User Tag List

First 456

Results 51 to 60 of 60

Thread: INTP or INFP?

  1. #51
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    You meant INTP instead of INFP right?
    Nope.

    Mind explaining more about these Fi-like "feeling tones"? I understand "aestheticism of ideas"
    You'd have to ask a Fi-Dom (and, I suspect, if you're Ti-Dom, still wouldn't wholly grasp what they mean).

    Nice description, that was me in an earlier period of my life. But I don't want to become entirely like this and I don't do this all day. Before you ask why I wouldn't want to be like this, it's because I also like to feel more "alive" than this.
    I don't need to ask, because I agree completely. The Ti quest I describe is ultimately existentially unsatisfying, and we all come to realise this sooner or later. I was simply indicating the direction of the drive of the dominant function to help differentiate the types for the OP. Though both are "subjective" or self-directed functions, one is focused on self-realisation, the other on self-annihilation. Obviously as one matures, this kind of extremism is (hopefully) tempered (by the Jungian process of individuation).
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  2. #52
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    Nope.
    I asked because the sentence didn't make sense to me otherwise. This one: "In Jung's conception, F is as logical as T. If we are talking about formal logic, Ti users (whether T or F) have the edge over Te users. Which is to say, an INFP may well be be more logical than an INTJ, and, in my experience, often are."

    INFP still doesn't have Ti. Or maybe you just meant that INFP has a rational dominant function while INTJ doesn't... and then the mention of formal logic was just an aside thing


    You'd have to ask a Fi-Dom (and, I suspect, if you're Ti-Dom, still wouldn't wholly grasp what they mean).
    I guess

    I don't know if I'm Ti-dom, I'm trying to figure that out though


    I don't need to ask, because I agree completely. The Ti quest I describe is ultimately existentially unsatisfying, and we all come to realise this sooner or later. I was simply indicating the direction of the drive of the dominant function to help differentiate the types for the OP. Though both are "subjective" or self-directed functions, one is focused on self-realisation, the other on self-annihilation. Obviously as one matures, this kind of extremism is (hopefully) tempered (by the Jungian process of individuation).
    Glad you understand Usually what makes a Ti-dom realise that there's a problem with overdoing this? And can someone with Ti not in the dominant position start going in this direction much?

    That idea of self-realisation in many respects sounds better than self-annihilation but I just wouldn't know how to do it. :/ Yet one of my favourite quotes I once found is all about self-annihilation really. At the same time I have the problem of feeling too "dead" if doing this attitude for long. Even though this (Ti-ish) attitude has its advantages too & it does have its own rewarding experience, that is, it doesn't have to be useful or have any advantage to be rewarding.

    Note I said "Ti-ish" attitude, because I sometimes wonder how much it's mixed with Ni. Would Ni-doms not have such issues? (I am not saying that there is any real possibility that I have dominant Ni, don't get me wrong. But if you disagree, let me know )

    Another thing; I find that if I use Ti integrated with something in the real world, say, I analyse something out there, that feels more "alive". (I will have to find a better word to express what I exactly mean here...) However, I would not say more rewarding or more satisfying, it's about the same. I don't know if this is still part of Ti or it's influenced by another function. Do you experience this as an INTP?

    I wonder what thoughts OP has on this / how OP relates to all this.

  3. #53
    Member tsumatachi_san's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/so
    Socionics
    SLI Si
    Posts
    91

    Default

    Sorry for how long it took for me to reply, my internet was acting up with all the bad weather.

    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    Not really, no. Inferior functions are those which are mostly outside the realm of our conscious control.


    Introverted ("subjective" in the Jungian sense) judging functions are preoccupied with a personal evaluation/assessment of "fitness". Extroverted judging functions take cues / make judgements about fitness according to external ("objective") criteria and standards. To the Je user, established hierarchies, standards and authorities have independent validity. For the Ji user, no such validity is presupposed. Everything must be established from either first principles (Ti) or personal values (Fi).

    Fi often manifests in opposition to those external standards. Think of the classic archetypal INFP, Joan of Arc, who violated both the laws of the land and the conventions of age/gender compelled by her inner values / voices. Her spirituality was an important force in her life, and it was a very personal spirituality, which ultimately saw her burnt at the stake by the upholders of those conventions.

    INTPs are not interested in spirituality and mysticism, as a rule, rather, we are preoccupied with uncovering truth by purely rational means. We are not immersed in the world of feeling (or healing), as INFPs are, but rather, see ourselves principally as detached observers. Fi is ALL about feeling tones. Ti has no feeling tones, as such. Instead there is a kind of aestheticism of ideas. It is interested in structure and with stripping away superfluities - hence the refinement of models, theories, equations etc.

    Ultimately, the INFP is on a quest towards ever-increasing subjectivity - that is to say, a striving towards authenticity, integrity and towards becoming who they feel themselves to be in the fullest sense. The realm is entirely personal and focused on the individual.
    By contrast, the INTP is on a quest towards ever-increasing (subjectively evaluated) objectivity, that is to say, to efface the personal and the self entirely in the pursuit of an impersonal understanding of universal structure.
    I think there's a fine line sometimes between the definitions of principles and values, as they can come together, like in this dictionary definiton:

    Principles - a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behaviour or for a chain of reasoning.
    Values - principles or standards of behaviour; one's judgement of what is important in life.

    As you can see, they overlap slightly, acting as a motivation for certain behaviours.

    Overall, however, I seem to generally be more of an observer, but it's not done as a conscious choice. I just fall into observing people and trying to find reasons for their actions or the results of something. It takes a lot to pull me out of that role because it's comfortable.

    Another bolded point: if Fi's values matched up to the external world's, wouldn't they look less like an Fi user in the typical sense? It would seem to depend on their agenda. How would you describe it then?

    I've also read Feeling has nothing to do with actual emotions, so I'm unsure what you mean by feeling tones and no feeling tones. I do have strong emotions, but I tend to fight them.

    I would say authenticity is important to me, but in everyone. I find it tiring to try and read people and think people should stick by what they think through their actions, unless there's risk to themselves or others.

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    Fun Were the other (S/N) functions much lower?
    The next highest function was Ni, but I'm fairly sure I use Ne as an aux function. I don't have the shotgun-spray kind of thought patterns of an Ne dominant (I've observed that in my sister and friend), but it seems like I work from a basic idea and grow it in my head.

    I think it's hard for me to say exactly, though, as I've had so much interference in my development, which has skewed things slightly. Not to say I'm an unhealthy individual, but I still have problems with emotions.

  4. #54
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tsumatachi_san View Post
    I think there's a fine line sometimes between the definitions of principles and values, as they can come together, like in this dictionary definiton:

    Principles - a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behaviour or for a chain of reasoning.
    Values - principles or standards of behaviour; one's judgement of what is important in life.
    That's a pretty good point; I don't know if this helps but I find I mostly use Ti just for reasoning, understanding stuff whatnot, if I was to use it for standards of behaviour, it would have to be based on similar reasonings and understanding of things. Fi might work a bit differently, I interpret the "feeling tones" thing as a sense or ability to draw the values or principles from subtle or deep feelings. I couldn't say though that it's more instinctual because of being feeling based, Ti too can include instinctual calculation instead of conscious step by step drawn out reasoning. In the case of Fi it wouldn't be calculation though...

    A Fi type can tell me if I'm going in the wrong direction with this though

    Also, did you relate to this distinction between self-realisation and self-annihilation? (Fi vs Ti)


    As you can see, they overlap slightly, acting as a motivation for certain behaviours.
    But how these principles or standards get built is the question.


    Overall, however, I seem to generally be more of an observer, but it's not done as a conscious choice. I just fall into observing people and trying to find reasons for their actions or the results of something. It takes a lot to pull me out of that role because it's comfortable.
    What kind of reasons do you typically find and how?


    I've also read Feeling has nothing to do with actual emotions, so I'm unsure what you mean by feeling tones and no feeling tones. I do have strong emotions, but I tend to fight them.
    If "actual emotion" means instinctive strong emotions then Feeling maybe isn't related to that yeah...


    I would say authenticity is important to me, but in everyone. I find it tiring to try and read people and think people should stick by what they think through their actions, unless there's risk to themselves or others.
    That's pretty generic or maybe I'm Fi type because I think similarly... :p I don't think much about this issue on my own though.


    The next highest function was Ni, but I'm fairly sure I use Ne as an aux function. I don't have the shotgun-spray kind of thought patterns of an Ne dominant (I've observed that in my sister and friend), but it seems like I work from a basic idea and grow it in my head.
    So how do you grow the idea? Why's that not Ni?

  5. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    From another thread on Ti/Fe vs Fi/Te

    Attached Images Attached Images

  6. #56
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tsumatachi_san View Post
    I think there's a fine line sometimes between the definitions of principles and values, as they can come together, like in this dictionary definiton:

    Principles - a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behaviour or for a chain of reasoning.
    Values - principles or standards of behaviour; one's judgement of what is important in life.

    As you can see, they overlap slightly, acting as a motivation for certain behaviours.
    They don't overlap. They encompass different domains. The impersonal vs the personal. People sometimes use "principles" interchangeably with "values", but they are not the same thing in the sense I used them. Establishing something from "first principles" incorporates the "fundamental truths" part of that definition. It is a process of formal logic. If you have trouble conceptualising this difference it seems doubtful you're INTP, since well-developed Ti tends to be highly sensitive to such distinctions.
    Read basic definitions of the functions here: http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com and see if this helps.
    And don't get too hung up on typing yourself. It's really not important. There is no scientific basis and no real value in asserting that you must be one type over another.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  7. #57
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    INFP still doesn't have Ti.
    This is a (common) misapprehension. Everyone has all 8 functions. No one has ever suggested otherwise. If the weakest function for the INFP is Te (the inferior), it follows that most INFPs will have better use of Ti than Te. (Just as most INTPs will have better use of Fi than Fe). Variance in function development between individuals is considerable.
    This isn't just my opinion (see Thompson, for one). Nor is it simply logically obvious (following from the very nature of inferior functions). Empirically it is the case more often than not. It's also the only model in which the INXP type makes any kind of sense. That the Beebe model (Ti+Fe vs Fi+Te) predominates in some circles says nothing about its legitimacy. If you think you can prove its validity, go ahead.

    That the bipolarity of the MBTI model is invalid is well established. (Eg see http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed...953511/related).
    Singer-Loomis has greater validity (i.e. not a forced-choice model).

    I don't know how to answer your other questions, but if you are trying to determine whether you are INTP, I would say it's unlikely. I think you tested as ESTP and that seems like it might be a better fit.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  8. #58
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    They don't overlap. They encompass different domains. The impersonal vs the personal. People sometimes use "principles" interchangeably with "values", but they are not the same thing in the sense I used them. Establishing something from "first principles" incorporates the "fundamental truths" part of that definition. It is a process of formal logic. If you have trouble conceptualising this difference it seems doubtful you're INTP, since well-developed Ti tends to be highly sensitive to such distinctions.
    Read basic definitions of the functions here: http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com and see if this helps.
    And don't get too hung up on typing yourself. It's really not important. There is no scientific basis and no real value in asserting that you must be one type over another.
    Where he/she may have seen the overlap is that both can apply to behaviour for example. When a Ti type works out principles that are then applied to behaviour, what is their motivation? The reasoning process will definitely be impersonal, the underlying motivation behind it may or may not be impersonal. Otherwise I agree with you that an impersonal principle isn't created and viewed the same way as a personal (Fi) one.

    Btw, I don't think it's such a good idea to tell someone else what they should find important or not important. Do you really think science is able to cover everything in life? Don't get me wrong, I like the scientific way of thinking, referring to science is just not a good reasoning for attempting to invalidate someone's motivations for understanding something that's currently hard to investigate by hard science.

    PS: Don't get me wrong - It certainly took a while for me to understand what it means that science isn't able to explain everything; current scientific methodology is just a way of investigating things, though undoubtedly the most sensible way to go about things. However, it doesn't mean that you can't try to explore things where we don't have a real scientific explanation yet.


    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    This is a (common) misapprehension. Everyone has all 8 functions. No one has ever suggested otherwise. If the weakest function for the INFP is Te (the inferior), it follows that most INFPs will have better use of Ti than Te. (Just as most INTPs will have better use of Fi than Fe). Variance in function development between individuals is considerable.
    This isn't just my opinion (see Thompson, for one). Nor is it simply logically obvious (following from the very nature of inferior functions). Empirically it is the case more often than not. It's also the only model in which the INXP type makes any kind of sense. That the Beebe model (Ti+Fe vs Fi+Te) predominates in some circles says nothing about its legitimacy. If you think you can prove its validity, go ahead.

    That the bipolarity of the MBTI model is invalid is well established. (Eg see http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed...953511/related).
    Singer-Loomis has greater validity (i.e. not a forced-choice model).
    Bad word usage, what I meant was INFP doesn't prefer Ti. As for a shadow function being more readily used than the inferior, well I can't say if it has to be that way. Your original statement didn't make sense simply because you also added into it that Ti is "the" logical function (formal logic). INTJ would still have shadow Ti, and it would easily be stronger than INFP's shadow Ti. So if I was going to compare INTJ to a more logical type on the basis of the idea that Ti is more logical than Te, I would have used an xxTP for comparison instead of INFP. That's all.

    The only thing I would be willing to claim about INFP vs INTJ is that stereotypical INFP would be less logical than stereotypical INTJ. Nothing more, nothing less. (Bolded: for a reason. I am sure there is individual variation.)

    Also, I never implied that I believe in any function model, but here we go: I do not. So I don't care about trying to prove the validity of any of these function theories.

    Btw, I did not understand what you meant by INxP type making sense only in one model. What to you doesn't make sense about INxP otherwise and why?


    I don't know how to answer your other questions, but if you are trying to determine whether you are INTP, I would say it's unlikely. I think you tested as ESTP and that seems like it might be a better fit.
    No, I don't think I'm INTP because I'm not into the Ne function at all. I however still have a problem with the ESTP idea because I'm nowhere near as hung up on Se as stereotypical ESTP seems to be. Have you really forgotten that there is another Ti-dom type that's not INTP? :P In Mal's test ISTP and ESTP got the same points (a tie, yes), which was pretty interesting.

    I was asking you as an INTP because I wanted to see if what I described is part of Ti or not. Did my question not make much sense or why are you not sure about how to answer?

  9. #59
    Member tsumatachi_san's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/so
    Socionics
    SLI Si
    Posts
    91

    Default

    Replies in bold.

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    That's a pretty good point; I don't know if this helps but I find I mostly use Ti just for reasoning, understanding stuff whatnot, if I was to use it for standards of behaviour, it would have to be based on similar reasonings and understanding of things. Fi might work a bit differently, I interpret the "feeling tones" thing as a sense or ability to draw the values or principles from subtle or deep feelings. I couldn't say though that it's more instinctual because of being feeling based, Ti too can include instinctual calculation instead of conscious step by step drawn out reasoning. In the case of Fi it wouldn't be calculation though...

    A Fi type can tell me if I'm going in the wrong direction with this though

    Also, did you relate to this distinction between self-realisation and self-annihilation? (Fi vs Ti)
    I find that I try to reason out emotions, like if I'm feeling unhappy, I ask myself why and try to find the root cause. I also rarely act purely on either gut feelings or emotions, because each time I have previously, it led to an unpleasant situation. I do have very strong principles and do tend to call people up on things I think are incorrect or 'wrong', unless it's related to me. I guess I am quite impersonal.



    But how these principles or standards get built is the question.

    That's the issue - motivation is the main part of MBTI as far as I can tell. I think my motivations are different depending on the topic.


    What kind of reasons do you typically find and how?

    Generally, I find they usually have something to do with a persona they wish to present to an audience, their friends. Except for a couple of friends who appear very geniune and mostly seem to have motivations like caring for others or, in the case of one, being in control of her environment, I tend to find these out by watching people for a long time in various situations to see how they respond. But I don't like immediately cataloguing people, as simple as that would be, because it would be unfair and disrespectful to them.


    That's pretty generic or maybe I'm Fi type because I think similarly... :p I don't think much about this issue on my own though.
    Yeah, it is generic, I think. That's why it's hard to use things like that.



    So how do you grow the idea? Why's that not Ni?
    Sorry, I was actually really tired and ill when I wrote that, so I think some of the explanation that should have been there never got put in.

    Basically, I start out with a general and extremely vague idea that I then mold around what I want to do with it, but it usually remains extremely flexible and changes depending on how other factors change. The idea is usually inspired by something I've seen etc. which leads me to conclude Ne over Ni, which tends to have ideas 'just appear'.

    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    They don't overlap. They encompass different domains. The impersonal vs the personal However both Fi and Ti are subjective systems of judgement.. People sometimes use "principles" interchangeably with "values", but they are not the same thing in the sense I used them. Establishing something from "first principles" incorporates the "fundamental truths" part of that definition But how would fundamental truths be defined in this case?. It is a process of formal logic. If you have trouble conceptualising this difference it seems doubtful you're INTP, since well-developed Ti tends to be highly sensitive to such distinctions It's more trying to wrok out precisely what you're saying because it seems slightly vague in terms of language usage. What is 'formal' logic, as opposed to 'informal' logic?.
    Read basic definitions of the functions here: http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com and see if this helps.
    And don't get too hung up on typing yourself. It's really not important. There is no scientific basis and no real value in asserting that you must be one type over another.
    I know it's not important really, it's just that I like to know.

  10. #60
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tsumatachi_san View Post
    I find that I try to reason out emotions, like if I'm feeling unhappy, I ask myself why and try to find the root cause. I also rarely act purely on either gut feelings or emotions, because each time I have previously, it led to an unpleasant situation. I do have very strong principles and do tend to call people up on things I think are incorrect or 'wrong', unless it's related to me. I guess I am quite impersonal.
    ah, nice self control there. :p

    About reasoning out emotions, I can't tell you if this means T or F preference, maybe someone else can. I don't do it often myself because usually it's pretty apparent why I feel the way I do, if I even feel anything consciously. It can be an interesting task to try and figure out the root cause if it isn't obvious, but I can't give you details on a reasoning process to find the cause, I just think of it suddenly. Do you have an explicit reasoning process at work when finding the cause?


    Generally, I find they usually have something to do with a persona they wish to present to an audience, their friends. Except for a couple of friends who appear very geniune and mostly seem to have motivations like caring for others or, in the case of one, being in control of her environment, I tend to find these out by watching people for a long time in various situations to see how they respond. But I don't like immediately cataloguing people, as simple as that would be, because it would be unfair and disrespectful to them.
    I see. That's maybe just N, I don't know...


    Basically, I start out with a general and extremely vague idea that I then mold around what I want to do with it, but it usually remains extremely flexible and changes depending on how other factors change. The idea is usually inspired by something I've seen etc. which leads me to conclude Ne over Ni, which tends to have ideas 'just appear'.
    OK it makes sense.

Similar Threads

  1. INTP or INFP?
    By Savage Idealist in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-27-2010, 01:51 AM
  2. INTP or INFP?
    By SilentStream in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-28-2009, 10:48 AM
  3. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-03-2009, 08:14 AM
  4. INTP or INFP?
    By Ankitn in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 06-02-2009, 03:04 AM
  5. INTP or INFP female ?
    By INTJMom in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 08-03-2008, 04:37 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