ENFP/INFP

[arcticangel02]

Well, since I'm talking about the uses of the functions, which are probably driven unconsciously, then you would think an MBTI-based test would be more likely engineered to pick that up. Though since Cognitiveprocesses test is I believe by Berens, and which category does that really fall under? She's basically Keirseyan, but recombines his theory with MBTI ("the Mixed Model").

I'm not exactly that well-read between the different systems, so your observations would probably be better than mine!

But even though, yes, an MBTI test should be designed specifically for that purpose, how is it possible to properly distinguish the two? Especially when trying to test someone who may not be that self-aware, or familiar with the system? Both tests ask questions about behaviour, since that's what's visible and quantifiable on the outside. Kiersey takes that as it is, but MBTI attempts to use the external picture to describe what happens on the inside. Not always that accurate, unfortunately.

Having dinner with my family last night, we recalled the time 20 years ago, when my father was having sewrious issues and taking it out on us. I was in my early 20's, and stuck in minimum wage jobs that did not pay enough for me to get out on my own. So he was harassing me about that, often drunk. (This is one of those times I was getting an overload of Te style thrown my way).

So after losing one of these jobs one afternoon, I just walked to the Times Sq. recruiting center and signed up for the Air Force.

That's perhaps the biggest "family"-related decision I made, though that also seemed to be something a lot of people did.

Interesting. I don't know if I can really say which preference that would indicte, though - what were your reasonings for signing up with the Air Force? To prove your dad wrong? Or because it was simply the best way out of minimum wage jobs? If you can, maybe go through your thoughts/feelings at that point?

ALSO - very important point which I nearly missed - the military moulds people into STJ personalities. That may also explain a lot of your Te. How were you different when you were younger? Eg, late teens?

I thought about that too, but still, as the dominant or "hero" function, I would think it would have more of a positive connotation a lot of the times; at least when they think of it outside of the negative reaction. A lot of times, it is hard for me to make Fi judgments, and I end up indifferent to things, or look for a logical reason for a decision.

Possibly. I mean, in my own situation, I don't know if I really pay that much attention to Fi very often at all. Given, it's not my dominant function, but still - I would probably have to think long and hard to even come up with a few things that I believed steadfastly in, to the point where someone crossing those values would cause a conflict. I don't know - I suppose I use it, I must do! But as far as making 'Fi judgements', I wouldn't know what they are! I do something because it 'feels' right? Maybe, but there's usually good reasons for why that is.

I don't feel like I really have that solid center that Fi is supposed to offer - oftentimes I worry that I change my opinions too often, depending on what other people think. Or maybe this is just a matter of me believing that everyone is entitled to their own beliefs, and nobody is ever wrong, as such?

Indifferent is also something I wonder about, sometimes. Do you ever feel 'detatched' from a conversation, like you're there, sure, and you're reacting to those people around you - often appearing quite involved - but somehow, it's a little like you're floating above it all, and even as you interact, there's still pieces of you that are wondering about this and that that have nothing to do with the current situation? I get that. But maybe that's Ne.

Ah, I don't know. I can't really identify Fi very easily, so this probably isn't helping things much.

Again, the Fi/Ti distinction, as well as "negative use of primary function vs positive use of shadow function" seems to be very fuzzy. Ti really does not seem to have any of that negative connotation, or something that comes up mostly under stress, and then is basically misused, or "destructuve". This is what came to mind first, and then when I looked at Fi (and Te) to compare, it was like yeah; those are what seem to have more of a strictly negative association).

Oftentimes the borderline is very fuzzy indeed! Who can tell where Ti stops and Fi starts? For one person what they may consider a feeling decision, another might chalk it up to thinking. It's personal, for sure.

And well, I can't exactly argue, if for you, those have had more of a negative association, wheras Ti has not.

Well, like Keirsey said, E/I is the least important dichotomy. Looking at the functions, two types with only an E/I difference willhave the same primary functions, in a different order (types with totally opposite T/F + J/P will have the same functions as well, but they'll be totally reversed, and this is what you all call the "shadow")

Yes, absolutely. The ENFJ, for example, although I love them, they're great - they're so different from me function-wise... I find it very difficult to believe that people can get stuck on the J/P dichotomy!

Everyone claims to be seeing "heavy" Te with me. Others say ENFP (though I'm not really "flighty" and stuff like that, though I can be occasionally, with close friends), and a few of you are suggesting INFP. For that type, Te is even lower, in the inferior position (and bordering on "shadow"). Online, such as these discussions, is basically recreation for me, although I am "into it", and often rushed if I have to go to work or bed, or something else, like you described above (and then the board/site starts freezing down on top of it:steam

Maybe the lower (i.e inferior) Te of the INFP is what causes the slightly negative connotations for you? Because you had to develop it prematurely?
My Si is pretty poor, but according to theory, it's not until later in adulthood that I should really start to develop this function. It does cause headaches when I am required to depend on it.

But you're clearly older than I am, so you're going to be more well-rounded, function-wise. Which also complicates things! But yes, these boards are also fun for me - I enjoy stretching my brain and debating skills when I so choose.

I think I'm a lot like that, and again, underestimated it.

Yes, see, I'm quite the opposite. I couldn't keep that sort of information in my mind for more than a minute, even if I tried. Which I don't, because I sort of think it's pointless. And as far as birthday presents, well, I am also guilty of 'not being bothered' on that case and just saying I forgot. Though usually that's only when I have to put a big last-minute rush into it because I forgot up until then!

How would you say your Fe manifests itself?

I'm quite aware of that, and I have noted it is becoming harder to take these tests. In the test my wife administers, they clearly say the person should now know too much about it, else, it will be compromised. (I used to start talking about it with friends she was planning to test, and she would tell me not to do that. I put a big warning up on the beginning of my page describing the theory). What I meant, was, since I still have my choices I made on both that and the Step II subscales, to just review and see if I might have scored to high or low on them. Again, I was letting my wife look a the Step II, and I'm sure she will say I scored too high on the T/F scales. She already said that for E over I.

At least you're aware, that's the important thing!

And I've never taken the Step II, so I don't really know how it works, exactly, or what conclusions you can draw.

Now, I have my Fe Dom. wife who will do all that stuff. So it's like I have fallen off on Fe. But I'm remembering that I was more into remembering people's birthdays, and such before her.

So, when you're married to someone for a while, if you're of similar type, you'll start to drift away from each other in order to pick up the slack that naturally wouldn't be taken care of. Yet on the other hand, if you're quite different, like in the case of my parent's relationship (ESTJ father and IsFP mother), they seem to have gravitated towards each other - my mother comes off like an ISTJ in many situations. Dad is also more F than he was, but still quite clearly ESTJ. That may be because he's such a strong personality, that everyone has to get into line with his way of doing things? I don't know. But it seems like one of those two things will happen, anyway. Thoughts?

So what is different; the motivation? Fi/Fe can also be another fuzzy distinction. In one of Hartzler's exercises (Fi7), it appears to involve connecting with others. But then this is supposedly about looking at their values in light of your own.

I would imagine it's the Golden Rule vs. the Platinum Rule. Fi does to others what they want done to themselves, while Fe does to others purely what they want, or the values of the whole group. So I guess the ENFP in your example of "apparent Fe" is just being nice because they want others to be nice to them?

Hmm. Quite possibly, but from observations, it seems a little different. This may just be my perception of it, but nonetheless: Fe seems to me to be more like... how do I describe this properly? Imposing their own beliefs about how you should be feeling on other people? Hrm. That sounds bad, but let me try and explain. Like, one quote an ESFJ friend of mine found somewhere, which I found wonderfully appropriate, went: "I will fight for you, even if you don't think you need me to."

Fe is prepared to stick it's neck out there for you, and make all the motions that it is believes it is supposed to do for you. It perhaps has a tendency to overlook the possibility that perhaps you don't want that sort of attention/support - but Fe will do it anyway. Which is often great, but sometimes a little over the top. (Although maybe that's more specific to dominant Fe). Fe is loyal - it will stick with you, even if you have hurt it, or rejected it before. Fe will do all it can do to help you.

Fi, on the other hand, is more... ah, shall we say, absorbing? They divulge less of themselves. They don't nessecarily need to spill their problems to their friends in order to work through them - they may even fail to express at all, and be in need of someone else to draw them out. As opposed to the direct intervention approach of Fe, Fi will sit and listen to what you have to say, and once you have said all you have to say, will suggest solutions. Because Fi absorbs external emotion, and carries it within themselves. Fe expresses, and lets it out.

Again, I dunno if that will help any, but maybe you'll recognise somethng in there.

Here's a question - how are you at telling other people things that are very important to you? Like something that's emotionally very close to your heart. Do you express it easily, or is there something that wants to keep it protected and close to you? Say there's something that's eating at your mind, and you need to tell someone - would you rather talk to someone you don't know well, just to let it out? Or to your friends, who'll dissect it and pick it apart?

I seem to be able to go either way with that, but I remember being a bit more into others' needs when doing something for them, before life started getting rough.

So what is Ti really like for an ENFP? It's supposed to be "trickster", meaning they are not normally into principles or categories, but under stress may become rigid about selected principles thinking it will ensure sucess when it wont. Do you have any examples of this?

Hrm. That's a tricky one. The only really experience I have with Ti is my INTP friend's method of arguing. I notice she picks apart arguments by going after any flaw - even if it has nothing to do with the actual topic of discussion. Usually, I have very little patience with it (and besides, her Ti beats my Fi/Te in a debate anyday), but I suppose on occasions when I'm feeling crabby, it gives me a strange sort of delight to do the same to other people, and go after irrelevant little details of the sort.

I can't really give you any examples of becoming rigid about selected principles - I'm lucky in the sense that I have not really ever had to deal with operating under serious levels of stress. Under general everyday stress, like deadlines, I either go into Te-mode, which gets the things that are stressing me out done and finished with, or, if it's not solvable with that mode (for example, I'm doing too much, the future's going to be way overloaded with work and i know I'm going to drown in it) I go to pieces and get panicky and can't seem to hold onto anything. I don't know if that tells you much, though.

 

[Xander]

Just to pop back in again (long hiatus... couldn't get on the forum). Fs don't want to be Ts any more than Ts want to be Fs IME. It's more because we're taught that logic is how you reason from A to B and it's taught that logic is impersonal. That's always been a blatant lie and also, ironically, illogical. How do you describe reasoned thought from point A to point B though? Fs do reason... maybe not rationally (though some of the rationalisations I've heard kept me laughing for hours ) but it is reasoning and often it does make rational sense to them.

I think that's the key really personal reasoning or impersonal reasoning. The whole idea that one thinks and one feels is both ridiculous and misleading.

Oh and to be perfectly honest, I doubt you've been using impersonal reasoning all that time Mr Viking. I'm not poking a finger nor fun but I do pick up that you're a serious F, in that you're not fluffy. That causes many confusion... like my ENFJ mate... with the diplomacy of a breeze block being swung from a crane.


As a parting shot for you two musers... is preference really how much you use something or is it which you'd prefer to use? Should it be infered that preference means competancy as the function you'd prefer, you'd use more and therefore develop. Should it be kept seperate from competancy?

The use of the word "preference" also gives me cause for concern.

 

[Eric B]

Interesting. I don't know if I can really say which preference that would indicte, though - what were your reasonings for signing up with the Air Force? To prove your dad wrong? Or because it was simply the best way out of minimum wage jobs? If you can, maybe go through your thoughts/feelings at that point?

My father would sometimes suggest the Air Force, to get out of those jobs. He was pressuring me to "do something". So when I lost that last job, I just went and did it. Not to prove him wrong, but it was sort of defiant, in that I was getting out from under him. Plus, I didn't feel like facing telling him I was unemployed again. It was so hard to find even the menial jobs I had. (Then, he was upset about "why I didn't talk to him first"!

ALSO - very important point which I nearly missed - the military moulds people into STJ personalities. That may also explain a lot of your Te. How were you different when you were younger? Eg, late teens?

No, I was pretty much infused with outside Te before joining. Even boot camp was light stuff compared to what I was receiving verbally for the whole previous decade (starting right before teens). Boot camp instructors did not know anything about you, except what they saw. So it was easier to detach from them.

Indifferent is also something I wonder about, sometimes. Do you ever feel 'detatched' from a conversation, like you're there, sure, and you're reacting to those people around you - often appearing quite involved - but somehow, it's a little like you're floating above it all, and even as you interact, there's still pieces of you that are wondering about this and that that have nothing to do with the current situation? I get that. But maybe that's Ne.

That happens, and yes, it probably is more Ne.

Maybe the lower (i.e inferior) Te of the INFP is what causes the slightly negative connotations for you? Because you had to develop it prematurely?

It seem to be more than slight. I just got home late from a job safety class (given in reaction to the death of two workers last year); and it was just a rehash of previous rules, with some new restrictions or clarifications added, and in some respects, I feel it doesn't get to the heart of things enough to solve problems. It's just patching the problem to say "we did something". I can see how it's reasoned: "OBJECTIVE: Increase saftety awareness and measures. RECOMMENDATION: make these rules tighter, etc." It's all very Te, STJ'ish formalism, and it made me think even more about how much I really hate Te. I've always been this way. I just became jealous of it, and sought to emulate it. Now this would perhaps fit in as an "aspirational" use of it (matching the inferior position of the IFP's), but it is a very negative kind of "aspiration" (when I think of it, I really do not want to be that way), and then looking at my own use of it, it seems very "oppositional", (which is actually the next position, though over the "shadow" boundary), or perhaps "witch".

How would you say your Fe manifests itself?

I think admiring it in people like my wife (though it can get annoying when it is pushed on me, and too hard at times, and I think there may be some shadow "oppositional" Fi mixed in with it). I myself always imagined being more like her, hosting others with her, etc. suggesting that may be the true "aspirational" function on the boundary of the shadow. It's just that my Ne pursuits get in the way.

And I've never taken the Step II, so I don't really know how it works, exactly, or what conclusions you can draw.

I just got Hartzler's book on the subscales/facets, and this is helping me understand them better. I'm going to reassess them as far as my use in the I/E and T/F areas, since they were so iffy for me.

Basically, it breaks each of the four dichotomies into five smaller dichtomies. This allows people who seem to be ambiguous to see in exactly which area of the main scale they differ in. There is another thread right below in this forum describing it.

So, when you're married to someone for a while, if you're of similar type, you'll start to drift away from each other in order to pick up the slack that naturally wouldn't be taken care of. Yet on the other hand, if you're quite different, like in the case of my parent's relationship (ESTJ father and IsFP mother), they seem to have gravitated towards each other - my mother comes off like an ISTJ in many situations. Dad is also more F than he was, but still quite clearly ESTJ. That may be because he's such a strong personality, that everyone has to get into line with his way of doing things? I don't know. But it seems like one of those two things will happen, anyway. Thoughts?

Not sure. Probably could go either way, depending on the people and other issues involved.

Hmm. Quite possibly, but from observations, it seems a little different. This may just be my perception of it, but nonetheless: Fe seems to me to be more like... how do I describe this properly? Imposing their own beliefs about how you should be feeling on other people? Hrm. That sounds bad

That kind of sounds like the way Fi is described. You're using your own values, and projecting it on the other person. Fe is supposed to be about connecting with the other person's or group's values, if I understand correctly.

Here's a question - how are you at telling other people things that are very important to you? Like something that's emotionally very close to your heart. Do you express it easily, or is there something that wants to keep it protected and close to you? Say there's something that's eating at your mind, and you need to tell someone - would you rather talk to someone you don't know well, just to let it out? Or to your friends, who'll dissect it and pick it apart?

I'd rather tell friends, and let them dissect it. Telling strangers could be making yourself too vulnerable. I think I've stretched the limit with all the stuff I've been saying about my life, here.

Hrm. That's a tricky one. The only really experience I have with Ti is my INTP friend's method of arguing. I notice she picks apart arguments by going after any flaw - even if it has nothing to do with the actual topic of discussion. Usually, I have very little patience with it

That's how I am a lot.

but I suppose on occasions when I'm feeling crabby, it gives me a strange sort of delight to do the same to other people, and go after irrelevant little details of the sort.

I can't really give you any examples of becoming rigid about selected principles - .

Probably what you just described would be part fof it. When you feel crabby; that negative connotation suggests the function is shadow for you.

As a parting shot for you two musers... is preference really how much you use something or is it which you'd prefer to use? Should it be infered that preference means competancy as the function you'd prefer, you'd use more and therefore develop. Should it be kept seperate from competancy?

The use of the word "preference" also gives me cause for concern.

I believe it is prefer to use, with "prefer" meaning in a more positive sense (hence the primary archetypes). A lot of people have been looking at how much a person uses them, but a person can apparently use a shadow function a lot. Yet, it waill usually have some negative connotation, such as being associated with stress.

 

[arcticangel02]

Hi Xander! Welcome back! :hi:

I think admiring it in people like my wife (though it can get annoying when it is pushed on me, and too hard at times, and I think there may be some shadow "oppositional" Fi mixed in with it). I myself always imagined being I was more like her, hosting others with her, etc. suggesting that may be the true "aspirational" function on the boundary of the shadow. It's just that my Ne pursuits get in the way.

Well, I admire Fe, too. I am sometimes quite jealous of the way they open up and offer themselves so completely to their friends and the people around them! The social circles they develop are indeed invaluable in whatever endeavour you may choose to undertake.

That kind of coulds lkke the way Fi is described. Your using your own values, and projecting it on the other person. Fe is supposed to be about connecting with the other person's or group's values, if I understand correctly.

I know the theory, but in my experience that's the most visible difference between the two, at least in observation - Fi absorbs emotion, Fe emits it.

I'd rather tell friends, and let them dissect it. Telling strangers could be making yourself too vulnerable. I think I've stretched the limit with all the stuff I've been saying about my life, here.

That's how I am a lot.

That you don't have patience with it? Or you do the nitpick thing?

Probably what you just described would be part fof it. When you feel crabby; that negative connotation suggests the function is shadow for you.

That makes sense.

I can't really find much to say that I haven't already mentioned before - my best guess is that you're an INxP. I'd still say INFP over INTP, but you seem fairly convinced that Te and Fi are in your shadow, and although I'm not sure - I see more of them than Ti and Fe - you obviously know yourself better than I do, and what may be coming across on a forum is obviously only a certain part of yourself. Hopefully this discussion has been helpful for you, regardless!

 

[Dom]

I hadn't forgotten this. It's just so difficult to think of anything "very difficult", because I'm very indifferent about a lot of things.
The best thing I can think of is moving, 3 months ago. We had to get out of an old, vermin infested apartment, we had just moved into a little over a year earlier to get out of another vermin infested place. I did not feel like moving again. So my wife suggested hiring movers this time. My parents helped with the money.

We looked for the first decent thing we could find. We went to look at two places not too far from where we were. One was cheaper and brand new brick/concrete constructed house, with a balcony. It looked a bit small, though. The other was a few years old prefab construction house, but the rent was higher. So we weighed the price, and location. The second one was in an area being rebuilt after decades of decay, yet it is closer to the transportation hub. So that's good for me. With the price, plus the familiarity of that side of the neighborhood, I guess it was "difficult".
We were interviewed by both, but only the second called back, and that's what we ended up taking. My wife loves it. I think it's nice. Good that the vermin are gone, and it's all new, and even has a little yard. (My wife is a definite "feeling" type).

I was basically indifferent, because I had my own ideas of what and where I wanted to live, but it was a matter of the price, and then spending time looking for more places, and if it's far, she would be away from her friends and have to travel further to get to church (where she works as a counselor). But we had to take something now, and with me, it was pretty much "whatever" (the only thing I am strictly against is a wood frame building, because they burn down too easily). So what we got was nice, so we're happy.

So basically, you would have been content with either property and allowed your wife's strong prefences to decide...

Damn that could easily be either I guess, all though my own personal bias against entps could create an explanation that you are not one... lol...

The two entps I know/knew really well, would probably have found seemingly independent problems or issues with the properties untill their other half realised that where they wanted to live was the only really suitable place, the others having too many problems...

but like I said I'm merely being a little mean. Frankly, i'm not sure what makes a home for me, and what doesn't, I do recall that my ENTJ ex wife picked teh house I bought before we were married, because she said it had a "good feeling" I liked it because it had an 18' kitchen! And I'm defo the F.

However, I many be leaning a little with Xander, and am starting to think INFP maybe, mainly because you remembered to come back with something, and you had thought about the example long and hard, rather than sorting through the first three or four that came to mind and flinging one back quickly...

This is even more personal, but when you decided to get married, how easy was the decision and what helped make up your mind?



I may catch up on the rest of the thread in a bit... SOrry I've been gone so long...

 

[Dom]

Dom (addressing 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.

Thank you for your concern! While others have already mentioned that xander and I go back irl, go back about 18 years now, it is nice that someone would worry over this. I try very hard not to let it bother me, sometimes I think Xander doesn't realise how much of an emotional response he causes, mainly because I suppress them. The friendship is of significant value to me to continue, despite the fact that several outside observers do not understand why. The other reason for suppressing most of these emotional response is that as an INTP Xander doesn't value them, and merely sees them as something to be weathered and waits for Dom to eventually calm down and get back to being sensible again... "Of course he doesn't MEAN to be offensive" it's always a joke I've taken to heart too much. Or at least I think that is how he sees it. The comment about propping up my mental abilities is hardly ever going to be welcome, but once pushed he admits that I've helped him at points too etc. It's a pity he always seems to need to be pushed.

Also for many years (when we were younger) we would have the hugest fights and debates. How responsible he is for my over-developed (for an ENFP) Ti (something he may deign but the tests say is there) is another debate, while i certainly had to learn how to voice my concepts and ideas in a manner he'd accept, I also had an NT father and two NT brothers lol and only my wholly unstable mother as another NF role model...

(Just a little cue for you, I've known Dom since school and most of my nearest and dearest friends, partners and family are F's. Just because I don't have any particular bias though doesn't mean I have to sound like it... where would be the fun in that? )

Hehe Xander? you realise this sounds so much like the "but some of my best friends are black" retort commonly made by someone whose been charged with inherent racism!!

Eric,
One thing which may help you (and perhaps trip you up) is the use of the words 'thinking' and 'logic'.

OK so I think we need to talk about logic, maybe not here but somewhere else. Logic is simply a statement of truth, and that is that. Is this statement true or false? If so then what does this statement mean? Computer code is logical: "If x = 10 then print 'x=10'" it does a logical test and a logical consequence follows. It tests to see if the premise is TRUE (does x = 10) Now Xander you and I have argued with many about the non- existence of an absolute or objective truth, or maybe for the suggestion that even if it did exist our paradigm wouldn't allow us to comprehend it fully. Therefore what is true, becomes subjective to the individual. This is were people start to go wrong with claiming whether people are being logical or not.

My father has always told me that if you ask an F (this is a bit of stereotyping but serves me well as an initial guideline) if they are logical and they'll tell you they are but they're not. Now I don't completely agree with that but I do note that with an F their logic is tied much closer to their initial emotional response than a T. Not that Ts are immune to their ID, it's just not as visceral IME.

Your father, who also happens to be an NT, is wrong; an F is capable of logical thought. As I just tried to illustrate the structure in which that thought takes place could be very different from your, or his, own. This is why I sometimes end up inside peoples heads, it's because I try to understand and figure out what that structure is. Your comment that you don't agree that Fs are not logical is then tempered with a note that 'their' logic (acceptance of the different mental constraints and structure's I've been discussing) is tied to their initial emotional response. This suggests that in 'your structure' you find tying an emotional response into a logical decision making process a contradiction in terms, and that to be logical one should be impersonal and dispassionate. If we were talking about an absolute, objective standard, to measure each persons decision making processes against then this would be fine but we've already established that such a thing doesn't exist. How I feel about things, may be much more important to my overall contentedness than what a more rigorous attempt at dispassionate reasoning, if it is, which it is, then it is only LOGICAL that those feelings be tied closely into the decision making process.

As for the use of the word "thinking", every INFP I know is a deep thinker. On par with most INTPs (I'm leaving out the reclusive INTP as they appear to be nothing more than thought half the time) for sheer just sitting on their ass and thinking of stuff. The one I meet with regularly is more a kin to a hole in a dam when he visits as the ideas and concepts flood out like a fire hydrant! So it's not really a good word to think of in terms of people, similarly with feeling as it's often quite obvious to me the emotional bias of the multiple ESTJs I appear to be working with.

This I totally agree with, trying to type oneself on the basis of being a deep thinker or not would be very hard. Most people would consider themselves a deep thinker and it would take a highly developed and comfortable person to be happy to admit that they aren't.... I of course am a very deep thinker... lol

As for your behaviour versus your cognitive wiring, the two aren't always going to match as we've discussed. That's why I asked about your background because if you've had to deal with people who expect objective reasoning then that is what you will develop. I grew up with 3 Js in the house and though I'm no neat freak I do tend to present plans fully formed with contingencies and such... not that these things come naturally but that's what I expect people to want and do because that's what I had to do as a child. Also thing like the military will drum plenty of STJ into you. Apparently an INFP who has served in the military is likely to be quite alike to an ESTJ as they've had to use their shadow so much to "survive" in such an NF hostile environment.

I'm not sure how far I'd agree that Xander comes up with fully fledged plans.. I mean just trying to work out what we are going to eat if we all go out is a nightmare!!! lol

But seriously, again he makes a very valid point, how you behave is not necessarily along with your natural, if there is such a thing, cognitive preference. I have developed my Ti etc. I hope Xander is developing his Fe... etc... Also I know that I have got stuck in Ti loops, where what I want to do doesn't match what my attempts at a dispassionate decision making process led me too. Sometimes you have to work out where you are happiest or most content, letting your heart rule, or your head. This is why I asked about big life decisions. I temper my heart with my head, but sometimes I have to just let my heart have it's way regardless of how mad it seems, I guess that is why we're off to Vegas in less than 3 weeks :horor: (j/k)

Just to pop back in again (long hiatus... couldn't get on the forum). Fs don't want to be Ts any more than Ts want to be Fs IME. It's more because we're taught that logic is how you reason from A to B and it's taught that logic is impersonal. That's always been a blatant lie and also, ironically, illogical. How do you describe reasoned thought from point A to point B though? Fs do reason... maybe not rationally (though some of the rationalisations I've heard kept me laughing for hours ) but it is reasoning and often it does make rational sense to them.

It is perfectly rational, once you step into their mental context. Sigh though I'm in danger of using myself as an example of all Fs which is blatantly unfair. Actually that is annoying, generalisations about Fs have to include me, though I can't generalise about Fs based upon me.... sigh... who said life was fair huh?

As a parting shot for you two musers... is preference really how much you use something or is it which you'd prefer to use? Should it be inferred that preference means competency as the function you'd prefer, you'd use more and therefore develop. Should it be kept separate from competency?

The use of the word "preference" also gives me cause for concern.

Preference is the correct MBTI term is it not?

But this is worth thinking about and ties back into the background stuff we've been discussing. There are numerous times you will do something or conclude something which isn't really inline with your preferences. I know for example that this society values being organised and fanatical attention to detail over More nebulous ways to do things. You should plan a wedding, with lists and time frames and the rest right? A move needs the boxes organised, with all the kitchen stuff in these and all this stuff in the other. None of this is actually the natural preference for an NP. An NP could reason that it will make their life easier but it will always be half hearted.

 

[Eric B]

I know the theory, but in my experience that's the most visible difference between the two, at least in observation - Fi absorbs emotion, Fe emits it.

That sounds like a good way of differentiating them

That you don't have patience with it? Or you do the nitpick thing?

Both; I think. But I do like to argue and pick apart arguments to find flaws.

I can't really find much to say that I haven't already mentioned before - my best guess is that you're an INxP. I'd still say INFP over INTP, but you seem fairly convinced that Te and Fi are in your shadow, and although I'm not sure - I see more of them than Ti and Fe - you obviously know yourself better than I do, and what may be coming across on a forum is obviously only a certain part of yourself. Hopefully this discussion has been helpful for you, regardless!

Sure has!

 

[Eric B]

So basically, you would have been content with either property and allowed your wife's strong prefences to decide...

I kind of like the one we took a little better, at least inside. Ultimately, as the person from the other apartment did not call back, this was the one that was still open, and it was either this, or keep looking (and the purpose of continuing to look would me for cheaper rent, and most of those in the neighborhood were old railroad flats). So this one was nice enough, and new and "airy" in layout, and that's what we went with.

Damn that could easily be either I guess, all though my own personal bias against entps could create an explanation that you are not one... lol...

The two entps I know/knew really well, would probably have found seemingly independent problems or issues with the properties untill their other half realised that where they wanted to live was the only really suitable place, the others having too many problems...

I basically pick out problems with each and weigh them (along with good things/benefits). I did not feel like being too picky at this time (which would result in longer searches; and I was trying to get the move over with as fast as possible), so again, this was nice, and we're happy.

However, I many be leaning a little with Xander, and am starting to think INFP maybe, mainly because you remembered to come back with something, and you had thought about the example long and hard, rather than sorting through the first three or four that came to mind and flinging one back quickly...

That was the problem. Nothing came to mind quickly. I guess I have a lot on my mind lately, as well as being tired; this week being my first vacation in 5 months. And I didn;t want to just ignore the question.

This is even more personal, but when you decided to get married, how easy was the decision and what helped make up your mind?

It was easy. I was a practicing Christian, and had to be married to meet that need for complete oneness, and the problem was finding someone suitable who was a believer. We just met at an event one night, and we decided pretty easily. Again, the Fe was very attractive (though I did not yet know it as such).

 

[Xander]

Can I just clear a few things up...

I've never said that Fs are incapable of logic.
I further described logic (as I see it) as objective and not subjective (obviously not 100% objective as that's impossible for many reasons that should be obvious).
Dom, you really need to remember that when I'm being sarky you'll get no warning... mind you though it does work better when you can see the smug grin as I light the blue touch paper and pull the ballistic shield up
Lastly, of all the types NFs are the ones I choose to hang around with cause they're usually good fun and warm. Sure I'm more relaxed around NTs but also they make me bristle on occasion. Plus, being INTP about it all, the proper quote is "But some of my best friends are black".



Btw, Eric.
Are you any closer to a decision?

Oh and one thing I paid especial attention to when I was type was that the flaws matched me. If they didn't make me wince slightly then I didn't believe them. The rational being that if this psychology is insightful then surely their analysis of my deepest fears/ vulnerabilities should worry me more than "can be impolite".

Mind you though if you are an INFP then make sure and drop the defences first. I've found that INFPs tend to deny most of their wounds... I figure it's a defence against letting other's emotional evaluations in or some such.

 

[Eric B]

Gary Hartzler's Facets of Type really helped me with the subscales, and when I redid I/E and T/F using his descriptions, I got this:

(From 0, being strongest in the facet on the left, to 10 being the facet on the right; 5 being dead center):

Initiating Receiving 6
Expressive Contained 3
Gregarious Intimate 7
Active Reflective 7
Enthusiastic Quiet 6

Average: (29/5) 5.8 (I)

Logical Empathetic 4
Reasonable Compassionate 6
Questioning Accommodating 4
Critical Accepting 4
Tough Tender 6

Average: (24/5) 4.8 (T)

So you can see that in two of the T/F subscales, I do lean towards F (both scores of 6 in "compassionate", and "tender"). This is what you all are seeing. Yet otherwise, I have a T preference, though it is still close to the middle.

Oh and one thing I paid especial attention to when I was type was that the flaws matched me. If they didn't make me wince slightly then I didn't believe them. The rational being that if this psychology is insightful then surely their analysis of my deepest fears/ vulnerabilities should worry me more than "can be impolite".

The INFP never struck me that way. That was part of the problem.

Mind you though if you are an INFP then make sure and drop the defences first. I've found that INFPs tend to deny most of their wounds... I figure it's a defence against letting other's emotional evaluations in or some such.

I don't. I think I've been sharing a lot.

 

[Dom]

Initiating Receiving 6
Expressive Contained 3
Gregarious Intimate 7
Active Reflective 7
Enthusiastic Quiet 6

Average: 4.8 (E)

Logical Empathetic 4
Reasonable Compassionate 6
Questioning Accommodating 4
Critical Accepting 4
Tough Tender 6

Average: 4.4 (T)

I'm not sure I like this test... but both of your scores based on an average give potential false negatives, you become E only because of the exceptionally low score on Expressive/Contained. All other point to a mild preference for introversion.
As for the T/F sunscales, I onject, that Reasonable and compassionate shouldn't be in contention, they are not opposites or opposed, such as logic and empathy are not. Picking which adjectives I'd prefer to call my self from those five options, I'd be close to coming out T too... is this a test somewhere? I'm curious to give it a try...

I think it is safe to say both the I/E and T/F preference is very mild. I still think you may have a personal desire to call yourself ET which could, in it self, be indicative of your preference.

I have to say to after reading about how you met your wife, and implictly about your obviously deep felt religous beliefs I think INFP is probably the closest fit. This is of course marked by personal bias, but every experience I've had with ENTPs leds me to dangerous generalisations, but none of them had anything that even remotely looked like a faith or belief system in anything. Implict in your description of deciding to marry is a sudden and deep contection made quickly. ALso your liking of Fe, again in my experience most ENTPs felt strong Fe in their partners, was smothering, fussy and unactractive, expecially if the partner wanted that to be recipricated in some token fashion.

 

[Dom]

Can I just clear a few things up...

I've never said that Fs are incapable of logic.
I further described logic (as I see it) as objective and not subjective (obviously not 100% objective as that's impossible for many reasons that should be obvious).
Dom, you really need to remember that when I'm being sarky you'll get no warning... mind you though it does work better when you can see the smug grin as I light the blue touch paper and pull the ballistic shield up
Lastly, of all the types NFs are the ones I choose to hang around with cause they're usually good fun and warm. Sure I'm more relaxed around NTs but also they make me bristle on occasion. Plus, being INTP about it all, the proper quote is "But some of my best friends are black".

Damn your INTP nickpicking worked this time, you are right it should be "SOME" lol. What is it with INTPs and detail, you guys hate it most of the time, then love it when you think you can pull it out a hat so you can stick your tongue out?!!

 

[Eric B]

I'm not sure I like this test... but both of your scores based on an average give potential false negatives, you become E only because of the exceptionally low score on Expressive/Contained. All other point to a mild preference for introversion.

I actually made a couple of mistakes. on I/E, to get the average, I divided the total (29) by 6, instead of 5, for the five scores (Don't know why I got that mixed up; probably from rushing). So it's really 5.8, which falls on the I side, after all. For T/F, I got the wrong total of 22, when it's really 24. So 24/5 is what is 4.8. That's still on the T side, but much closer to the "boundary" with F.

As for the T/F sunscales, I onject, that Reasonable and compassionate shouldn't be in contention, they are not opposites or opposed, such as logic and empathy are not.

I question that too, but Hartzler's book Facets Of Type makes it easier to understand and choose from the facets.

Picking which adjectives I'd prefer to call my self from those five options, I'd be close to coming out T too... is this a test somewhere? I'm curious to give it a try...

To take the whole test is300 questions, and about $80 or so. So what someone suggested for me was a "shortcut" to just grade the subscales directly from 0 to 10 0-4 would be the E facet, and 6-10 would be the iI facet. 5 is right in the middle). I got the I/E and T/F ambiguities, so to make sure I was understanding them correctly, I got Hartzler's book, and used the definitions and "activity" examples to help determine them. With around 3 definitions of each facet, and around three exercises for those definitions, that is more like taking the whole test.

I think it is safe to say both the I/E and T/F preference is very mild. I still think you may have a personal desire to call yourself ET which could, in it self, be indicative of your preference.

I originally thought it was IT, and this helps confirm it.

I have to say to after reading about how you met your wife, and implictly about your obviously deep felt religous beliefs I think INFP is probably the closest fit. This is of course marked by personal bias, but every experience I've had with ENTPs leds me to dangerous generalisations, but none of them had anything that even remotely looked like a faith or belief system in anything.

It has always been extremely difficult for me, because I tend to be so skeptical and "questioning". It's just that some of it made sense to me when saw it expressed in a different way. So it was more a logical belief, and it hasn't been disproven, so why assume it's wrong? (Many people who outright reject it are reacting to bad memories and images of past abuses of religion. I myself grew up in an agnostic household, so I did not have those issues, and could look at it more objectively from the outside, and then separate out the nonsense from what good points it made).
So it's not deeply felt, but more like deply reasoned. The problem is, I end up with an almost purely "intellectual" faith, and cannot muster the emotions others (including my wife) have towards God in singing, praying, etc. It's always been a big problem for me, (especially in a religion famous for putting down logic or "head knowledge only") but I've given up trying to force myself to do those things. I have held on by a string at times.

Implict in your description of deciding to marry is a sudden and deep contection made quickly. ALso your liking of Fe, again in my experience most ENTPs felt strong Fe in their partners, was smothering, fussy and unactractive, expecially if the partner wanted that to be recipricated in some token fashion.

That actually fits me exactly as well. I like the idea of it, until it demands from me. (and I think she mixes some shadow Fi with it as well). One site does say that ESFJ's and INTP's are attracted to each other. For an NFP, Fe would be in the shadow range.

And they emphasized chastity so much (perhaps too much, while other sins are ignoored), so it was engrained that I should wait for marriage, and it was difficult, and inasmuch as I do have some F leanings, the whole connection and ideal relationship thing came into play as well.

Also, just did cognitiveprocesses over, and this time took my time and really thought more deeply aboit it better. More confiirmation of what I've been saying:

extraverted Sensing (Se) ******************* (19.1)
limited use
introverted Sensing (Si) **************************************** (40)
excellent use
extraverted Intuiting (Ne) ************************************************* (49.4)
excellent use
introverted Intuiting (Ni) ************ (12.8)
unused
extraverted Thinking (Te) ************************ (24.9)
average use
introverted Thinking (Ti) ********************************************** (46.5)
excellent use
extraverted Feeling (Fe) *********************** (23.9)
limited use
introverted Feeling (Fi) *********************** (23)
limited use

Summary Analysis of Profile
By focusing on the strongest configuration of cognitive processes, your pattern of responses most closely matches

individuals of this type: INTP [however the order of Ti and Ne would suggest ENTP]

When I really think of it, I really do not understand Fi stuff like "being in touch with/evaluating what you want for your life and what's most imporatant". When people used to ask me stuff like that, I was always "I don't know", or my attitude like "whatever". And it said if you don't understand it, you should put "not me", because the words used are designed to "look good to the right people", and are not for everyone (that was part of the analysis). I really had to strain to try to figure out if I truly evaluate importance (just getting upset when something happens does not seem to be what those questions were getting at). So perhaps Fi should technically be a little higher, but I think this is more accurate, and notice how the functions are more in order now. (No Fi running neck and neck with Ti followed somewhat closely by Te).

 

[Xander]

Gary Hartzler's Facets of Type really helped me with the subscales, and when I redid I/E and T/F using his descriptions, I got this:

(From 0, being strongest in the facet on the left, to 10 being the facet on the right; 5 being dead center):

Initiating Receiving 6
Expressive Contained 3
Gregarious Intimate 7
Active Reflective 7
Enthusiastic Quiet 6

Average: 4.8 (E)

Logical Empathetic 4
Reasonable Compassionate 6
Questioning Accommodating 4
Critical Accepting 4
Tough Tender 6

Average: 4.4 (T)

So you can see that in two of the T/F subscales, I do lean towards F (both scores of 6 in "compassionate", and "tender"). This is what you all are seeing. Yet otherwise, I have a T preference, though it is still close to the middle.

What type of person wrote the test?
What was their objective?

The INFP never struck me that way. That was part of the problem.

That causes me concern but perhaps not considering your second response.

I don't. I think I've been sharing a lot.

Classic F. I didn't say you were. I said that whilst reading the description of INFP try to ensure you're not defending yourself. You have been candid that much is true but I find that INFPs can deceive themselves quite well, but note that I am not saying you are... just checking that your checking

 

[Xander]

Damn your INTP nickpicking worked this time, you are right it should be "SOME" lol. What is it with INTPs and detail, you guys hate it most of the time, then love it when you think you can pull it out a hat so you can stick your tongue out?!!

Jealousy will get you no where.

 

[Xander]

Eric,
I have a question but it's possibly personal so please do refuse to answer if you wish.

Why do you want to know so badly that you'll put all this effort into it?

You don't seem INTP to me as you're not going in depth but rather broadening with each thought. You include more and more information from other systems but you've not really looked into any one with any depth (aside from the Arno stuff). Also you don't seem very INTP in that you're not questioning these tests but rather accepting these external authorities as valid measures with not much evidence of thought (note I'm not saying that's what is just that's what I'm reading).

Now I could quite figure that a religious background could alter your display of your type significantly. I cannot think what I would have been like in a religious background and I'd guess I wouldn't be a million miles away from your current position but I'm looking past what is expressed and trying to see what is used for what is expressed (your actual type and not the one you appear to be).

Anyhow hopefully that'll cause some interesting thoughts for you and also hopefully not prod anything painful.

 

[Eric B]

What type of person wrote the test?
What was their objective?

MBTI Step II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Isabel Briggs Myers had noted that people of any given type shared differences as well as similarities, and at the time of her death was developing a more in depth method to offer clues about how each person expresses and experiences their type pattern, which is called MBTI Step II. In the 1980s, Kathy Myers and Peter Myers developed a team of type experts, and a factor analysis was conducted. This resulted in the identification of five subscales (with corresponding pairs of facets each) for each of the four MBTI scales.

These break down the uniqueness of individuals into greater detail, by bringing to light the subtle nuances of personality type; thus avoiding the reduction of all of personality to just the 16 types.

It is particularly used in one-to-one executive coaching and in working with teams who have already had some exposure to MBTI Step I. It is also useful in helping individuals to clarify their MBTI Step I best fit type.

Here's also a link to its own site:
PersonalValuation.com - Personality Tests

(Type Coach Vicky Jo, who is licensed to administer it, also thinks it is some sort of profit ploy, she just told me yesterday).

That causes me concern but perhaps not considering your second response.

Classic F. I didn't say you were. I said that whilst reading the description of INFP try to ensure you're not defending yourself. You have been candid that much is true but I find that INFPs can deceive themselves quite well, but note that I am not saying you are... just checking that your checking

I know I have F traits, but in actuality, I am more inclined to not "share" all that stuff with strangers. I have been criticized before for being so "impersonal" with the technical details only and not revealing more of who I am, so since I am now looking at my own type, I might as well "share" more. (Thus I would think this "sharing" would be more a less developed Fe than Fi).

Eric,
I have a question but it's possibly personal so please do refuse to answer if you wish.

Why do you want to know so badly that you'll put all this effort into it?

Doesn't it make sense to you? Taking something apart (including ideas/theories) to understand how it works. Critiquing why a type or role variant others are suggesting for me doesn't seem to fit completely, etc. Plus finding the type that fits me best. The ones people are suggesting are based on what they see, but inside, I know something is missing in them. So I'd like to be able to explain my personality from both systems in a way that matches.

You don't seem INTP to me as you're not going in depth but rather broadening with each thought. You include more and more information from other systems but you've not really looked into any one with any depth (aside from the Arno stuff).

Not going into depth? Why do you think that? I don't even think of Step II as "another system", really, but rather a more "in depth" version of MBTI. And I think it has helped me understand the whole thing as well as my own processes more in depth (along with all I have been reading).
I've been told something like that before, and then figured "Oh, well; I guess then I don't use Ti well"; and this was right before I got all the books and really understood the functions better. But again, I think what you all are looking at is the apparent Te I use to try to put the systems together, and you figure this is what I am primarily operating off of. But Te will naturally be more visible to the outside world. It doesn't mean the Ti isn't there. You don't see how much I have "looked into" any one or all of them. You only see me mentioning them, and trying to fit them together.

As I had had discussion with you and a few other INTP's, I notice that you all do seem to show some amount of interest in my ideas, but it seems people have a hard time grasping them. You know a little about FIRO, but others, it is still like a foreign language. That's because you as Ti preferring already have your own models in your heads, so from what I see, and from people's own admissions, it can be hard to wrap your minds around a totally foreign model. (I forgot whether you yourself said something like this in the PM's or e-mails, but another one did say it would take time for him to grasp it, and maybe Jennifer too). That kind of makes sense, especially having only limited tome to think about this stuff, and you're already immersed in something totally different. Me, I started with the FIRO-based system, and made it my own internal model of personality. So when I was introduced to the Keirsey system, and by extension, MBTI, it took me a long time (especially with my time and other interests) to really grasp it. (And I believe the so-called "alphabet soup" system is much harder to learn than the simple e/w matrices, which were used in some form for perhaps most of temperament theory's history). Thus, I slowly began "broadening" my perspective.

Also you don't seem very INTP in that you're not questioning these tests but rather accepting these external authorities as valid measures with not much evidence of thought (note I'm not saying that's what is just that's what I'm reading).

Others have said this as well. I think both systems are interesting, and have something to offer personality theory, so that's why it looks I am just accepting and then "rearranging" things Te style. But I did start out questioning. My first objective was to compare the 16 types to my own internalized model. I did not try to simply put it together with Keirsey's temperaments (which I thought were fake or irrelevant or something) and the Interaction Styles (which I did not know about at first), but started from scratch looking at each of the 16 types for common features. As I look over my notes, I see where a new modelwas beginning to take shape. I then join internet discussions, and begin learning more from people familiar with it, and soon find out about the Interaction Styles, which was a key to making the connections. They were somewhat similar to what I was already grouping out. I looked at them, and they seemed to fit the Inclusion area, so I tested them against it, and sure enough, it was a good match, so I went with that. Over more time, I see that Structure/Motive and Cooperative/Pragmatic would be good fits for the Control factors. So it was like "Hey, Keirsey's system does fit the model after all!" I did and do continue to dispute him on NF being Choleric and NT being Phlegmatic (and you have even seemed to agree with that), yet everything else he did seem to get right. I even then traced his theory back, and saw where his "strain" diverged from the e/w line of theories, and why he mixed up Choleric and Phlegmatic.

All of this time, I was not really interested in the cognitive functions. Keirsey himself didn't use them, so I figured they were probably not that vital. But I see others using them, and they seemed interesting as well, and I over time began trying to learn them, first with the influence of the preferred pair (dom, aux), which also fit my model (TJ's are both Directive and Structure-oriented and this fits Melancholy/Choleric mixtures) then the non-preffered pair and then finally the shadows. Again, it took time, because I was still working out the temperament model. So it may look like I just jumped into this juggling prepackaged concepts around and not going into them in depth, but I really did break them down and then put them back together again.

So now, with Step II, I do question it, but I have just really gotten into it, and do want to really break it down further, and see if it helps me improve my ideas of how it fits with FIRO. I tried it on myself, was skeptical about the first resules, so I got Hartzler's book, and he broke it down, clarifying the facets. And it does seem to help separate the areas where I have conflicting I/E and T/F preferences. And as I see others struggling with their type, I suggest it to them, too.

Now I could quite figure that a religious background could alter your display of your type significantly. I cannot think what I would have been like in a religious background and I'd guess I wouldn't be a million miles away from your current position but I'm looking past what is expressed and trying to see what is used for what is expressed (your actual type and not the one you appear to be).

Anyhow hopefully that'll cause some interesting thoughts for you and also hopefully not prod anything painful.

No problem.
I was grown when I made the decision to accept Christianity, so it was just my on decision, and I always made up my own mind, and tried to figure out what scriptures and doctrines [supposedly!] derived from them really meant. It is my current thoughts on this that also led me to see that I probably really do prefer Ti over Te, because I always wanted to know what things meant, and I get tired of people just projecting their own thinking into the Bible to make it say whatever they want it to. (that's the cause of a lot of the corruption and fear tactics, etc. that so many people are reacting to today). I jumped in and engaged in the back and forth Te debating for years, but recently got tired of it. It was a defensive strategy, yet ultimately, it doesn't lead anywhere but confusion. I'd just rather understand it better myself now than try to convince someone else of something.

 

[Xander]

Eric,
Sorry for the time delay, I've been busy.

Reading your response it becomes clearer that you certainly don't think of things in the same manner as I do. I tend toward calling such instances as a difference of type but I would admit that it is entirely possible for you to be an INTP (which was one of our discussed possibilities at one point and hence why I keep refering to it).

Now my post, the one which you have replied to above, was not supposed to be a critique of your manner of thinking, nor call into question the validity of your thinking or decisions but rather a commentary on what I thought was different between how you approach things and how I do. I may well appear to favour my own approach but I consider such normal and have given up trying to eliminate this vesitge.

Anyhow, does INFP fit well?

Oh and the whole inquiry into why you want to know isn't a question regarding sorting out a system, it was more a personal inquirey. See I do see the validity in testing a system by figuring out how it would work out on myself and gauging it by it's responses but I also realise that most NFs who I have known take the test see it more as what it possibly tells them about themselves and how others percieve them (well at least that's what I pick up from them). It was more of an information gathering exercise. Rather than asking outright A or B I just asked it as an open ended question to see your response. As such then yes I'd say it's more of a Te approach than Ti (you're not looking for the optimal points of torque for example).

I'm happy with INFP, as much as one can be considering the vagaries of the mediums we're using to communicate. Are you?

 

[Eric B]

Eric,
Sorry for the time delay, I've been busy.

Reading your response it becomes clearer that you certainly don't think of things in the same manner as I do. I tend toward calling such instances as a difference of type but I would admit that it is entirely possible for you to be an INTP (which was one of our discussed possibilities at one point and hence why I keep refering to it).

Now my post, the one which you have replied to above, was not supposed to be a critique of your manner of thinking, nor call into question the validity of your thinking or decisions but rather a commentary on what I thought was different between how you approach things and how I do. I may well appear to favour my own approach but I consider such normal and have given up trying to eliminate this vesitge.

I didn't take it as a critique of my thinking.
You were giving your own reasons why you thought I was an F.

Anyhow, does INFP fit well?

I initially thought it was better than the originally suggested ENFP (this was in the late winter before I joined this board). While I do have some similarities with it, from identifying with the Behind the Scenes Interaction Style, I can see that I do not really share it's Fi dominance. In fact, it to some extent goes over my head, as I saw when I took the cognitive test over, and really thought about the Fi-related questions (evaluating importance, etc). On another board, the host is INFP, and we are clearly different in the way we think and while I may appear to be using Te, he still sees my liking to take the systems apart as Ti conflicting with his Te that wants to keep the four temperaments whole. His Fi always speaks in terms of "the real you", and that sort of language I have never related to. My parents probably have relief Fi, and they always insisted on "importance", and complained that I didn't regard it.

Oh and the whole inquiry into why you want to know isn't a question regarding sorting out a system, it was more a personal inquirey. See I do see the validity in testing a system by figuring out how it would work out on myself and gauging it by it's responses but I also realise that most NFs who I have known take the test see it more as what it possibly tells them about themselves and how others percieve them (well at least that's what I pick up from them). It was more of an information gathering exercise. Rather than asking outright A or B I just asked it as an open ended question to see your response.

What I was trying to prove in my response was that it was Ti. Trying to analyze, using a model. Telling me about myself is like a secondary "fringe benefit". (This type of reason is why I realize I do not really prefer Fi). I was never interested in personality theory until my wife got into the APS, and when I saw how well it explained all of us, and consisted of these interesting symmetries, (which for once in my life, were practical for something), then I got into it for it's own sake, and then when I encountered other systems, I wanted to see how they worked and how they fit.

As such then yes I'd say it's more of a Te approach than Ti (you're not looking for the optimal points of torque for example).

OK; I've never heard the term "torque" used in this context before. Are you referring to Ti's "leverage points"? I have used that in seeing what works in fitting the systems together. Again, it may look like I have just pasted two things together, but I did break them down, try different approaches, alter possible connections to see if things fit better.
Like when it was first suggested that I was NFP, that did not seem to match my APS, though it did jibe with Keirsey's claim that NF was Choleric. Yet I believe he was wrong on that, so I had to look why this was happening. Maybe my theory was wrong. But it seemed to work elsewhere in the types. There was the idea that the NFP's "choleric" traits lied in the Te, so I considered that. But the SFP's have Te in the same place, and they're not considered Choleric. Maybe my theory was right, but my APS score was wrong, and I was really a Phlegmatic in Control. But that didn't seem realistic either. So then if I look like an NFP to everyone because I'm really displaying all of this Te and Fi, I then had to look at the possibility of them being active shadows. I initially was not focusing so much on the functions, but this forced me to really read up on them, and sure enough, both of those functions seem associated with stress and other negative uses, while Ti is not.

Continuing to try to optimize my model: when I ran across the articles of Roger Bissell (a freelance type theorist who's an INTP, and also sees me as one), and his insignts helped me a lot, and yet he rejects Keirsey's sytem in favor of more "symmetrical" models, and goes into a lot of other possible groupings, such as TP, TJ, FP, FJ, and SP, SJ, NP, NJ. I then looked at those as well. (But still came back to Keirsey/Berens, because they seemed to fit what I was looking for better).

(Another big Ti trait is "referencing multiple frameworks", and this is what I do when discussing my or anyone's type. I use Keirsey temperament, Interaction Styles, classic temperament, FIRO/APS, cognitive dynamics, or the four letters by themselves).


Another good point I have completely forgotten to mention all this time is that there is not complete agreement on the relative place the shadow functions really have. To some, they simply follow the primaries, from 5 to 8, but another view suggests that each shadow might be used as much as its primary counterpart. And then when you look at the archetype names, the "good side of the shadows" name for the fifth place ("oppositional") is "backup", which acccording Berens "provides depth to our leading role process, backing it up and enabling us to be more persistent in pursuit of our goals" (and wouldn't this make perfect sense for a process like Te?). So then Ti types would use Te a lot. Again, if Ti takes things apart, they do have to be put back together. And then if the shadow is overdeveloped, like I have been suggesting, then the process would be even more apparent.

I'm happy with INFP, as much as one can be considering the vagaries of the mediums we're using to communicate. Are you?

You mean happy with it for me? Not for yourself, right, because you said you were INTP?

 

[Gabe]

I actually made a couple of mistakes. on I/E, to get the average, I divided the total (29) by 6, instead of 5, for the five scores (Don't know why I got that mixed up; probably from rushing). So it's really 5.8, which falls on the I side, after all. For T/F, I got the wrong total of 22, when it's really 24. So 24/5 is what is 4.8. That's still on the T side, but much closer to the "boundary" with F.

I question that too, but Hartzler's book Facets Of Type makes it easier to understand and choose from the facets. To take the whole test is300 questions, and about $80 or so. So what someone suggested for me was a "shortcut" to just grade the subscales directly from 0 to 10 0-4 would be the E facet, and 6-10 would be the iI facet. 5 is right in the middle). I got the I/E and T/F ambiguities, so to make sure I was understanding them correctly, I got Hartzler's book, and used the definitions and "activity" examples to help determine them. With around 3 definitions of each facet, and around three exercises for those definitions, that is more like taking the whole test.
I originally thought it was IT, and this helps confirm it.
It has always been extremely difficult for me, because I tend to be so skeptical and "questioning". It's just that some of it made sense to me when saw it expressed in a different way. So it was more a logical belief, and it hasn't been disproven, so why assume it's wrong? (Many people who outright reject it are reacting to bad memories and images of past abuses of religion. I myself grew up in an agnostic household, so I did not have those issues, and could look at it more objectively from the outside, and then separate out the nonsense from what good points it made).
So it's not deeply felt, but more like deply reasoned. The problem is, I end up with an almost purely "intellectual" faith, and cannot muster the emotions others (including my wife) have towards God in singing, praying, etc. It's always been a big problem for me, (especially in a religion famous for putting down logic or "head knowledge only") but I've given up trying to force myself to do those things. I have held on by a string at times.
That actually fits me exactly as well. I like the idea of it, until it demands from me. (and I think she mixes some shadow Fi with it as well). One site does say that ESFJ's and INTP's are attracted to each other. For an NFP, Fe would be in the shadow range.

And they emphasized chastity so much (perhaps too much, while other sins are ignoored), so it was engrained that I should wait for marriage, and it was difficult, and inasmuch as I do have some F leanings, the whole connection and ideal relationship thing came into play as well.

Also, just did cognitiveprocesses over, and this time took my time and really thought more deeply aboit it better. More confiirmation of what I've been saying:

extraverted Sensing (Se) ******************* (19.1)
limited use
introverted Sensing (Si) **************************************** (40)
excellent use
extraverted Intuiting (Ne) ************************************************* (49.4)
excellent use
introverted Intuiting (Ni) ************ (12.8)
unused
extraverted Thinking (Te) ************************ (24.9)
average use
introverted Thinking (Ti) ********************************************** (46.5)
excellent use
extraverted Feeling (Fe) *********************** (23.9)
limited use
introverted Feeling (Fi) *********************** (23)
limited use

Summary Analysis of Profile
By focusing on the strongest configuration of cognitive processes, your pattern of responses most closely matches

individuals of this type: INTP [however the order of Ti and Ne would suggest ENTP]

When I really think of it, I really do not understand Fi stuff like "being in touch with/evaluating what you want for your life and what's most imporatant". When people used to ask me stuff like that, I was always "I don't know", or my attitude like "whatever". And it said if you don't understand it, you should put "not me", because the words used are designed to "look good to the right people", and are not for everyone (that was part of the analysis). I really had to strain to try to figure out if I truly evaluate importance (just getting upset when something happens does not seem to be what those questions were getting at). So perhaps Fi should technically be a little higher, but I think this is more accurate, and notice how the functions are more in order now. (No Fi running neck and neck with Ti followed somewhat closely by Te).

There's a description of how that test works in one of the papers on Dario Nardi's site (the cognitiveprocesses test). I still think some of the questions on that test are a bit misworded, and I told them so in the feedback form. My Ne score was low because I missed all the Ne questions that had the word "random" in them. (I told them, 'the whole point is that it's NOT random',)

I actually completely disregard that facet stuff, and ever since I read about the facets in a sample MBTI part II report, I've concluded that they're BS. And I keep wondering, What did they base those on? (I bet that it's some circular logic thing where they based it on how people answered step two questions.) Facets schmacets. (according to the step II, am I supposed to 'accomadate' you right now and pretend that I think the facets are for real? OMG, I must not be a real ENFP).

from INFJ or INFP? a closer look
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

More with the stereotypes! Here's the latest: people assume Feeling types are touchy-feely warm and cuddly.

Nyuh-uh.

Once you learn about interaction styles, you will discover this image is not necessarily true!

I had an encounter with an INFJ girlfriend recently who insisted that her husband was more "effie" than she is, and ergo must be a feeling type. My take on the husband was that his preferences were more likely for INTP. But, ironically, INTPs regularly come across as more "effie" than many Fs do. Most of the INTPs I know seem like big cuddly bears, despite their Temperament!

I've also met a number of INFPs who believe they are NTs because they don't think they are "effie" enough to be an F. But doesn't that make sense?! After all, their Feeling function is introverted, and they don't show it around to everybody. They prefer to feel harmony in their environment -- but that doesn't mean they're some font of outpouring love with everyone they meet! Their Feeling function is directed inwards, not outwards.

INFJs aren't very "effie" either, I regret to say. We can be rather harsh critics at times, thanks to our extraverted Feeling judgments. Put that in combination with our devotion to Time & Task and our directing style of communication, and it's no wonder so many INFJs believe they're INTJs instead!

For all Feeling types, Dr. Beebe says that people often make the mistake of assuming Feeling = caring, when in truth, it can sometimes be cold, ruthless, and calculating instead. So some Feeling types can be extremely nasty indeed!

This is one of those times when "trait" descriptions really get in the way of "pattern" descriptions. People would rather believe all Fs fit some kind of friendly stereotype without taking the time to realize the falsity of this belief. Don't make that mistake

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Warning: The more I hear people spout feeling stereotypes, the bigger bitch I'll be. I suppose the whole forum knows that by now though, huh?