Demonic vs. Inferior functions

[Such Irony]

How are they different, really? I know the demonic function is in the 8th position and the inferior is in the 4th. For INTPs, that's Fi and Fe, respectively. But what I don't understand is how the role of the demonic function is different from the role of the inferior. How would demonic Fi play out in INTP? I've tried to find information about the demonic function without much luck.

Also I've read about the inferior function being the weakest function. But then, what about functions 5-8, are they supposedly weaker than the inferior? Is the demonic function the weakest of them all?

I hardly ever hear anything said about functions 5-8 from an MBTI perspective. One reason why I prefer socionics theory to MBTI theory is with the socionics theory, there is extensive descriptions of the 8 functions and what they do (Model A) . In MBTI, it seems like functions 5-8 are hardly ever talked about as if they're out somewhere in the netherworld. Yet we obviously use functions 5-8 on a daily basis. We have to use all 8 functions to survive as normal beings.

 

[Eric B]

Have you seen the "Archetypes of the Functions" sticky, especially the last few pages?
(I also made a better compilation of all the stuff over on PersonalityCafe).

For one, It's not about strengths, it's about the suppression of complexes and their associated perspectives into the unsconscious. So Feeling in general is inferior, with the external orientation somewhat suppressed, and the internal orientation even more suppressed.

 

[Totenkindly]

Also, Fi is essentially the alternate path of Ji, so it's going to feel entirely alien to someone whose primary is Ti. It's like knowing how to do something to an expert level, then having all of that taken away and being forced to relearn how to make those internal deliberations while being prohibited from using your old virtually instinctive approach.

(Ti doesn't demand that you be in touch with yourself and your internal states and use those as an evaluative method, it is all about detaching from the personal inclinations and being "impersonal." With Fi, those internal states and instincts and how they mesh up with the external world are actually the things that help you determine right from wrong, good from bad.)

Fe's different since it is aimed outwardly, whereas Ti is aimed inwardly; they don't get into each other's territory as much.

 

[INTP]

My Fe sucks and my Fi is pretty good. But since im an intp i dont use Fi as easily as i use Fe, because Fi would clash with my Ti, because they are both introverted judging functions. Fe wont clash with Ti that easy because the judgment is aimed in different ways(this is why each type has one Ji, Pe, Je and Pi function as the main 4 functions).

I use my Fi mainly to deny me from doing things that it finds immoral, which Ti judgment alone might accept, its kinda like a moral rule set. I also use it for empathizing, but for small stuff i prefer using sympathy, but when the empathy hits, it hits me much harder than sympathy, because the Fi is stronger than Fe and also i use empathy instead sympathy on things that really matter(but sometimes i might feel vivid empathy on some small things too). Also i use it to process my feelings, but i dont normally have to do this much since im not a big feeler, except i have felt kinda emo for about a year because of this one thing.

 

[Moiety]

This should be stickied as the most important thread on this board right now.

I would very much like some more information on this, because it doesn't make much sense. People keep saying I can't possibly be using Ti because I'm NeFiTeSi. Si is supposed to be the one I use with more difficulty right? Because it's the inferior. Well then what does that say about Se being the demonic?



It would be nice if someone gave concrete examples and explanations for how all the 8 functions affect a particular type, just an example.

 

[Jaguar]

People keep saying I can't possibly be using Ti because I'm NeFiTeSi.

It is common knowledge that the attitude of the Tertiary function has always been under dispute, which is why it is given so much latitude. Furthermore, in many of the books published by CAPT (Center for Application of Psychological Type) they refrain from even identifying the attitude of the Tertiary function. So for ENFPs, they list the order as:

Ne
Fi
T
Si

One of the theories that exists in the type community is the Tertiary is flexible, which means the person can use either, or both, attitudes. In other words, an ENFP can indeed be using Ti, Te, or toggle back and forth, at will, depending upon the situation the person my find themselves.

 

[Thalassa]

Ok...so in an ENFP, Se would be my demonic function? Hmm I don't see it, though I guess Se can scare me when it's out of control, like I appreciate Se but the dark side of Se is terrifying to me...I don't want to race motorcycles or even get on crazy rollercoasters, and I trust the relative security of Si much more...I also use a buttload of Si for an ENFP, I think.

So I almost wonder if we looked at this as INFP....that would make Ti my demonic function, and that's totally true. On functions test I score absolute lowest on Ti and it can annoy me to no end, even in academics...I'm like "wow look at this pretentious blah blah blah!" Yeah...

 

[Such Irony]

I just don't see Fi as being my demonic. I suppose I could be INTJ, but then I'd have Si as demonic, which makes less sense. I actually have pretty good Si and its alot more developed than Se.

For one thing, I score high on Fi in function strength tests. One of the tests I took, had Fi on the top and scored me as an INFP. I really don't think I'm an INFP and demonic Ti makes absolutely no sense.


The functions and their positions fit nicely for me in socionics theory..........

 

[skylights]

hey guys, here's one description list for the function roles.

The Roles of the Processes
In each of the sixteen types, each of the eight processes plays a different “role” in the personality. The type code lets you know what role each process plays for each type. This is called “type dynamics.” It is also referred to as the “hierarchy of functions”: Dominant, Auxiliary, Tertiary, and Inferior. The roles are explained below to help you better understand the patterns. In most of what we do we rely on two of the processes—a preferred way of accessing information and a preferred way of organizing and evaluating that information. As we look more closely we can see that one process takes a leading role and the other takes a supporting role.

In truth, we have access to all eight cognitive processes—the other six are often in the background, playing other kinds of roles. Each has a positive and a negative way of expressing itself. Each bears a different energy cost when we use it.


The Primary Processes
The primary processes are those used in the first four roles. Each process tends to emerge and develop at different times in our lives. During these times we are drawn to activities that use these processes. Then, learning the content and the skills that engage these processes is often nearly effortless. We find our interest is drawn to them and our interest is pulled away from things we were drawn to before.

• The Leading Role (Dominant) (sometimes referred to as the 1st function)
  The process that plays the leading role is the one that usually develops early in childhood. We tend to engage in this process first, trusting it to solve our problems and help us be successful. Being the most trusted and most used, it usually has an adult, mature quality to it. While we are likely to engage in it rather automatically and effortlessly, we have much more conscious control over it. The energy cost for using it is very low. Much like in the movies, the leading role has a heroic quality as using it can get us out of difficult situations. However, we can sometimes “turn up the volume” on this process and become overbearing and domineering. Then it takes on a negative dominating quality.
  
  
• The Supporting Role (Auxiliary) (sometimes referred to as the 2nd function)
  The supporting role is how we are helpful to others as well as supportive of ourselves. Once we have developed some facility with our leading role process, we are more likely to feel comfortable engaging in our supporting role process. In its most positive form, this can be quite like a nurturing parent. In its more negative aspect, it can be overprotective and stunting rather than helpful. When the leading role process is an extraverted one, the supporting role process is introverted. When the leading role process is an introverted one, the supporting role process is extraverted and may be quite active and visible as it provides a way of dealing with the outer world.
  
  
• The Relief Role (Tertiary) (sometimes referred to as the 3rd function)
  The relief role gives us a way to energize and recharge ourselves. It serves as a backup to the supporting role and often works in tandem with it. When we are younger, we might not engage in the process that plays this role very much unless our life circumstances require it or make it hard to use the supporting role process. Usually, in young adulthood we are attracted to activities that draw upon this process. The relief role often is how we express our creativity. It is how we are playful and childlike. In its most negative expression, this is how we become childish. Then it has an unsettling quality, and we can use this process to distract ourselves and others, getting us off target.
  
  
• The Aspirational Role (Inferior) (sometimes referred to as the 4th function)
  The aspirational role usually doesn’t develop until around midlife. We often experience it first in its negative aspect of projecting our “shoulds,” fears, and negativities onto others. The qualities of these fears reflect the process that plays this role, and we are more likely to look immature when we engage in the process that plays this role. There is often a fairly high energy cost for using it—even when we acquire the skill to do so. As we learn to trust it and develop it, the aspirational role process provides a bridge to balance in our lives. Often our sense of purpose, inspiration, and ideals have the qualities of the process that plays this role.

The Shadow Processes
The other four cognitive processes operate more on the boundaries of our awareness. It is as if they are in the shadows and only come forward under certain circumstances. We usually experience these processes in a negative way, yet when we are open to them, they can be quite positive.

• The Opposing Role (sometimes referred to as the 5th function)
  The opposing role is often how we get stubborn and argumentative—refusing to “play” and join in whatever is going on at the time. It might be easy for us to develop skill in the process that plays this role, but we are likely to be more narrow in our application of this skill, and it will likely take more energy to use it extensively. In its positive aspect, it provides a shadow or depth to our leading role process, backing it up and enabling us to be more persistent in pursuit of our goals.
  
  
• The Critical Parent Role (sometimes referred to as the 6th function)
  The critical parent role is how we find weak spots and can immobilize and demoralize others. We can also feel this way when others use the process that plays this role. It is often used sporadically and emerges more often under stressful conditions when something important is at risk. When we engage it, we can go on and on. To access its positive side of discovery, we must learn to appreciate and be open to it. Then it has an almost magical quality and can provide a profound sense of wisdom.
  
  
• The Deceiving Role (sometimes referred to as the 7th function)
  The deceiving role fools us into thinking something is important to do or pay attention to. The process that fills this role is often not trusted or seen as worthy of attention, for when we do engage it, we may make mistakes in perception or in decision making. Then we feel double bound—trapped between two bad options. Yet this role can have a positive side as it provides comic relief. Then we can laugh at ourselves. It can be refreshing and join with the relief role as we recharge ourselves through play.
  
  
• The Devilish Role (sometimes referred to as the 8th function)
  The devilish role can be quite negative. Using the process that plays this role, we might become destructive of ourselves or others. Actions (or inactions) taken when we engage in the process that plays this role are often regretted later. Usually, we are unaware of how to use the process that fills this role and feel like it just erupts and imposes itself rather unconsciously. Yet when we are open to the process that plays the devilish role, it becomes transformative. It gives us the impetus to create something new—to make lemonade out of lemons, rather than lament their sourness.

so with the shadow processes, are they saying they're typically experienced negatively because when they do poke out from the shadows of our subconscious, it's because they're being a pain?

Ok...so in an ENFP, Se would be my demonic function? Hmm I don't see it, though I guess Se can scare me when it's out of control, like I appreciate Se but the dark side of Se is terrifying to me...I don't want to race motorcycles or even get on crazy rollercoasters, and I trust the relative security of Si much more...I also use a buttload of Si for an ENFP, I think.

So I almost wonder if we looked at this as INFP....that would make Ti my demonic function, and that's totally true. On functions test I score absolute lowest on Ti and it can annoy me to no end, even in academics...I'm like "wow look at this pretentious blah blah blah!" Yeah...

lol, i feel the same way about Ti, it's my crappiest function by leaps and bounds. i have to admit, the deceiving role sounds pretty accurate.

Se, on the other hand, i really like. i'm not very good at noticing bundles of detail all at once, but i get sensory stuff in Fi pulses/impressions... i really love letting Ne "tune out" sometimes, and letting Se automatically tune in, like a passive thing - during yoga, driving (fast), biking, horseback riding, floating in the ocean, rollercoasters with lots of flips and turns, etc. ... it's calming and reenergizing to me. not to mention i kind of love the adrenaline rush when pushing it with the more physical things

i have a hard time thinking i'm really that psychologically advanced to have my last function going decently for me, but maybe i just got lucky to like things like very tactile arts (pottery, painting, drawing, etc.) and enjoying pushing the limits physically, both of which happen to involve Se. maybe the energy i use for Se ends up being taken away from poor Ti too ;

 

[Amargith]

Wow. Ok, tnx Skylights for posting this. I needed to go through this again. This, with the previous threads on ENFPs and INFPs(common issues) has made things clear to me.

Thank you so much.

 

[Thalassa]

hey guys, here's one description list for the function roles.



so with the shadow processes, are they saying they're typically experienced negatively because when they do poke out from the shadows of our subconscious, it's because they're being a pain?

Thanks, this was very helpful.

lol, i feel the same way about Ti, it's my crappiest function by leaps and bounds. i have to admit, the deceiving role sounds pretty accurate.

Se, on the other hand, i really like. i'm not very good at noticing bundles of detail all at once, but i get sensory stuff in Fi pulses/impressions... i really love letting Ne "tune out" sometimes, and letting Se automatically tune in, like a passive thing - during yoga, driving (fast), biking, horseback riding, floating in the ocean, rollercoasters with lots of flips and turns, etc. ... it's calming and reenergizing to me. not to mention i kind of love the adrenaline rush when pushing it with the more physical things

i have a hard time thinking i'm really that psychologically advanced to have my last function going decently for me, but maybe i just got lucky to like things like very tactile arts (pottery, painting, drawing, etc.) and enjoying pushing the limits physically, both of which happen to involve Se. maybe the energy i use for Se ends up being taken away from poor Ti too ;

I really wonder about function order, because while I was reading this it seems to me that Si would be my "relief role"/play/childlike...even childish...function. Me and my memories, getting into Fi/Si loops, being comforted by sensory things, the past.

Also, my "devilish" function would appear to be more Ti than Se. I could be wrong though.

I AM NEVER GOING TO FIT IN A BOX. I GIVE UP ON MBTI.

Just kidding...sort of...

 

[Thalassa]

hey guys, here's one description list for the function roles.

I'm also looking at 5th/6th function here...a lot of ENFPs on this board seem to be hostile to Fe...and it would be the Critical Parent role for ENFP, right? Interesting.

But an INFP would actually have more development or appreciation for it (Fe)"It might be easy for us to develop skill in the process that plays this role, but we are likely to be more narrow in our application of this skill, and it will likely take more energy to use it extensively. In its positive aspect, it provides a shadow or depth to our leading role process, backing it up and enabling us to be more persistent in pursuit of our goals."

I really feel torn between ENFP and INFP when I start to look at function order. It seems almost like I'd be INFP by function order.

But then again, I think it's also not reasonable to assume that the human brain is THAT neatly organized. I'm quite sure our personalities don't fall QUITE that specifically into neat little roles.

 

[sculpting]

The odd thing about those last four functions...


When I note them, they take on the very worst, most horrible, nightmarish aspects of that particular function. Instead of seeing the beautiful side of Fe, I feel the really bad shameful side and so on..

I tend to see the only under massive stress...it feels like part of me rolls around and forms a defensive barrier as the normal part couldnt hold down the fort anymore. Jung described this as "complexes" that arise and displace the ego temporarily. When it happens, the very worst aspects of my personality come into play. It isnt that those shadows functions are innately bad, just that I am using them like sledge hammers rather than the finely honed tools that someone in positions 1-4 would use them as. Almost like in that moment of stress, I dont ever see the positive aspects of the function.

For me, a shadow Ni feels like a barrier to hide behind and my whole mind goes numb. This happens when I am in great emotional pain. All pain is quenched. When I use Ni in a more healthy way, I can feel my whole perspective shift internal and I will come up with very strange answers to problems I have been thinking on already. Gaps get filled, but the answers seem insane without any factual basis-yet they feel correct. It is just a baby Ni and only stays for short periods.

Shadow Fe happens most when I am rebuked by an Fe user. It is an overwhelming sense of utter shame. I want to withdraw totally and erase any contribution of myself from the conversation. Fe in a more healthy way is very fleeting, but feels very calming, an acceptance of a slight loss of identity (from the Fi perspective), a blending of goals with those around me. I am trying to learn to tap into those when under stress as it is a more productive, less stressful stance than tert Te. It means moving away from "myself" to be a slightly different self, if that makes any sense. Letting go a bit.

shadow Ti is not pretty. I sometimes note perhaps I tap into Ti in a healthy way when in a debate, I will get nit picky about the way a word is being used and how that might influence the whole argument-but this could be Te being used in a learned fashion to mimic Ti.

Se? I dunno. I am so very unaware of everything around me. I dont know what this is honestly.

 

[Such Irony]

Yeah, thanks for posting that, skylights. The bolded parts in the demonic Fi description, actually seem describe how inferior Fe manifests itself at its worst. Maybe I'm just mistaken Fi for Fe? On the other hand, I do relate to aspirational Fe.

The Devilish Role (sometimes referred to as the 8th function)
The devilish role can be quite negative. Using the process that plays this role, we might become destructive of ourselves or others. Actions (or inactions) taken when we engage in the process that plays this role are often regretted later. Usually, we are unaware of how to use the process that fills this role and feel like it just erupts and imposes itself rather unconsciously. Yet when we are open to the process that plays the devilish role, it becomes transformative. It gives us the impetus to create something new—to make lemonade out of lemons, rather than lament their sourness.

 

[Eric B]

This should be stickied as the most important thread on this board right now.

I would very much like some more information on this, because it doesn't make much sense. People keep saying I can't possibly be using Ti because I'm NeFiTeSi. Si is supposed to be the one I use with more difficulty right? Because it's the inferior. Well then what does that say about Se being the demonic?

It would be nice if someone gave concrete examples and explanations for how all the 8 functions affect a particular type, just an example.

Here is where I described each of the eight functions in each of the four shadow archetypes; in terms of them actually "shadowing" their primary counterparts:

http://www.typologycentral.com/foru...s/1416-archetypes-functions-7.html#post844121 (844121)

To understand the shadows, just look at the dom/aux/tert and inferior (and the related archetypes: hero/parent/child and anima) and the shadows will be the more negative aspect of it suppressed from consciousness.

Also worthy of note which I really grasped after writing that post) is that the shadows are primarily projected onto others. We see the other person playing those roles, but it is really those archetypes as complexes operating within us. The related function will be the "perspective" the situation is seen through. Like they might be engaging the function, (it's more about a perspective than something they are "using", or some behavior), and it irritates us. We then respond in kind, but that is really coming from us, not them.

Here I go into this more:
http://www.typologycentral.com/foru.../1416-archetypes-functions-8.html#post1207960 (1207960)

It is common knowledge that the attitude of the Tertiary function has always been under dispute, which is why it is given so much latitude. Furthermore, in many of the books published by CAPT (Center for Application of Psychological Type) they refrain from even identifying the attitude of the Tertiary function. So for ENFPs, they list the order as:

Ne
Fi
T
Si

One of the theories that exists in the type community is the Tertiary is flexible, which means the person can use either, or both, attitudes. In other words, an ENFP can indeed be using Ti, Te, or toggle back and forth, at will, depending upon the situation the person my find themselves.

Lenore Thomson explains why. If you treat the i/e orientation, the functions and the archetypal complexes separately, then the dominant orientation and dominant function are initially chosen (as distinct items) by the ego, and everything else is rejected: the other functions and the opposite orientation. So the dominant function takes on the "attitude" of the dominant orientation, and the other three functions take on the opposite attitude they have become associated with in the unconscious.

However, the Puer (child) complex will arise, which is the ego's first defense in maintaining the dominant orientation against the opposite one trying to get our attention from the unconscious. So this Puer complex will orient the tertiary to the dominant attitude. The auxiliary and inferior will remain the opposite attitude, and the tertiary in the opposite attitude will remain unconscious (shadow) and become associated with a negative 'child' complex called the Trickster. The orientations opposite the other three will likewise have shadow complexes formed around them.

In this vein, Beebe did suggest that the Puer and Trickster do "develop" close together. That's another reason why we cannot look at this order as "strengths". They do not even "develop" in that order. He suggested 1-2-3-7-4-5-8-6. Hence, you might be able to look at a whole "tertiary" function irrespective of attitude in some people.

 

[Eric B]

Ok...so in an ENFP, Se would be my demonic function? Hmm I don't see it, though I guess Se can scare me when it's out of control, like I appreciate Se but the dark side of Se is terrifying to me...I don't want to race motorcycles or even get on crazy rollercoasters, and I trust the relative security of Si much more...I also use a buttload of Si for an ENFP, I think.

So I almost wonder if we looked at this as INFP....that would make Ti my demonic function, and that's totally true. On functions test I score absolute lowest on Ti and it can annoy me to no end, even in academics...I'm like "wow look at this pretentious blah blah blah!" Yeah...

Thanks, this was very helpful.

I really wonder about function order, because while I was reading this it seems to me that Si would be my "relief role"/play/childlike...even childish...function. Me and my memories, getting into Fi/Si loops, being comforted by sensory things, the past.

Also, my "devilish" function would appear to be more Ti than Se. I could be wrong though.

I AM NEVER GOING TO FIT IN A BOX. I GIVE UP ON MBTI.

Just kidding...sort of...

I'm also looking at 5th/6th function here...a lot of ENFPs on this board seem to be hostile to Fe...and it would be the Critical Parent role for ENFP, right? Interesting.

But an INFP would actually have more development or appreciation for it (Fe)"It might be easy for us to develop skill in the process that plays this role, but we are likely to be more narrow in our application of this skill, and it will likely take more energy to use it extensively. In its positive aspect, it provides a shadow or depth to our leading role process, backing it up and enabling us to be more persistent in pursuit of our goals."

I really feel torn between ENFP and INFP when I start to look at function order. It seems almost like I'd be INFP by function order.

But then again, I think it's also not reasonable to assume that the human brain is THAT neatly organized. I'm quite sure our personalities don't fall QUITE that specifically into neat little roles.

I see all over the place, these archetypes do seem to be fitting INFP for you, and that's based on the roles, not strengths, as I have been emphasizing.
Considering I also just ran across a post where you said you originally scored as INFJ; what is it that is making you think now that you're an E in the first place?
I/E seems to be what you need to really weigh, now.

For some reason, you did seem to fit ENFP as far as I could see; perhaps more outgoing or something? But then you cannot always go by online posts. But if the archetypes fit dom. Fi (backed up by Fe), relief Si, demon Ti, etc. that would really suggest INFP.

While the organization seems like a lot, it is really just the symmetry created by the way the brain chooses one perspective and orientation, and suppresses others. It compensates by creating opposite complexes which are mirror images of the preferred ones (hero-anima; parent-child, and then the further suppressed shadows of these), and then framing the functions around them.

 

[Thalassa]

I see all over the place, these archetypes do seem to be fitting INFP for you, and that's based on the roles, not strengths, as I have been emphasizing.
Considering I also just ran across a post where you said you originally scored as INFJ; what is it that is making you think now that you're an E in the first place?
I/E seems to be what you need to really weigh, now.

For some reason, you did seem to fit ENFP as far as I could see; perhaps more outgoing or something? But then you cannot always go by online posts. But if the archetypes fit dom. Fi (backed up by Fe), relief Si, demon Ti, etc. that would really suggest INFP.

Here's why I decided I might be E: more likely to interject opinions into conversation, openly shows emotion, apparent "Te push" making me seem more assertive; also some attention-seeking behavior associated with ENFP.

I am quite introverted in terms of needing time to myself and wanting one-on-one interaction, but apparently the forcefulness of my personality suggests extroversion?

The thing is, though, I apparently seem a lot more introverted in person. I got INFP and INFJ, even someone suggested that she saw InFJ...meaning she thought she saw Fe and Si in me, more like ISFJ I guess, and was surprised that I seemed more "conservative" in person? However, I also got ENFP, ENFJ, and even ESFP from others here who met me. Apparently the only thing anyone can agree on is F, that's pretty clear.

While the organization seems like a lot, it is really just the symmetry created by the way the brain chooses one perspective and orientation, and suppresses others. It compensates by creating opposite complexes which are mirror images of the preferred ones (hero-anima; parent-child, and then the further suppressed shadows of these), and then framing the functions around them.

In terms of functions, at least, the INFP order makes the most sense to me.

 

[Eric B]

If you seem more introverted in person, and "needing time to myself and wanting one-on-one interaction" then that sounds more like the real you. And I don't really buy the whole "ENP - 'introverted extravert'" thing some mention.
You're listing a few behaviors as being extraverted: interject opinions into conversation, openly shows emotion, some attention-seeking behavior, but those in themselves I would not think carry as much weight as the other stuff. Anyone can do those things at times. In fact, an introvert, from being reserved, might tend to lash out like that at times from naturally holding things inside so much.

As for the Te, how do uou think that compares to Si. If you said Si fits tertiary (child/relief), then does Te definitely not fit that role? (then, it could be safely ruled out). Does it seem weaker or less mature? For an INFP, it would be animus or aspirational, which carries a sense of vulnerability around external logic. You might feel intimidated by it, yet look up to it in others. The "child" can be like that as well, yet would be a bit more conscious.

 

[Eric B]

I also just decided to check the Inclusion-Control-Affection thread, to look for a particular clue, and sure enough, you put Inclusion: Phlegmatic-Sanguine.

That explains why you're waffling between E and I. (I didn't seem to individually break your results down, but glossed over several of them at a time after your post since a few of you with type uncertainty were coming out as Phlegmatic blends).

So you're technically an ambivert, as the "Phlegmatic" part of that blend means you express moderately; more than an introvert, but less than an extrovert. The Sanguine part means you respond as a Sanguine, meaning want interaction from others. However, the Supine's responsiveness is equal to the Sanguine, despite expressing as an introvert.
So you are between Sanguine and Supine (or between Get Things Going and Behind the Scenes in Interaction Styles); slightly on the Sanguine side from the profile you chose over there.

I believe in translating to type, it could really go either way, since the function order will force the dominant to be E or I. One possible deciding factor would be the archetypal roles, which are suggesting I.

Control either Phlegmatic-Sanguine or Melancholy-Phlegmatic:
As I said over there, this is overall moderate (Phlegmatic), which in Control I have associated with NF, and both of those choices border Supine, which I have also mapped to NF. (Melancholy in Control would be SJ, and Sanguine in Control would be SP, but for you, it all seems to be centering on Phlegmatic or Supine).

So from both the functions and ICA, it looks like you're really INFP.
INFJ would not be as responsive, being a Melancholy in Inclusion (as you may have seen; almost all of them came out as that), so I think that is out as well. ENFJ is a Choleric in Inclusion. Again, too directive. ESFP would be Sanguine in both Inclusion and Control, and you did border on that in both areas (hence seeming like you could go that way as well); but again, the functions seem to push towards INFP.

 

[Thalassa]

If you seem more introverted in person, and "needing time to myself and wanting one-on-one interaction" then that sounds more like the real you. And I don't really buy the whole "ENP - 'introverted extravert'" thing some mention.
You're listing a few behaviors as being extraverted: interject opinions into conversation, openly shows emotion, some attention-seeking behavior, but those in themselves I would not think carry as much weight as the other stuff. Anyone can do those things at times. In fact, an introvert, from being reserved, might tend to lash out like that at times from naturally holding things inside so much.

As for the Te, how do uou think that compares to Si. If you said Si fits tertiary (child/relief), then does Te definitely not fit that role? (then, it could be safely ruled out). Does it seem weaker or less mature? For an INFP, it would be animus or aspirational, which carries a sense of vulnerability around external logic. You might feel intimidated by it, yet look up to it in others. The "child" can be like that as well, yet would be a bit more conscious.

Te is not a relief thing for me. I know that Si is playing this role for me. However, the "toughness" with which I can come across, the "cut the crap" tough love stuff, was something I actually learned growing up, and from life experience. I don't know if that's Te, but people seem to think that it is. Reality is necessary. People have to learn to function and survive in the real world, and logic cannot be completely abandoned. That being said, I often find people with dom/aux Te much too overbearing and structured, I often don't want to follow their rules, can be hurt by their 'objective' standards, and can even view them as heartless. As I say, I *think* I am better at Sensing than Thinking (Logic) in the MBTI sense. I could be wrong and just not even be aware of what I am doing.

I also wonder about my preference for writing in a more structured fashion than many ENFPs I see on this forum - even highly educated ones who went to grad school, and I didn't even graduate from a four year university. Is that because I'm an INFP? Or is that just a personal quirk?