "Artisan", Idealist",and "Rational" (or Stabilizer, Improviser, Catalyst and Theorist), the names are based on a specific trait of the pattern, used as general descriptors of the temperament. Of course, there is much more to the temperament than just that one description. The behavior patterns were there all along, but did not fit into the other four, so it was probably confused with the others. (Like, it is very reserved like a Melancholy, yet likes people like a Sanguine, and appears amiable like a Phlegmatic). It is also very similar to the Enneagram type 6.
    Yet, again, I never said I wasn't using it. But I explained possibly why.

    If I'm supposedly the same type as you, and thus have this Te in the same "puer" position as you (unlike others elsewhere who claimed it brought out their 'witch'), then why is your tone such that you think I would be pissed? Why do you seem to be annoyed?
    I see Xander has rubbed you the wrong way as well. Yet I have not clashed with him like that. To me, the stuff he said that annoyed you just came across as being humorous. (According to his somewhat moderate FIRO scores, which are on his blog, you would expect him to have a bit of a dry, wry humor, like a Phlegmatic, in which some people might not know how it is to be taken).

    Are you sure that it is not Ti you are reacting to, which once again, can appear to be "extraverted" when projected by Ne? People who thought I was ENFP expected me to be similarly miffed by Ti, but I do not seem to have that problem at all (hence a big part of my now questioning the whole idea of being ENFP). And don't try to say "trickster" Ti, again. I do not fit the description of that use of it (remember, that archetype is more about "stress"). I seem to like or at least get along with it, and it is more like Te that has always annoyed me, though I may try to emulate it a lot (in response).

    Also, is the way I use Te really the same way an ENFP uses it? Is this how you use it? I don't think it's accurate to see a person using one function, however much, and just take that and build up his whole type from it. There are many causes of a person's behavior. And even then, cognitive dynamics is only one of several ways to detemine type, and a person can easily mistake what he sees in others.
    uh, it's just as easy to be dissagreeable with informing communication. In fact, I don't agree with any of those. so please don't state it as if it's fact (how in the world would openness correspond with S/N? Why. I can think of a few fake reasons but no real ones) I admit that I have no idea what the 'affiliative vs. pragmatic' role stuff is about (I'll look it up). Yeah, I'm not even sure about the leadership thing. The majority of U.S presidents have probably been stabalizers, and other countries have had catylist leaders, so I bet it has much more to do with the culture of the institutions. Besides, theorissts (IRL) can seem arrogant whether or not they actually have any power or influence. Also, as much as I would not like to admit it, democracy was thought up by theorists. And in countries that are not 'ready' for democracy, that culture is inforced by all of the types, including the catylists. I also think that Mao Zedong was an ENFJ.

    I won't acknowledge the existence of a supine temperment, AND it occurs to me that NTJs don't actually have particularily quick tempers.

    Xander didn't annoy me because of my type, and he didn't annoy me because of some supposedly 'phlegmatic' humor. He annoyed me because I now have an extremely short fuse for type bias. This forum should be for learning, and contriving a fake 'battle of the types' out of boredom serves no purpuse. I am still dissapointed that some people are so obviously bored with the material, and just try to make a game out of it. Have some respect for the ideas! Jung came up with his stuff through years of study, not through five minutes of armchair thinking.

Similar Threads

  1. [INFP] ENFP/INFP differences in dealing with conflict
    By Anomoly in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-25-2015, 07:06 PM
  2. [ENFP] ENFPs & INFPs: Our Relationship
    By Adasta in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 79
    Last Post: 10-13-2011, 04:14 PM
  3. [ENFP] ENFP/INFP relationship
    By tortoise in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-10-2010, 08:55 PM
  4. [MBTItm] ENFP / INFP couples?
    By Mighty Mouse in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 08-31-2010, 12:25 PM
  5. [MBTItm] ENFP-INFP: How much emotion and vulnerability do you show others?
    By heart in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 68
    Last Post: 05-22-2010, 10:24 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO