[INFJ] Aren't INFJs supposed to be a very rare type?

[Lauren Ashley]

Through my own observations over the last few years, I've come to the conclusion that many attempt to identify themselves to the type simply because it's considered so rare and "special". It is very easy to believe you are a good and understanding person, but the reality is often completely different.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I typed myself as INFJ because that is what I scored on official and unofficial tests and the description was amazingly accurate for me, whereas none of the others came even close to my personality. I didn't know INFJs were supposed to be rare and special until I started posting on this forum; all of the literature I read claimed INTJs, INTPs, etc, to be as rare if not moreso than INFJs, and leaps and bounds more substantial.

People come to the belief that if they can relate to other equally confused individuals, they somehow possess the ability to "understand" each other. This creates a false blanket of misguided empathy that is easy to cling to, but very hard to maintain. I have found with a lot of INFJs though that their supposed capacity for understanding people does not in fact extend beyond themselves and their own common interests and similar personality traits.

I can understand a wide range of people, but that doesn't mean I will agree or sympathize with them.

When push comes to shove though, I've seen very few INFJs hold true to the type's description. They show themselves to be selfish and self-serving, only connecting with people for their own benefit and emotional security.

True enough.

What I have seen is that INFJs, like all types, are very diverse, so if you're looking for one INFJ "type" amongst those that have INFJ listed as their type, you're going to be disappointed. There are common threads that tie us all together, but I would be wary of stereotyping types.

 

[Liesl]

Because MBTI tests often generate inaccurate results and you incur an error range whenever you extrapolate from a small sample size to a wider population, none of those statistics can paint an accurate picture.

I'm looking at a statistical sampling that says INFJs are 1.46% of the population and that INFPs are 4.4% of the population. The margin of error is probably huge. Even with a 2% margin of error, the actuality could be that INFJs are 3.46% of the population and that INFPs are 2.4% of the population. Making INFPs "rarer," whatever that means.

And the types that are online are not reflective of the general population.

 

[Mondo]

Who doesn't want to be an INFJ?
I would join an INFJ-exclusive group just to feel awesome!

 

[Liesl]

Who doesn't want to be an INFJ?

Raises hand!

(I'm happy being an ENFP.)

 

[tcda]

1% of the population in the USA is what? over 3 million people? To find a few dozen on a web board isn't that far-fetched. (it's not like all types are going to be equally attracted to mbti boards).

neither is it far-fetched for some of them to be unhealthy.

perhaps the person should have centred their criticims on the people's flaws, rather than phrasing it as an accusatory "you're not an INFJ". Becuase it begins to seem like he views MBTI as a system of heirarchical types where some are "good enough" to be his type, which he views as a badge of honour and others not. The lack of any functions theory to back up his claim also suggests this.

It comes down to Q: "can INFJ's be selfish assholes" A: "yes they can"

 

[Words of Ivory]

And the types that are online are not reflective of the general population.

Something I'm quickly becoming aware of.

Thanks for all the input so far people. I'll gladly admit my own over-arching ignorance on the subject, but then, that was the whole point of creating the thread. To see a broader perspective outside of my own. Some of these posts have definitely made me re-evaluate my opinion on the subject.

 

[musicnerd93]

I kind of understand. Except I was always told INFP was a rare type, but it seems like more than half the people on here are that.

So I don't know.

 

[ConstantlyImagining]

The way I see it the statistical data for all types can be considered incorrect. Someone scoring as an INFJ on the test or even fitting the profile does not make them an INFJ. What makes someone an INFJ is having Ni as one's dominant function, Fe as one's auxiliary function,Ti as one's tertiary function, and Se as one's inferior function. MBTI is not so much about behavior or the four dichotomies as much as the mental processes we use to process and obtain data.The code can be considered to act as a "shorthand" of sorts which is used as sort of jargon- like what is typically done in fields such as medicine to foster efficient communication.In order to determine your type or another person's you have to determine via introspection or observation respectively what cognitive functions are being used

 

[PeaceBaby]

Imagine INFJ as a big play room of balls:

The room could be so large, that you, as one purple ball inside it, may not recognize a red ball residing at the opposite corner as belonging in your room. Within that large room is space for multiple external expressions ... ones that don't "look" like you on the outside, but still share your functional preferences.

Some of the nuances between INFP's are nicely captured by enneagram type. It is worth a look for INFJ.

 

[Sniffles]

Who doesn't want to be an INFJ?

I'm actually shocked anybody would want to be one!

 

[jcloudz]

i dont think infj`s are as uncommon as people think either.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

I'm often afraid of taking the test and answering the question along the lines of how I want to be and not who I am. I think this fear/truth is the reason why a great deal are misdiagnosed as INFJ's, or any type for that matter.

 

[Tiltyred]

I'm actually shocked anybody would want to be one!

I know, right? Since "rare" is the euphemism for "weird."

 

[Mondo]

Raises hand!

(I'm happy being an ENFP.)

You lie!!

j/k, ENFP's are kinda cool, I guess..

 

[Mondo]

INFJs are supposed to be... what? A type that is held by as little as 1% - 2% of people? If this is in fact true, why does it seem to me that there in fact an huge abundance of people who claim to be this type? How do you tell the bogus ones from the real ones?

INFJ's really are supposed to be that rare. I've only met three or four in my life and I know a lot of people. Obviously, there are a lot of bogus ones out there.. like the question I brought up: who doesn't want to be an INFJ?

 

[ReadingRainbows]

I'm a little suspicious of everyone I know having an ex-gf that was an INFJ. Either there are some INFJs out there who date a whole lot more than the ones I'm acquainted with or someone is misdiagnosed. On the other hand, I would be careful not to tell someone that they were or weren't a specific type, as they know themselves better than I do. I'm quite sure I'm an INFJ, but I suppose it's possible that I'm not. Maybe others are equally deluded...

Or they really really suck at personality typing.

i didnt read this, but i think they might just be a rare type to test themselves or then many isfjs are confusing themselves as infj

I love ISFJs. ISFJs should love themselves because I love them.

On the other hand, I very well could be an ISFJ.

 

[OrangeAppled]

Most of the statistics out there are rather dubious if you look into how they have been collected....I suppose it's a rough guide, but there could be twice that many INFJs - who's to say some INFPs or INTJs aren't really INFJs who mis-tested? Really, there is an over-representation of ALL the iNtuitive types online when compared to population percents. This can be explained for many reasons, the most obvious reason already mentioned being that N types are often drawn to theory more than S types (a generalization of course).

This is a bit strange to me. I almost think you don't want too many people to be INFJ because you yourself think that INFJs are so special and nice and reclusive saints etc etc.

When was the last time there was an accurate test to see the percentages of certain types? What were their methods for ascertaining those numbers? Why do you believe it? And why do you care?

It just doesn't seem like a big deal, whether there are 1% or 50% INFJs, you are still an individual.

Oh, and I think it's a little pompous to think someone mistyped themselves (even if they have) because it makes it seem like they are gravitating towards a "better" type.

Honestly, I agree with this in a way.... I too sometimes get this vibe when people start complaining that too many belong to their rare type. I've been guilty of it myself, and it reeks of an elitist attitude. There's an implication that your "rare" type is somehow superior to others & so any old person cannot qualify to be that type. It also screams, "I'm sooo special; that many people just cannot share my personality type." Riiight....

On the other hand, N bias is real, the tests are not always well-written, and the profiles can romanticize INxx types and make them more appealing than they are in reality, which is what I see the OP implying. I blogged here about a blog that discussed a similar topic (more about enneagram 4s though).

 

[KLessard]

Isabel Myers-Briggs is thought to be INFJ. Her MBTI theories easily attract other INFJs who gather in such sites as Typology Central to get a better understanding of temperaments. Wanting to understand personality type is a typical INFJ thing, which is why they are in great numbers here. This has been discussed before in another thread.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

I like feeling special too.

 

[cascadeco]

I'm actually shocked anybody would want to be one!

Being INFJ sucks big time sometimes. It's not an easy internal world to grapple with (not that the same can't be said for other types. I suppose we each have our unique battles). I don't exactly wish it upon anybody. It's eased up with age, but for sure in my teens and 20's I was for the most part one unhappy/dissatisfied camper.

Yeah, an online forum community such as this is NOT going to reflect societal demographics. It's a very niche community here.

I have become acquainted/friends with 3 INFJ's through real-life means over the years, and a 4th through this forum (and then came to meet/be friends with her irl too).

As for the %'s of each type in the whole population, eh, like others have said there's a margin of error at best. And, to me it doesn't really matter if I or anyone has met a lot of INFJ's irl... they might still comprise just 1-2% of the whole population, but irl you or I could, again, be in more niche crowds where the liklihood of meeting said INFJ's will increase. Or, it could just be a bit of randomness.. happen to meet/get to know quite a few, and maybe 3 miles to the east, and another 50 miles beyond, there's a total vacancy of INFJ's so that in the end the sum total in the entire population is still just 1-2%. If that makes any sense as a silly way to illustrate.