Fe or Fi?

[mancino]

lol I'm a woman but definitely true that I don't pay attention to soft feelz like I said in my questionnaire too above lol... I prefer to be tough yeah. I'm virtually never melancholic or sentimental either though. That's part of the soft stuff for me really. ... And I don't miss the past, it drains me to think of the past. I'm not in my 40s tho yet lol, I mean I'm closer to 40 than 30 damn, but no I'm not like your friend with this.

Also I'm not the most consistent person out there even tho I'd like to be...but I do try to be very reliable for the important things. Like for people I do care about and hard deadlines and the like are important. But I think that's basics really for anyone.

Physics and engineering or mechanics stuff: I don't have a strong affinity for this stuff... I'm decent if I spend time on it but not interested beyond doing it if I have to. An ex boyfriend tho had the affinity&talent for this totally. But I'm a woman anyway... so I'm not really expected to be able to fix the plumbing at home lol. I was very good at mathematics though in school.

Anyway no ...... if you tried to describe me with "organisation, management" that would only get half of me. It would ignore the other half of my person. Which is my being about challenges and not necessarily terribly organised... I feel very disorganised half of the time. I do like project management stuff though.

You got it right about how I don't care much about novel ideas lol. I like some philosophy but most of philosophy just doesn't relate to reality in the right way at all. Otherwise I don't spend a lot of time on the abstract like I said though the "NF grips" do make me focus on insights and stuff

***

All in all: the thing about the past and being always fully organised isn't me. But yes I'm goal oriented most of the time (more than half of the time for this one lol). I mean in recent years I was stuck in the past due to personal losses but that was without even noticing because I don't like to go into memories. Like I said it drains me, even if it is good memories. I don't get sentimental either, I just feel like throwing up if I think of all that.

How is your friend with challenges? Does he like that or does he only like his routine or something?

I'm late as usual, sorry.

I've bolded some stuff that confirms my guesses. Being "very good at math" for a lady gives 100 points to your being T!

I won't do a deep, thorough analysis, [MENTION=32874]Vendrah[/MENTION] is much more knowledgeable and capable than yours truly. I'll add some comments, sharing what I know, and answering your curiosity.

I compared you to my male ESTJ best friend exactly because I knew you were female! The similarities were astonishing to me, I should have pointed that out. To continue in that direction, my friend is competitive when he feels like to be, otherwise he doesn't care. You see, Te is not a robot, it's more like a bulldozer, or Thor's Hammer, if you know what I mean. A tool. The world rewards Te, so everybody has some, in some way or another. The question is how good you are at it and how much you like it. The way I see it, being Te-dom simply means that, WHEN NEEDED/FEEL LIKE IT, you are good at it and you enjoy it, to the point to using it as your main perspective to see the world: challenges to be overcome, problems to be solved and done with, stuff to do.

My friend can relax too, he's funny, but always in a kind of domineering way, like having fun is a sport and he plays to win. Like my ENTJ brother in law, running triathlons and marathons for fun.

Actually, I could add that you remind me also of my ESTJ sister in law; the thing is that I don't know her deeply enough to draw a meaningful comparison. No engineering and no math for her. But I tell you this: she's as competitive as you can get. Even in casual talk, she will assert herself to gain the upper hand, to stress that she's better than anybody in the room, she knows more, she's right and you're wrong, or you're right but she's righter! No empathy, very annoying, trust me. She sees everything as a problem to solve, like the saying, when you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

Can you relate to all of this? They are just anecdotes, but you know, this is how typing works: looking for trends and patterns of behavior among people of similar temperament.

All in all, I reiterate: I go with ESTJ for you.

 

[mancino]

my competitiveness is like, I think I go hard for the win than just fun, I forget the latter really easily in favour of the former.

Yeah, this quote says it all. You get obsessed with the goal so much that you forget the process. Not all the time, not always, but that's the pattern that better describes you. But you don't need to have Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder to be J! (that would be my ISTJ boss, a textbook case, but that's another story...)

 

[Meowcat]

Just to fit STJ, actually, I think that Se=Si in your case.

Yeah I got a problem deciding about the Se/Si thing, I analysed that earlier (if you want to read it by any chance, post #36, about the sandwiches and whatever, by functions, lol - wasn't my idea).




[MENTION=40271]mancino[/MENTION]

Ah no worries about the delay & thanks again for the analysis. Couple comments below.

I actually do the triathlons/marathons stuff too. For fun...to get as good a placing as possible....it's both these motivations. The competitiveness is there but I do also enjoy it somewhere, it's not just a random choice that I went with these sports.

With casual talk, I default to being very polite and nice, if I feel more comfortable then that's when I show that side you talked about with regard to your sister in law, though I wouldn't say I'm this narcissistic. I just start to show how I'm actually opinionated, and can get argumentative and competitive yeah.

I don't see everything as a problem to solve because I like just the interaction itself too (with people), but I'm pretty task oriented yeah. That's how I interface myself usually with others but then sometimes I get to just have fun with the interactions, for a few moments here and there and that's really enjoyable too. If I'm in a worse place I can do that fun stuff less. Then I can connect less with others and more things are just tasks and problems to be sorted.

Yeah, this quote says it all. You get obsessed with the goal so much that you forget the process. Not all the time, not always, but that's the pattern that better describes you. But you don't need to have Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder to be J! (that would be my ISTJ boss, a textbook case, but that's another story...)

It's like goal and process are in one if that makes any sense. I'm still present in this way. But yeah it's no smelling the roses.

Is your boss 1000% organised then? heh

I'd have a problem with that because I can lose adaptability too much if I try to get more organised or more planned, more scheduled blah blah. That is part of why I don't plan in detail.

Do your ESTJ friends/ESTJ people in your life ever plan in detail or are they more relaxed than that?

How do they deal with change in circumstances?

 

[Meowcat]

Is it more ISTJ or ESTJ or both to be really annoyed if someone doesn't keep rules for being considerate/not rude? (I don't show it but I am irritated by that as hell, internally.)

 

[Pionart]

Is it more ISTJ or ESTJ or both to be really annoyed if someone doesn't keep rules for being considerate/not rude? (I don't show it but I am irritated by that as hell, internally.)

You're describing Fe it seems, however it might be something that applies to Thinkers more than Feelers, since it's in a negative form. I'm unsure.

For example, as an INFJ, I'm very bothered by unpleasant sensations, because my low Sensing has a hard time handling it. Same with bad memories.

So, the same principle might apply where Thinkers are more bothered by lack of adherence to social consideration, but that's just a speculation and could easily be the other way around.

 

[Meowcat]

You're describing Fe it seems, however it might be something that applies to Thinkers more than Feelers, since it's in a negative form. I'm unsure.

For example, as an INFJ, I'm very bothered by unpleasant sensations, because my low Sensing has a hard time handling it. Same with bad memories.

So, the same principle might apply where Thinkers are more bothered by lack of adherence to social consideration, but that's just a speculation and could easily be the other way around.

Hm yeah I am like that with Feeling, like you are with the Sensing stuff.

And hm it being Fe, interesting. Do you find STPs are bothered like this? I thought the fact that I verbalise this stuff to myself (I usually keep silent about it though) in the form of rules made it more STJ but if I'm wrong let me know. I didn't decide between STP/STJ for now

 

[Pionart]

Hm yeah I am like that with Feeling, like you are with the Sensing stuff.

And hm it being Fe, interesting. Do you find STPs are bothered like this? I thought the fact that I verbalise this stuff to myself (I usually keep silent about it though) in the form of rules made it more STJ but if I'm wrong let me know. I didn't decide between STP/STJ for now

Yeah the "rules" aspect perhaps does sound Si/Te. I haven't come to a conclusion about which function(s) would deal in terms of rules.

I don't know enough people of different types to know whether STPs are bothered by it. My real world observation database is quite limited, and I mostly deal with typology in terms of the theoretical aspect of it, as well as how I am personally.

Something I think would bother Ti/Te dominant types would be people around them being emotionally distraught, e.g. crying. For an FJ, they don't like that someone is crying, but the instinct is to try to make the person feel better, whereas with a Thinking dominant type the Feeling capacity is limited so it becomes somewhat of a helpless situation.

In terms of rudeness, I don't know which types would deal better with it. I can make arguments either way, so I guess I would need more empirical data to decide.

 

[Meowcat]

Yeah the "rules" aspect perhaps does sound Si/Te. I haven't come to a conclusion about which function(s) would deal in terms of rules.

I don't know enough people of different types to know whether STPs are bothered by it. My real world observation database is quite limited, and I mostly deal with typology in terms of the theoretical aspect of it, as well as how I am personally.

Something I think would bother Ti/Te dominant types would be people around them being emotionally distraught, e.g. crying. For an FJ, they don't like that someone is crying, but the instinct is to try to make the person feel better, whereas with a Thinking dominant type the Feeling capacity is limited so it becomes somewhat of a helpless situation.

In terms of rudeness, I don't know which types would deal better with it. I can make arguments either way, so I guess I would need more empirical data to decide.

Hmm I see. As for crying, if I'm not close to them, I can try and say some basic nicety or stay out of it entirely if I can. If I'm close to them I'll put in all effort I can to help. This includes wanting them to feel better but also problem-solving if I can. Or I just try to survive the situation heh. But in general I'm OK.

As for rudeness. If it's just someone being blunt or rough in language, I don't worry about that, but when they do actions that show they do not consider others is when I get irritated & judge it.

 

[Pionart]

Hmm I see. As for crying, if I'm not close to them, I can try and say some basic nicety or stay out of it entirely if I can. If I'm close to them I'll put in all effort I can to help. This includes wanting them to feel better but also problem-solving if I can. Or I just try to survive the situation heh. But in general I'm OK.

As for rudeness. If it's just someone being blunt or rough in language, I don't worry about that, but when they do actions that show they do not consider others is when I get irritated & judge it.

Sounds pretty normal. I don't know what type it suggests.

I would try to type you with my standard methods, but I haven't been doing many typings this year so I won't do that.

I'll provide my basic understanding of what Ti+Fe versus Te+Fi is like instead and see if it helps.

For Fe, there is a monitoring of the environment on a social level, and also a readiness to engage socially (which may consist of imaginary interactions),
This couples with Ti, where there is an internal tinkering of definitions and other aspects of logic, which ties in with the communication.

So with Te, there is a monitoring of mechanistic process, and a readiness to "get things done", such as planning,
This couples with Fi, where there is an internal balancing of one's values, such as sentiments about people or things, or moral beliefs, which informs the planning by determining what is important.

I believe that people generally use both pairs of processes, but that one is more characteristic of their default state of mind. So you might, for example, sometimes be oriented to social processes, but generally be more focused on work flow, and so on.

 

[Meowcat]

Sounds pretty normal. I don't know what type it suggests.

I would try to type you with my standard methods, but I haven't been doing many typings this year so I won't do that.

I'll provide my basic understanding of what Ti+Fe versus Te+Fi is like instead and see if it helps.

For Fe, there is a m̶o̶n̶i̶t̶o̶r̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶e̶n̶v̶i̶r̶o̶n̶m̶e̶n̶t̶ ̶o̶n̶ ̶a̶ ̶s̶o̶c̶i̶a̶l̶ ̶l̶e̶v̶e̶l̶, and also a readiness to engage socially (which may consist of imaginary interactions),
This couples with Ti, where there is an internal tinkering of definitions and other aspects of logic, which ties in with the communication.

So with Te, there is a monitoring of mechanistic process, and a readiness to "get things done", such as planning,
This couples with Fi, where there is an i̶n̶t̶e̶r̶n̶a̶l̶ ̶b̶a̶l̶a̶n̶c̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶o̶n̶e̶'̶s̶ ̶v̶a̶l̶u̶e̶s̶,̶ ̶s̶u̶c̶h̶ ̶a̶s̶ ̶s̶e̶n̶t̶i̶m̶e̶n̶t̶s̶ ̶a̶b̶o̶u̶t̶ ̶p̶e̶o̶p̶l̶e̶ ̶o̶r̶ ̶t̶h̶i̶n̶g̶s̶, or moral beliefs, which informs the planning by determining what is important.

I believe that people generally use both pairs of processes, but that one is more characteristic of their default state of mind. So you might, for example, sometimes be oriented to social processes, but generally be more focused on work flow, and so on.

OK firstoff, I bolded and underlined what I definitely have.

I did a strikethrough for what I definitely don't do

Um yeah I don't know how informative that is



But as far as the last part you mentioned... Yeah yeah that really fit as is (tho' idk what we mean by work flow exactly). When I'm around people, I'm way more focused on logistics of tasks than social monitoring. I mean, that's how I get to feel comfortable. I try to find a task even if just in my own mind, like taking a mental inventory of things around me, or anything. Or if there is a topic where I can give some opinion (or even argue), I will feel ok with that too. Or someone asks for help, and that's also a task to be done, to be engaged with. I just am not comfortable otherwise unless someone else involves me in a really social way, then I can enjoy that too some (unless it turns out the person only talks about boring stuff/wants to do only boring stuff).

So where I underlined readiness to engage socially & readiness to get things done, it works like that. Comfortable with tasks because then I don't have to be exposed socially, all that connecting to people directly, you know. Unless like I said, someone else makes that social connecting comfortable too. I'm not gonna be comfortable about initiating on my own unless I'm on really good terms with the other people. Sure with strangers, I can still initiate socially a little but eh.

Also, I used to need the task thingies less when younger. I could just be there around others without having to put rules of tasks on things to occupy myself with that.

Anyway something else. Is the following what you mean by monitoring mechanistic processes. When I talked about logistics of tasks above I meant (copypasted definitions) "the detailed organization and implementation of a complex operation" & "the activity of organizing the movement", I definitely like that sortof stuff. Tho' it's not always very detailed. So like, it's just, get things done, but get it done neatly and fast, if possible. Did you mean that sortof thing? I don't know if I'm focusing on processes per se or just on the organisation and doing things fast enough.

BTW, I don't really understand how you tie in the Ti definitions or whatever with the social communication. I understood the part about needing to determine priorities (importance) to do tasks/planning, that one seems like a no-brainer. But how does the Ti/Fe thingy work? I will also admit that the prioritising doesn't really use Fi, I don't use moral beliefs or sentiments about stuff to do it. I do it based on logistics concerns or if it comes to subjective preferences, I pick based on what my body wants (what it finds comfortable, desirable e.g. if it comes to food, or aesthetics, and so on), or if it comes to what other people's needs and preferences are, like I'm involved in helping others or cooperating with them, then I will use those to do the prioritising.



I think all in all I didn't really pick up on how these pairs feel as a state of mind. Sorry.

Low Fe and low Fi where I have to do Te things so low Fe doesn't get in the way, and I don't focus on Fi (and didn't understand the Ti desc), basically that's what I interpreted it as. My question to you: does that make sense in terms of type ?

 

[Pionart]

OK firstoff, I bolded and underlined what I definitely have.

I did a strikethrough for what I definitely don't do

Um yeah I don't know how informative that is



But as far as the last part you mentioned... Yeah yeah that really fit as is (tho' idk what we mean by work flow exactly). When I'm around people, I'm way more focused on logistics of tasks than social monitoring. I mean, that's how I get to feel comfortable. I try to find a task even if just in my own mind, like taking a mental inventory of things around me, or anything. Or if there is a topic where I can give some opinion (or even argue), I will feel ok with that too. Or someone asks for help, and that's also a task to be done, to be engaged with. I just am not comfortable otherwise unless someone else involves me in a really social way, then I can enjoy that too some (unless it turns out the person only talks about boring stuff/wants to do only boring stuff).

So where I underlined readiness to engage socially & readiness to get things done, it works like that. Comfortable with tasks because then I don't have to be exposed socially, all that connecting to people directly, you know. Unless like I said, someone else makes that social connecting comfortable too. I'm not gonna be comfortable about initiating on my own unless I'm on really good terms with the other people. Sure with strangers, I can still initiate socially a little but eh.

Also, I used to need the task thingies less when younger. I could just be there around others without having to put rules of tasks on things to occupy myself with that.

Anyway something else. Is the following what you mean by monitoring mechanistic processes. When I talked about logistics of tasks above I meant (copypasted definitions) "the detailed organization and implementation of a complex operation" & "the activity of organizing the movement", I definitely like that sortof stuff. Tho' it's not always very detailed. So like, it's just, get things done, but get it done neatly and fast, if possible. Did you mean that sortof thing? I don't know if I'm focusing on processes per se or just on the organisation and doing things fast enough.

BTW, I don't really understand how you tie in the Ti definitions or whatever with the social communication. I understood the part about needing to determine priorities (importance) to do tasks/planning, that one seems like a no-brainer. But how does the Ti/Fe thingy work? I will also admit that the prioritising doesn't really use Fi, I don't use moral beliefs or sentiments about stuff to do it. I do it based on logistics concerns or if it comes to subjective preferences, I pick based on what my body wants (what it finds comfortable, desirable e.g. if it comes to food, or aesthetics, and so on), or if it comes to what other people's needs and preferences are, like I'm involved in helping others or cooperating with them, then I will use those to do the prioritising.



I think all in all I didn't really pick up on how these pairs feel as a state of mind. Sorry.

Low Fe and low Fi where I have to do Te things so low Fe doesn't get in the way, and I don't focus on Fi (and didn't understand the Ti desc), basically that's what I interpreted it as. My question to you: does that make sense in terms of type ?

Well, it does sound like you're a TJ of some sort.

With some of the things I said, I'm not precisely sure myself what I meant, it just sounded "right" with regards to how I conceptualise the functions.

Regarding how definitions and communications tie in regarding Fe+Ti: look at what I'm doing in this interaction. I'm taking on a helper role to interact with you, but a lot of what I'm doing is working with the definitions of what Te, Ti etc. are. Basically, in order for communications with a person to be effective, it's often best to make sure that you're explaining things in the right way. Like how a (Fe+Ti) teacher needs to be mindful of the audience and how best to teach them, but also needs to know the material so they're not teaching them incorrect things. So, generally when I speak, I'm adhering a) to the person/people I'm speaking to, and b) to the theory/internal logic of what I'm saying.


Also, when you say you pick based on what your body wants, that does sound like Si to me. I associate Si with an awareness of the internal processes of the body, as opposed to Se which is an awareness of the details of the environment. Of course there are other aspects to Si, but in general it's based on internal sensations. Another example of this is episodic memories, where you remember a time in the past, or when you recollect a fact that is stored away in a kind of collection of facts. As an Ni dominant, my internal awareness of by body is quite weak, and recollection of events is not my strong point. I generally have a lot of uncertainty regarding my bodily wants and sensations, and tend to remember things well only if they've seemed particularly significant at the time.

I may try to write up something for the perception functions like I just did for the judgment functions and see how you respond, to see if Si indeed is your strongest perception function. Choosing between ESTJ and ISTJ is difficult though, unless you use what I refer to as "sequential function order" which I may explain later.

 

[Meowcat]

Here's an example of how I need to use all this tasks/rules stuff (and I did when younger too but less necessary then). So I was in a relay race and when I was not doing my part of the race, once two other team members wanted to fuck around with their water guns a bit, spraying water on other people coming (in the race), and they pulled me into that too, but I wasn't comfortable with it without making rules for it, since the idea was it would help people feel refreshed if we spray water on them. It was definitely a hot summer day. So I turned all this into serving the people refreshment in the best way possible, while the other team members just spontaneously fucked around in whatever way they felt like doing it. I made those rules/turned it into a task for myself only though, I let them have their fun, I'm not one to ruin fun of people unnecessarily.

 

[Meowcat]

Well, it does sound like you're a TJ of some sort.

OK, I see. Btw I just wrote another post for a short example of what I meant by the tasks vs social connecting Please read that too.

With some of the things I said, I'm not precisely sure myself what I meant, it just sounded "right" with regards to how I conceptualise the functions.

Regarding how definitions and communications tie in regarding Fe+Te: look at what I'm doing in this interaction. I'm taking on a helper role to interact with you, but a lot of what I'm doing is working with the definitions of what Te, Ti etc. are. Basically, in order for communications with a person to be effective, it's often best to make sure that you're explaining things in the right way. Like how a (Fe+Ti) teacher needs to be mindful of the audience and how best to teach them, but also needs to know the material so they're not teaching them incorrect things. So, generally when I speak, I'm adhering a) to the person/people I'm speaking to, and b) to the theory/internal logic of what I'm saying.

Right I see what you mean. Yeah in a teaching/educating context this makes sense, but that to me seems like a narrow context where this is useful, idk. Like there are many other things too in life where you need to communicate with people. And anyway I'm better off with focusing on concrete tasks and not just educating all the time tho' I do that too sure. But when I "educate" others, I don't think I do your Fe thing with adhering to the person/people/audience I'm speaking to. And that can cause issues. I just focus on explaining in a sensible way. Then I guess I want to make sure it's sensible to others too and I really put in the effort for that. But no, no personal/social audience. I get to feel weird af at the idea of trying to focus on that while explaining, lol. Let alone adjust the explanations like that. Yah it causes issues. Again it causes more issues now than when I was younger (not that I'm old lol).

Also, when you say you pick based on what your body wants, that does sound like Si to me. I associate Si with an awareness of the internal processes of the body, as opposed to Se which is an awareness of the details of the environment. Of course there are other aspects to Si, but in general it's based on internal sensations. Another example of this is episodic memories, where you remember a time in the past, or when you recollect a fact that is stored away in a kind of collection of facts. As an Ni dominant, my internal awareness of by body is quite weak, and recollection of events is not my strong point. I generally have a lot of uncertainty regarding my bodily wants and sensations, and tend to remember things well only if they've seemed particularly significant at the time.

Hmmm well yeah my body awareness is about what I want to get more (esp. compared to other things), what is comfortable (in many things), what to do when I do physical things or concrete tasks, like sports training, or just what I feel like doing atm if I'm not required to do some task/work, etc.

I don't spend time focusing deeply on any internal anything though, I just simply feel (sense) the above things and know what to do concretely or what I want to go for etc.

And yeah I'm good with episodic memories or having the right fact come up when it's relevant in the situation.

I'm also fine with awareness of the environment details. I don't focus deeply there either lol, I usually go back to my tasks soon Iguess, if I'm busy with something. Or maybe I'm busy with competing hard right there and then instead of smelling those roses . But it would be weird to not have awareness of the environment around me. That is also what I meant earlier about focusing on the external world instead of my mind's internals or internal emotions or whatever. I just focus on what's around me or on what I'm doing, that's more conscious to me, all that internal (mental, emotional, esp in my "NF grips") processing is hiccupy and been hard to learn for me. I can't focus inside continuously but I can focus outside continuously ... by the way that I think applies to internal sensations too, that I don't focus continuously on them

I may try to write up something for the perception functions like I just did for the judgment functions and see how you respond, to see if Si indeed is your strongest perception function. Choosing between ESTJ and ISTJ is difficult though, unless you use what I refer to as "sequential function order" which I may explain later.

OK, thanks

 

[Pionart]

OK, I see. Btw I just wrote another post for a short example of what I meant by the tasks vs social connecting Please read that too.

I'll get to it a bit later (I'm drunk at the moment so I may have to respond to certain things tomorrow when my capacity to respond is better).

Right I see what you mean. Yeah in a teaching/educating context this makes sense, but that to me seems like a narrow context where this is useful, idk. Like there are many other things too in life where you need to communicate with people. And anyway I'm better off with focusing on concrete tasks and not just educating all the time tho' I do that too sure. But when I "educate" others, I don't think I do your Fe thing with adhering to the person/people/audience I'm speaking to. And that can cause issues. I just focus on explaining in a sensible way. Then I guess I want to make sure it's sensible to others too and I really put in the effort for that. But no, no personal/social audience. I get to feel weird af at the idea of trying to focus on that while explaining, lol. Let alone adjust the explanations like that. Yah it causes issues. Again it causes more issues now than when I was younger (not that I'm old lol).

The reason why I used teaching, is because my thoughts (if you can call them that) largely consist of me explaining an idea to another person, as though I were teaching them. So the teacher example seems a prime example to me. I think many other INFJs, and perhaps FJs in general, and maybe TPs, would agree with that, although I assume many wouldn't identify with the teacher role.

With Te, the teacher role would be more about adhering to the system, for example a lawyer saying things to be in line with what the laws are. I tend to adopt that mode when I'm challenged, and I need to go to the evidence to show that I'm right. But generally I prefer not to do that.

An example of me using Fe with Ti would be when I'm feeding my cats. My caring impulse says to feed the cats, but when I go to do it there's decisions. *pause* do I feed them biscuits or packet food? Hmm, packet. *pause* how much of the packet? Hmm, a third for now.

I don't know how Te/Fi would approach that scenario differently though.

Hmmm well yeah my body awareness is about what I want to get more (esp. compared to other things), what is comfortable (in many things), what to do when I do physical things or concrete tasks, like sports training, or just what I feel like doing atm if I'm not required to do some task/work, etc.

I don't spend time focusing deeply on any internal anything though, I just simply feel (sense) the above things and know what to do concretely or what I want to go for etc.

Well, comfort might be considered internal, it's hard to say. The word "internal" is associated with introversion, but to an extend it can be association with intuition, because ideas, even Ne ideas, can be experienced as though they're internal, and Si can seem externally focused due to its sensory nature.

Si does have an association with fitness. Se is better with reflexes, but I think Si has better bodily control.

And yeah I'm good with episodic memories or having the right fact come up when it's relevant in the situation.

Yeah, sounds Si.

I'm also fine with awareness of the environment details. I don't focus deeply there either lol, I usually go back to my tasks soon Iguess, if I'm busy with something. Or maybe I'm busy with competing hard right there and then instead of smelling those roses . But it would be weird to not have awareness of the environment around me. That is also what I meant earlier about focusing on the external world instead of my mind's internals or internal emotions or whatever. I just focus on what's around me or on what I'm doing, that's more conscious to me, all that internal (mental, emotional, esp in my "NF grips") processing is hiccupy and been hard to learn for me. I can't focus inside continuously but I can focus outside continuously ... by the way that I think applies to internal sensations too, that I don't focus continuously on them




OK, thanks

In terms of environmental details, I would describe Se versus Si like this...

With all functions, the environment is perceived in terms of colours, objects, etc.

With Se, there is an ability to zoom in on what it's seeing just as it is. For example, noticing the fine details in a painting.

With Si, there is more a tendency to see the object in terms of whether it is familiar - "I recognise this", and when zooming in, it's more about remember more memories about the object, or seeing things that are different from how it's expected to look.

So Se looks at the object just as it is, whereas Si is comparing with an internal storehouse of how something is expected to look. In that sense, Si is actually noticing subjective details.

 

[Meowcat]

I'll get to it a bit later (I'm drunk at the moment so I may have to respond to certain things tomorrow when my capacity to respond is better).

Okay I'll be curious what you say about that.

The reason why I used teaching, is because my thoughts (if you can call them that) largely consist of me explaining an idea to another person, as though I were teaching them. So the teacher example seems a prime example to me. I think many other INFJs, and perhaps FJs in general, and maybe TPs, would agree with that, although I assume many wouldn't identify with the teacher role.

With Te, the teacher role would be more about adhering to the system, for example a lawyer saying things to be in line with what the laws are. I tend to adopt that mode when I'm challenged, and I need to go to the evidence to show that I'm right. But generally I prefer not to do that.

An example of me using Fe with Ti would be when I'm feeding my cats. My caring impulse says to feed the cats, but when I go to do it there's decisions. *pause* do I feed them biscuits or packet food? Hmm, packet. *pause* how much of the packet? Hmm, a third for now.

I don't know how Te/Fi would approach that scenario differently though.

Gotcha I think, for the first part.

I don't think I ask questions myself like you do with the cats. For everyday things like that I'm more like I just look (nonverbal) and decide instead of verbalising questions about options. I noticed I sometimes have a quick picture flash in my mind when I "think" like that. It really is fast though. Idk did that make sense.

I don't really explain ideas, I find that draining, I just want to convey sensible logic.

Well, comfort might be considered internal, it's hard to say. The word "internal" is associated with introversion, but to an extend it can be association with intuition, because ideas, even Ne ideas, can be experienced as though they're internal, and Si can seem externally focused due to its sensory nature.

Si does have an association with fitness. Se is better with reflexes, but I think Si has better bodily control.

Well comfort for me is like I do certain things or I get to have certain things to have comfort. Then I just enjoy that.

Reflexes, bodily control, both are okay

In terms of environmental details, I would describe Se versus Si like this...

With all functions, the environment is perceived in terms of colours, objects, etc.

With Se, there is an ability to zoom in on what it's seeing just as it is. For example, noticing the fine details in a painting.

With Si, there is more a tendency to see the object in terms of whether it is familiar - "I recognise this", and when zooming in, it's more about remember more memories about the object, or seeing things that are different from how it's expected to look.

So Se looks at the object just as it is, whereas Si is comparing with an internal storehouse of how something is expected to look. In that sense, Si is actually noticing subjective details.

Right I see. So I had a friend who was NF something and she said she only experienced seeing things just as it is when she was on drugs (partying). Like, she'd drink a glass of water and she really was just drinking the glass of water and she was not going in her mind or whatever. And she found that awesome. That's Se?

Just because I find it hard to imagine that it's not trivial for someone to experience the drinking of the glass of water or anything else that way. To me it's trivial and basic.

I don't know if I understand the idea on how something is expected to look as per Si.

Take that glass of water, I know what the glass looks like because it's mine and I used it alot of times before, sure. I don't think I have an extra expectation beyond that tho'. It's just object permanence.

Also where you say "it's more about remember more memories about the object, or seeing things that are different from how it's expected to look."

Umm no I don't think of memories about the whatever object I look at more closely, that additionally sounds draining as hell. Going to the past is always draining for me so no. I just see its details closely. Another NF friend did once comment on how I must be seeing things that way, seeing all the smallest details while he would instead see the universe, or the moon or something?!... I didn't really follow that part, ha. Anyway yeah. I wasn't sure about the big deal there either lol. That I see the details of stuff, that's not a big deal. But while we are at it, if I was starting to imagine stuff about the universe then yeah that would be a big deal LOL that'd be very different from my usual.

Anyway the second part of the sentence from you. I already said I don't think of memories about the object. And as far as expectations, ... I don't zoom in for that, I either notice right away if it looks different from how it was before, or there's only some small difference I didn't pay attention to that much, like I usually just don't really care if a small detail is different, idk.

Edit: actually with the expectations on small details, maybe food is the exception, sometimes a certain meal is really delicious the way it is and then I want that again. Until I get bored of it after eating it too often for a few days/weeks lol

 

[Pionart]

Here's an example of how I need to use all this tasks/rules stuff (and I did when younger too but less necessary then). So I was in a relay race and when I was not doing my part of the race, once two other team members wanted to fuck around with their water guns a bit, spraying water on other people coming (in the race), and they pulled me into that too, but I wasn't comfortable with it without making rules for it, since the idea was it would help people feel refreshed if we spray water on them. It was definitely a hot summer day. So I turned all this into serving the people refreshment in the best way possible, while the other team members just spontaneously fucked around in whatever way they felt like doing it. I made those rules/turned it into a task for myself only though, I let them have their fun, I'm not one to ruin fun of people unnecessarily.

The other people sound like SPs to me.

Notice the way that you subjectively changed what the situation meant - you changed how you were looking at it. That suggests an introverted function, probably introverted perception. That became the "why" of the situation, and the action of spraying the gun became the "how" (extroverted judgment). STJ makes sense in that regard, but I can't say for sure that that's what it implies.

Gotcha I think, for the first part.

I don't think I ask questions myself like you do with the cats. For everyday things like that I'm more like I just look (nonverbal) and decide instead of verbalising questions about options. I noticed I sometimes have a quick picture flash in my mind when I "think" like that. It really is fast though. Idk did that make sense.

I don't really explain ideas, I find that draining, I just want to convey sensible logic.

It's not that I necessarily verbalise those questions, those were just the verbal forms of what I was doing. It is more of a look and do thing, but what I was getting at is that with Ti there's a disengagement from the task at hand to weigh up a decision. Extroverted judgment keeps moving according to protocol, and when an issue arises where you have to disengage from the task and inwardly decide something, that's introverted judgment.

Right I see. So I had a friend who was NF something and she said she only experienced seeing things just as it is when she was on drugs (partying). Like, she'd drink a glass of water and she really was just drinking the glass of water and she was not going in her mind or whatever. And she found that awesome. That's Se?

Well, as an INFJ I do experience drinking a glass of water as just drinking a glass of water, but I'm not quite sure how an SJ would perceive the situation.

--

One of the ways I investigate type is to "activate" a particular cognitive function, or type (which is a configuration of all 8 cognitive functions), and then make a mental note of how my experience of things changes when I do so.*

I did this for the IxFx types this morning, so I'll give a brief description of how I experienced the perception functions.


So, for all 4 types there's a process of "scanning" (eyes moving across the environment), and "lingering" (eyes set in place on a specific object), and each of those can be either in-focus (perception is clear), or out-of-focus (perception is fuzzy).

Scanning = Pe, lingering = Pi, in-focus = S, out-of-focus = N.


INFJ (strong Ni, weak Se). I found myself looking around at things, and when I would stop on an object there would be a sense of the future, for example it may be: sees a drink, sees that this drink will be drunk later, but that it needs to go in the fridge. Or it could be: sees an artistic item, and feels a sense of personal transformation regarding the item.

INFP (strong Ne, weak Si). My eyes would moving in jumps from one thing to another. When I stopped on the item, this is where the sense of object-recognition came in. I would note what I was seeing, then move to something else. Ne can be thought of in terms of a creative impulse, so perhaps what I was doing was looking for things that would spur creativity.

ISFJ (strong Si, weak Ne). In comparison to Ne, there was much less jumping from one object to another, and more time spent looking at a specific object. It's hard to describe what I was perceiving about the object when lingering on it, but a word that comes to mind is that I was "inspecting" it. What I was inspecting it for, I'm unsure.

ISFP (strong Se, weak Ni). Like INFJ, I was scanning while in focus to look at the different details around me, and like ISFJ I would spend a longer time looking at one object (but my eyes were drifting rather than staying fixed), but how ISFP differed would be that I was really enjoying what I was looking at. Whereas ISFJ is like "What do we have here...", ISFP is like "Wow, that's so cool!". INFJ is aware of the environment, but ISFP enjoys actually exploring it. (similarly, SJs are aware of the ideas that are "out there", but it's the NPs that really enjoy learning about it all. NJs tend to learning new things for the purpose of furthering their overall life philosophy, so it's more like going into new theoretical territory to find the next big idea, or update to the previous ideas).


Hopefully something in there is applicable to your own cognition.


* you might be thinking: if we can change type like that, what's the point of typing ourselves at all? What does it even mean to say we're that type?

Well, on the one hand, yes the potential to shift types at will does weaken type theory, and make it seem as though type is illusory, but on the other hand, there does seem be a particular type that we "default" to. When I'm done with the type shifts, I tend to just revert back to INFJ cognition without even trying to, because that's the configuration which requires the least energy for me to use. Type shifts can happen without trying to do them if there is a build up of energy that is creating an imbalance (e.g. being too "J", and shifting to a P type to unwind), or if an easy to use, but not default, configuration is best for a particular situation, e.g. a person may type shift a lot if they're in a line of work that is not optimal for their default configuration.

So one can think of a person as a mix of all the types, but with one strongest type, just as a particular type is a mix of all 8 functions, but with one dominant function.

That's my understanding, at least. It's not a view I've read anywhere else in that form.

 

[Meowcat]

The other people sound like SPs to me.

I don't know their types. One of them was a poet/writer woman though. Her boyfriend was the one that was the "hard to rein in" type.

Notice the way that you subjectively changed what the situation meant - you changed how you were looking at it. That suggests an introverted function, probably introverted perception. That became the "why" of the situation, and the action of spraying the gun became the "how" (extroverted judgment). STJ makes sense in that regard, but I can't say for sure that that's what it implies.

I don't think I changed how I was looking at it, that is, the situation itself remained "as is". As I described the happenings. That is what the situation itself looks like to me. I then made rules and justification for the behaviour, which I also described. That however did not change how I saw the situation itself.

Does this make sense?

As for the "why" of the situation, I don't understand that. I don't look for deep "why's", it just simply happened as it happened. I wouldn't even know where I would begin to look for a "why" beyond what's obvious, what I described already.

There was a "why" for my own behaviour that I chose to do, which explanation (my feeling not comfortable in any other way, I'd have felt too "out of line" and aimless if I had just kept up what the other two team members did) and justification (hot day, so they'll appreciate the refreshment) I already gave you.

I was able to give you the "why" explanation for my behaviour only though because of having increased my self-awareness a bit. The justification part (hot day...), that was conscious, I made it myself, and it was just logical enough to justify what I did.

It's not that I necessarily verbalise those questions, those were just the verbal forms of what I was doing. It is more of a look and do thing, but what I was getting at is that with Ti there's a disengagement from the task at hand to weigh up a decision. Extroverted judgment keeps moving according to protocol, and when an issue arises where you have to disengage from the task and inwardly decide something, that's introverted judgment.

OK, for me there would be no questions in the verbal form though. It would go something like (I don't have pets so I used another example about deciding on dinner), I have bread and to put something on it, for that I have an opened package of camembert and an opened can of sardine in the fridge, I feel more like eating camembert but the sardine will not last another day before it starts to taste less good (before it goes really actually bad), and I don't mind eating sardine too much, so I will make a sardine sandwich and then I'll make myself eat that. I will eat all of the remainder in the can so it still tastes good enough and there is not too much, I don't have to put too much on the bread, a bit more than I would by default but it is still just fine. And the camember will be very nice next time.

... So I end up eating the sardine sandwich which tastes good enough, and it's even nice that there is a little extra quantity of it on the bread. And I will enjoy the camembert next morning just fine.


Actually right now I had to make another decision, it's fresh enough so here we go and it'll show how I change plans easily enough lol even tho I don't necessarily want to...

So I was spending the night now at a family member's house and they have to leave 1:30pm for the train station so in 70mins from now. I have to go home too at that point. I knew this much last evening. So my plan was, I wanted to do a little short run, I'm recovering from illness so it was going to be short. I never ran in this area so I was looking forward to it. Okay the plan was, I get up 10am (long story, I didn't sleep much the night before, so I planned to sleep in), I have breakfast after that, then I go *start* the run between 12:00-12:30 pm. So that enough time passes after breakfast. Finish the run 12:50 the latest, quick shower, then get in a little lunch before we all leave the flat at 1:30.

I did get up around 10am (a few mins later, takes time for me to get out of bed due to my bad moods). I had breakfast alright. Checked emails, talked to my brother on Skype. Saw you replied to me. So now I started on this post, I was either gonna finish it or leave it in the middle before I go out. Family member just came up to me and said I won't have time to do my run because they really have to leave 1:30pm. She was nervous like she always is when she's not sure things will work out. I tell her, a tiny little irritated, that I will definitely have time and laid it out to her that I'll be back by 12:50 and I'll eat lunch quickly at 1:15. She calmed down and left. I then remembered I wanted to go to the tanning salon too the way back home. And then realised I'd like to shower only after that and didn't feel like showering twice, nor was it an option leaving the shower after the tanning salon until tomorrow evening. That's too long.
(PS Using the tanning salon shower isn't an option either, don't have the stuff on me to go do it there, as this wasn't planned)
I could have showered twice, but I didn't feel like it because I already would be like, trying to finish this post and trying to eat the lunch real fast, which is okay but add on top of that the showering twice and I just don't feel like doing that. Iguess you call it too non-optimal. So I instantly had the "picture" flash that I would just eat lunch here, go to the tanning salon, go home, and since the lunch isn't a big lunch, I would not have to wait long to go out and do the run around where I live. And so I can still do it before it goes dark and too cold (I'm recovering from illness or I would not mind that at all). And I can have fun like I wanted to with the new route next time I sleep over here at the family member's flat, it will be better conditions for that then.

Iguess this is an example of the comfort too that I talked about.

And yeah, no, while writing this is when I thought of the "PS" above. I already made the decision in a flash based on how all these options felt (to my body, not moral feelings). Another PS. It's not optimal that I packed and brought my running clothes here being ready to do the run here, and I was looking forward to trying out this new route as I never ran here like I said. It'd have been fun but when I'm fully recovered from the illness it's gonna be more fun anyway. And the showering twice with all the rest of the problems as above was a big no no so that was decisive for me I don't feel second guessing. BTW I never second guess my decisions. This writing it out here was too much verbalising and made me think of more options (like these "PS" options), too many, and almost second guessing. I most definitely do NOT like that lol. That's not me. I don't spend time on looking at further options, that takes me too far from my body and the present too. Too much in my mind or whatever. It's not normal for me with these things

I mean, I do it trying to do the "NF" grip and explore things there. I'm NOT!!!! going to do it for normal everyday situations. This options-seeking to see a more refined picture or whatever. Just no.

OK. That's as close as it gets, to my actual thought process as this is really fresh, just happened now.

I didn't feel like changing the plan at first but the resistance lasted about a second before I moved on to making the new plan. Which took me about 2 seconds and then I was set again. And I like redoing the plan on the fly it can be fun Iguess.

Does it tell you anything?

(Or anyone else reading by any chance)

It's not that I necessarily verbalise those questions, those were just the verbal forms of what I was doing. It is more of a look and do thing, but what I was getting at is that with Ti there's a disengagement from the task at hand to weigh up a decision. Extroverted judgment keeps moving according to protocol, and when an issue arises where you have to disengage from the task and inwardly decide something, that's introverted judgment.

OK I re-quoted this. I wasn't doing a task unless you mean I was doing the whole plan. I was following the plan decently well but I was gonna rush things because I didn't feel like getting to do the stuff earlier. So even if sticking to the plan I wasn't gonna go at some very comfy slow pace lol. Is that protocol to you?

And I definitely did disengage to weigh up and decide things. But that lasted for a short time only. I don't like weighing things up for these simple decisions for longer than like, two seconds. I know some people take half an hour where I take two seconds and I don't understand those people. I also don't understand people who second-guess these things. It feels like a pain in the ass to have to second-guess yourself all the time on simple everday things like the above

I did not use any moral feelings or moral judgments for the deciding. Just the above optimising. That doesn't need moral feelings. (I wasn't going to hurt anyone obviously)

Well, as an INFJ I do experience drinking a glass of water as just drinking a glass of water, but I'm not quite sure how an SJ would perceive the situation.

She was an NF too. I also do just experience the glass of water as just that, but she meant she was like fully in the moment like it never happened before, the drinking of the glass of water was its own event in the moment, not linked to anything else or whatever. And yeah that is how I am by default and she never is, except when she tried those drugs.

One of the ways I investigate type is to "activate" a particular cognitive function, or type (which is a configuration of all 8 cognitive functions), and then make a mental note of how my experience of things changes when I do so.*

I did this for the IxFx types this morning, so I'll give a brief description of how I experienced the perception functions.


So, for all 4 types there's a process of "scanning" (eyes moving across the environment), and "lingering" (eyes set in place on a specific object), and each of those can be either in-focus (perception is clear), or out-of-focus (perception is fuzzy).

OK... I either scan but I don't overdo that or I look/stare at something specifically and it's clear focus. I don't even know what it is supposed to be like when "perception is fuzzy" ??

INFJ (strong Ni, weak Se). I found myself looking around at things, and when I would stop on an object there would be a sense of the future, for example it may be: sees a drink, sees that this drink will be drunk later, but that it needs to go in the fridge. Or it could be: sees an artistic item, and feels a sense of personal transformation regarding the item.

No way in hell that I ever do that lol. LOL. Interesting tho' but I would die if I had to think of the future when I just look at some everyday object like that drink. It would be so draining.

INFP (strong Ne, weak Si). My eyes would moving in jumps from one thing to another. When I stopped on the item, this is where the sense of object-recognition came in. I would note what I was seeing, then move to something else. Ne can be thought of in terms of a creative impulse, so perhaps what I was doing was looking for things that would spur creativity.

No like I said I don't overdo the scanning, this is just pointless and aimless

ISFJ (strong Si, weak Ne). In comparison to Ne, there was much less jumping from one object to another, and more time spent looking at a specific object. It's hard to describe what I was perceiving about the object when lingering on it, but a word that comes to mind is that I was "inspecting" it. What I was inspecting it for, I'm unsure.

Why is it hard to describe what you perceived? I mean, was it not about how the object looked? Not about its details?

I mean if I inspect something I look at its details closely. That is what inspection is for. I do do that when needed.

ISFP (strong Se, weak Ni). Like INFJ, I was scanning while in focus to look at the different details around me, and like ISFJ I would spend a longer time looking at one object (but my eyes were drifting rather than staying fixed), but how ISFP differed would be that I was really enjoying what I was looking at. Whereas ISFJ is like "What do we have here...", ISFP is like "Wow, that's so cool!". INFJ is aware of the environment, but ISFP enjoys actually exploring it. (similarly, SJs are aware of the ideas that are "out there", but it's the NPs that really enjoy learning about it all. NJs tend to learning new things for the purpose of furthering their overall life philosophy, so it's more like going into new theoretical territory to find the next big idea, or update to the previous ideas).

That's not me because I'm not going to particularly enjoy exploring everyday stuff that I've seen a million times before

I mean I do enjoy it if I go on an unknown (and hard!!) trail in the woods, if I don't even know where it's leading that's extra fun, and the more hilly and hard it is the better lol but I do also want to feel my own strength like yeah I liek to be able to manage hard hilly trails and feeling like I can go forever if I want to lol, that's obviously not trivial either. I've worked hard on that goal too already. But the part about going really hard, that's more for when there is a race. When alone I'm more just enjoying the whole thing. I can go hard and enjoy that too when I feel like it but if the training plan doesn't allow for it then I can't. And if I make a plan that does allow it...then it would still not be the same going hard as when racing against others. Would be more impulsively random. When I race against others that is more controlled. But my training plan also makes me more controlled. ... Um I have to think about how much of it is enjoying the trail itself, it being hilly being fun variety enough, and how it's leading who knows where, and I'm not saying I look for danger specifically with that, it's just exciting. It is hard to explain, Iguess it's jsut the adventure itself. The more complex the better tho!!, I like that summary I think. As long as I can meet the challenge ofc. There is no fun in it if you set an impossible & completely unrealistic challenge in front of you, lol.

But I'm not gonna enjoy looking at whatever object in the flat around me if I've seen it a million times before. I don't know what objects you were looking at though. Bc if it's expensive shit that looks real cool, then I don't think I'll ever feel like I've seen it a million times before. I'll always feel that it's good to own it, lol. ...Sorry I hope that doesn't come off bad in any way either, I don't mean it like that.

Also that's not the same kind of enjoyment as with the adventure on the trails. But it's enjoyment too, just different.

I also am not emotional enough to just go like the ISFP on the whole. I don't go around like "wow so cool" all day. If I see something *actually* cool then I'll usually just think it to myself and I don't make exclamations easily. It would drain me fast emotionally. But I've been around people who do that all day and I don't mind that. It's fun even, seeing how they get emotional so easily lol.

No I'm more like the ISFJ with "what do we have here". I'm more unemotional like that, more stoic than the ISFP. I'm not 100% stoic but compared to this ISFP...yes I am.

Hopefully something in there is applicable to your own cognition.

Well I tried to describe what I could relate to and what I couldn't relate to, yeah.

None of it had me go "yes that's me".

The ISFJ was ok except that you indicated that the inspecting was not about the actual details of the object. Unless I misunderstood you.

The ISFP is ok too when something is cool enough but I don't feel it or express it like the ISFP does

* you might be thinking: if we can change type like that, what's the point of typing ourselves at all? What does it even mean to say we're that type?

Well, on the one hand, yes the potential to shift types at will does weaken type theory, and make it seem as though type is illusory, but on the other hand, there does seem be a particular type that we "default" to. When I'm done with the type shifts, I tend to just revert back to INFJ cognition without even trying to, because that's the configuration which requires the least energy for me to use. Type shifts can happen without trying to do them if there is a build up of energy that is creating an imbalance (e.g. being too "J", and shifting to a P type to unwind), or if an easy to use, but not default, configuration is best for a particular situation, e.g. a person may type shift a lot if they're in a line of work that is not optimal for their default configuration.

So one can think of a person as a mix of all the types, but with one strongest type, just as a particular type is a mix of all 8 functions, but with one dominant function.

That's my understanding, at least. It's not a view I've read anywhere else in that form.

It's a cool view actually. It makes sense.

 

[Meowcat]

Ah I realised something today. Thought of that trail example again and I realised that yeah, I often enjoy things like that more when I'm alone. If I'm with others it would turn so fast into competitive stuff, lol. I mean I enjoy that too but it's again a different kind of enjoyment, lol. But it's not like just having fun with people, it's harder to with them than if I do things alone. I got a problem with being around people in a "normal fun" way. I either protect myself with the rules/tasks stuff or I turn it all into competition and in the latter case I do still keep having fun, just different fun...

I mean I sometimes do have "normal fun" too with people. I.e. when I am not competitive, not argumentative, and I don't hide behind tasks/rules, or otherwise taking care of things, directing things or organising things for people etc... But it's harder to do the "normal fun" now than a long time ago. (I don't just mean having bad moods or being in a bad place though)

I don't think it was ever easy tbh

 

[Pionart]

I don't know their types. One of them was a poet/writer woman though. Her boyfriend was the one that was the "hard to rein in" type.

I was probably rather presumptuous in think they were SPs, I don't know really.

I don't think I changed how I was looking at it, that is, the situation itself remained "as is". As I described the happenings. That is what the situation itself looks like to me. I then made rules and justification for the behaviour, which I also described. That however did not change how I saw the situation itself.

Does this make sense?

As for the "why" of the situation, I don't understand that. I don't look for deep "why's", it just simply happened as it happened. I wouldn't even know where I would begin to look for a "why" beyond what's obvious, what I described already.

There was a "why" for my own behaviour that I chose to do, which explanation (my feeling not comfortable in any other way, I'd have felt too "out of line" and aimless if I had just kept up what the other two team members did) and justification (hot day, so they'll appreciate the refreshment) I already gave you.

I was able to give you the "why" explanation for my behaviour only though because of having increased my self-awareness a bit. The justification part (hot day...), that was conscious, I made it myself, and it was just logical enough to justify what I did.

Yeah, that's what I meant by "why".

OK, for me there would be no questions in the verbal form though. It would go something like (I don't have pets so I used another example about deciding on dinner), I have bread and to put something on it, for that I have an opened package of camembert and an opened can of sardine in the fridge, I feel more like eating camembert but the sardine will not last another day before it starts to taste less good (before it goes really actually bad), and I don't mind eating sardine too much, so I will make a sardine sandwich and then I'll make myself eat that. I will eat all of the remainder in the can so it still tastes good enough and there is not too much, I don't have to put too much on the bread, a bit more than I would by default but it is still just fine. And the camember will be very nice next time.

... So I end up eating the sardine sandwich which tastes good enough, and it's even nice that there is a little extra quantity of it on the bread. And I will enjoy the camembert next morning just fine.

I would say when you're checking in with what you feel like having that is likely Fi.

Actually right now I had to make another decision, it's fresh enough so here we go and it'll show how I change plans easily enough lol even tho I don't necessarily want to...

So I was spending the night now at a family member's house and they have to leave 1:30pm for the train station so in 70mins from now. I have to go home too at that point. I knew this much last evening. So my plan was, I wanted to do a little short run, I'm recovering from illness so it was going to be short. I never ran in this area so I was looking forward to it. Okay the plan was, I get up 10am (long story, I didn't sleep much the night before, so I planned to sleep in), I have breakfast after that, then I go *start* the run between 12:00-12:30 pm. So that enough time passes after breakfast. Finish the run 12:50 the latest, quick shower, then get in a little lunch before we all leave the flat at 1:30.

I did get up around 10am (a few mins later, takes time for me to get out of bed due to my bad moods). I had breakfast alright. Checked emails, talked to my brother on Skype. Saw you replied to me. So now I started on this post, I was either gonna finish it or leave it in the middle before I go out. Family member just came up to me and said I won't have time to do my run because they really have to leave 1:30pm. She was nervous like she always is when she's not sure things will work out. I tell her, a tiny little irritated, that I will definitely have time and laid it out to her that I'll be back by 12:50 and I'll eat lunch quickly at 1:15. She calmed down and left. I then remembered I wanted to go to the tanning salon too the way back home. And then realised I'd like to shower only after that and didn't feel like showering twice, nor was it an option leaving the shower after the tanning salon until tomorrow evening. That's too long.
(PS Using the tanning salon shower isn't an option either, don't have the stuff on me to go do it there, as this wasn't planned)
I could have showered twice, but I didn't feel like it because I already would be like, trying to finish this post and trying to eat the lunch real fast, which is okay but add on top of that the showering twice and I just don't feel like doing that. Iguess you call it too non-optimal. So I instantly had the "picture" flash that I would just eat lunch here, go to the tanning salon, go home, and since the lunch isn't a big lunch, I would not have to wait long to go out and do the run around where I live. And so I can still do it before it goes dark and too cold (I'm recovering from illness or I would not mind that at all). And I can have fun like I wanted to with the new route next time I sleep over here at the family member's flat, it will be better conditions for that then.

Iguess this is an example of the comfort too that I talked about.

What I notice is that there's a lot of planning and measuring (i.e. of the time). I think that's Te, I don't do that to nearly the same extent.

Remembering what happened and the order things went in could indicate Si, as could noting "she was nervous like she always is". Si is known for good recollection of events as well as noting regularities in how things happen, because that's viewing the stimulus in the environment in terms of one's internal store of sensory impressions.

Si, perhaps even more so when paired with Te, has a tendency to have a kind of "to-do list" mentality, of keeping note of what needs to be done and when. Ni on the other hand is more about following up on things that may suggest potential, such as an idea to be explored or a problem to be solved, but these aren't really kept track of in the same way, since they're typically not of practical importance per se. Of course, NJs still can keep track of things that need to be done, but this is of a more simplified, unintentional, sporadic nature.

And yeah, no, while writing this is when I thought of the "PS" above. I already made the decision in a flash based on how all these options felt (to my body, not moral feelings). Another PS. It's not optimal that I packed and brought my running clothes here being ready to do the run here, and I was looking forward to trying out this new route as I never ran here like I said. It'd have been fun but when I'm fully recovered from the illness it's gonna be more fun anyway. And the showering twice with all the rest of the problems as above was a big no no so that was decisive for me I don't feel second guessing. BTW I never second guess my decisions. This writing it out here was too much verbalising and made me think of more options (like these "PS" options), too many, and almost second guessing. I most definitely do NOT like that lol. That's not me. I don't spend time on looking at further options, that takes me too far from my body and the present too. Too much in my mind or whatever. It's not normal for me with these things

I mean, I do it trying to do the "NF" grip and explore things there. I'm NOT!!!! going to do it for normal everyday situations. This options-seeking to see a more refined picture or whatever. Just no.

OK. That's as close as it gets, to my actual thought process as this is really fresh, just happened now.

I didn't feel like changing the plan at first but the resistance lasted about a second before I moved on to making the new plan. Which took me about 2 seconds and then I was set again. And I like redoing the plan on the fly it can be fun Iguess.

Does it tell you anything?

(Or anyone else reading by any chance)

The further options thing is like Ne, and taking you away from your body is because the body is associated with Si, and Ne generally suppresses Si, and vice versa. The Ne is best engaged with when it is in the context of Si.

OK I re-quoted this. I wasn't doing a task unless you mean I was doing the whole plan. I was following the plan decently well but I was gonna rush things because I didn't feel like getting to do the stuff earlier. So even if sticking to the plan I wasn't gonna go at some very comfy slow pace lol. Is that protocol to you?

And I definitely did disengage to weigh up and decide things. But that lasted for a short time only. I don't like weighing things up for these simple decisions for longer than like, two seconds. I know some people take half an hour where I take two seconds and I don't understand those people. I also don't understand people who second-guess these things. It feels like a pain in the ass to have to second-guess yourself all the time on simple everday things like the above

I did not use any moral feelings or moral judgments for the deciding. Just the above optimising. That doesn't need moral feelings. (I wasn't going to hurt anyone obviously)

I guess by protocal I was referring to the general approach taken to planning and executing the plan. With Fe there's an ethical code, where actions are taken according to what the Fe user feels is the appropriate way to do it, e.g. social customs, but it's not necessarily dictated by what people usually do and can be highly individualised. So with Te I suppose there would also be a kind of code (and this code gets updated across time), where there is a way that things are done, e.g. to maximise efficiency. It's a rather abstract way of looking at it, so don't worry about it if it doesn't make much sense to you.

And yeah the weighing up doesn't necessarily take a long time. Someone who spends a lot of time weighing things up probably is a P type who isn't engaging extroverted judgment, but I admit that there are times when I've done that. Actually sometimes I do take way longer than a few seconds to make a decision, but I think I am particularly indecisive for a J.

And yeah, second-guessing is a pain, I do it a lot.

She was an NF too. I also do just experience the glass of water as just that, but she meant she was like fully in the moment like it never happened before, the drinking of the glass of water was its own event in the moment, not linked to anything else or whatever. And yeah that is how I am by default and she never is, except when she tried those drugs.

Yeah, linking to other things would indicate intuition, I think. I suppose, for me, things I do are generally framed as an ethical decision, even drinking a glass of water, but that's more about the actions I'm taking. I still have a perception of things as they are in "reality", i.e. drinking a glass of water is just drinking a glass of water.

OK... I either scan but I don't overdo that or I look/stare at something specifically and it's clear focus. I don't even know what it is supposed to be like when "perception is fuzzy" ??

Fuzzy perception... well, "stare into space", make your vision unfocused. You're still aware of what's there, just not in as fine detail. It allows the mind, I think, to form connections around what you're looking at.

No way in hell that I ever do that lol. LOL. Interesting tho' but I would die if I had to think of the future when I just look at some everyday object like that drink. It would be so draining.

Well, you did something similar with the food example by thinking about e.g. the sardines going off. I suppose you would have looked at them and known they wouldn't last long.

With Ni, things in the environment are inwardly viewed in terms of moving the story forward, so to speak. Like Si, there's a sense of looking for something and it can be hard to say what it is exactly (unless, I suppose, you really are looking for a specific thing like a lost item).

No like I said I don't overdo the scanning, this is just pointless and aimless

Heh, I guess to someone who does a lot of scanning, staying in one place would seem pointless and aimless.

Why is it hard to describe what you perceived? I mean, was it not about how the object looked? Not about its details?

I mean if I inspect something I look at its details closely. That is what inspection is for. I do do that when needed.

I'm writing some of this post in reverse order, so see the section at the end.

That's not me because I'm not going to particularly enjoy exploring everyday stuff that I've seen a million times before

I mean I do enjoy it if I go on an unknown (and hard!!) trail in the woods, if I don't even know where it's leading that's extra fun, and the more hilly and hard it is the better lol but I do also want to feel my own strength like yeah I liek to be able to manage hard hilly trails and feeling like I can go forever if I want to lol, that's obviously not trivial either. I've worked hard on that goal too already. But the part about going really hard, that's more for when there is a race. When alone I'm more just enjoying the whole thing. I can go hard and enjoy that too when I feel like it but if the training plan doesn't allow for it then I can't. And if I make a plan that does allow it...then it would still not be the same going hard as when racing against others. Would be more impulsively random. When I race against others that is more controlled. But my training plan also makes me more controlled. ... Um I have to think about how much of it is enjoying the trail itself, it being hilly being fun variety enough, and how it's leading who knows where, and I'm not saying I look for danger specifically with that, it's just exciting. It is hard to explain, Iguess it's jsut the adventure itself. The more complex the better tho!!, I like that summary I think. As long as I can meet the challenge ofc. There is no fun in it if you set an impossible & completely unrealistic challenge in front of you, lol.

But I'm not gonna enjoy looking at whatever object in the flat around me if I've seen it a million times before. I don't know what objects you were looking at though. Bc if it's expensive shit that looks real cool, then I don't think I'll ever feel like I've seen it a million times before. I'll always feel that it's good to own it, lol. ...Sorry I hope that doesn't come off bad in any way either, I don't mean it like that.

Also that's not the same kind of enjoyment as with the adventure on the trails. But it's enjoyment too, just different.

I also am not emotional enough to just go like the ISFP on the whole. I don't go around like "wow so cool" all day. If I see something *actually* cool then I'll usually just think it to myself and I don't make exclamations easily. It would drain me fast emotionally. But I've been around people who do that all day and I don't mind that. It's fun even, seeing how they get emotional so easily lol.

No I'm more like the ISFJ with "what do we have here". I'm more unemotional like that, more stoic than the ISFP. I'm not 100% stoic but compared to this ISFP...yes I am.

The specific objects I was looking at weren't too relevant, it's more that the environment itself was just more alive than usual. Usually things are just "there", and I'm aware of it but have little interest in it, but when I tried to be an SP, it's like I actually wanted to explore what was around me.

The "leading to who knows where" phrase seems to indicate an intuitive function. It's in a sensory context though, so it makes sense. Generally, the weaker functions can be enjoyed when they're done in the context of the stronger functions. The emphasis on things being "controlled" suggests a J type mentality I think, although it could possibly also suggest introverted judgment. It wouldn't suggest Se though. Though everyone has Se, and for an SJ, Se is a function which is enjoyable/energising, it's just that it's hard to wield in an intentional/controlled manner (since it's unconscious).

Well I tried to describe what I could relate to and what I couldn't relate to, yeah.

None of it had me go "yes that's me".

The ISFJ was ok except that you indicated that the inspecting was not about the actual details of the object. Unless I misunderstood you.

The ISFP is ok too when something is cool enough but I don't feel it or express it like the ISFP does




It's a cool view actually. It makes sense.

It's not that the Si wasn't about details. I was looking at the details, but it's like I was looking at them for a specific reason, like I was looking for something. But I don't know what I was looking for. With more practice I should be able to get a better understanding of the Si process.

 

[Meowcat]

Yeah, that's what I meant by "why".

This is what you meant by reframing the perception? I didn't reframe the *perception*. Things just happened as they happened. Then I decided on how I was going to behave, what I was going to do and kept myself to those rules. The rules are separate from the perception, the perception stays "as is".

I would say when you're checking in with what you feel like having that is likely Fi.

No, for me it's still the body stuff, it's still not moralistic feelings whatsoever. It's moralistic feelings as much as hunger is moralistic feelings

Judgment comes in when I decide based on optimising. This is my understanding of this.

Also: I'm not "checking in with" what I feel like in this way. I just have that by default. It's not some controlled way of checking in. It's again not moralistic, it's just sensations

Edit: Iguess where I called it "feel like" at that point I already identified the sensations so maybe at that point it does have judgment too, but that's not moralistic either (I wrote more below about "measurement").

What I notice is that there's a lot of planning and measuring (i.e. of the time). I think that's Te, I don't do that to nearly the same extent.

Remembering what happened and the order things went in could indicate Si, as could noting "she was nervous like she always is". Si is known for good recollection of events as well as noting regularities in how things happen, because that's viewing the stimulus in the environment in terms of one's internal store of sensory impressions.

Si, perhaps even more so when paired with Te, has a tendency to have a kind of "to-do list" mentality, of keeping note of what needs to be done and when. Ni on the other hand is more about following up on things that may suggest potential, such as an idea to be explored or a problem to be solved, but these aren't really kept track of in the same way, since they're typically not of practical importance per se. Of course, NJs still can keep track of things that need to be done, but this is of a more simplified, unintentional, sporadic nature.

You are too nice by calling that a "LOT" of planning

It's not a lot to me because I spend like 2 seconds on it.

It would be boring and unnecessary for me to spend more time on it.

Yeah I could recall all that in detail and in order just fine but I did this for the task/purpose of giving more info on myself here. It was kinda boring to list all the detail without leaving anything out but it wasn't too bad. Because it was easy to do it. I think it's the same with the to-do list stuff as you described here. It's easy and necessary and important but that's about it. As long as there is some purpose I care about I guess it's fine and doesn't feel too boring.

OK based on what you say here, I still don't have much Ni, lol. Except maybe in my "NF" grips (Ni or Ne, idk but one of the two yeah).


OK re-quoting:

Si is known for good recollection of events as well as noting regularities in how things happen, because that's viewing the stimulus in the environment in terms of one's internal store of sensory impressions.

That internal store of sensory impressions is unconscious? Mine has to be because I do not see it consciously. I relate to being able to remember some things in detail (tho' then some other things I just completely forget that they ever happened) but I don't see an "internal store of sensory impressions".

The further options thing is like Ne, and taking you away from your body is because the body is associated with Si, and Ne generally suppresses Si, and vice versa. The Ne is best engaged with when it is in the context of Si.

I do not like looking at aimless pointless options in any context. I need to have a goal and the "options" have to be relevant to that. In my "NF" grip I still have a goal of figuring out what the hell is going on so I can get back on track with my life. I still don't see many options even then.

I think the one time when I am okay with options is when I really want something that's hard to get (and some people would actually get discouraged bc of that), and then I just get really extra focused on taking action and then I somehow do see extra & direct options for action, and I do like those extra options fine because I can take actually concrete action right away and get what I wanted to get or get to my (concrete) goal. There are not many of these options, they all make sense for the direct action taking, I call them extra because I wouldn't think of them by default, not until I really really want that something.

And that kind of option doesn't take me away from the present or my body either, doesn't take me deep into my mind or any of that. So yeahh I'm fine with it.

BTW: I thought all Sensing is associated with the body, no? Is the above inferior Intuition in a sensory context to you? (I still don't know if i have inferior Feeling or inferior Intuition tho')

I guess by protocal I was referring to the general approach taken to planning and executing the plan. With Fe there's an ethical code, where actions are taken according to what the Fe user feels is the appropriate way to do it, e.g. social customs, but it's not necessarily dictated by what people usually do and can be highly individualised. So with Te I suppose there would also be a kind of code (and this code gets updated across time), where there is a way that things are done, e.g. to maximise efficiency. It's a rather abstract way of looking at it, so don't worry about it if it doesn't make much sense to you.

Oh I actually think I understand you on the code thing. Mine isn't an ethical code much for sure. Except if it is about social things sometimes. My code consists of some kinds of rules and principles, but I don't know if "there is a way that things are done" describes it best. I'd have to think about that.

Edit: I had the sardines example below again that mentioned a rule. That's not about efficiency but more about optimising my life lol, I think. But I can also pay attention to efficiency, sure. I think my general approach to planning for everyday things coming up is just what I said, that two-seconds decision making.

I think "there is a way that things are done" for me works for specific tasks only, there is no general approach otherwise

And yeah the weighing up doesn't necessarily take a long time. Someone who spends a lot of time weighing things up probably is a P type who isn't engaging extroverted judgment, but I admit that there are times when I've done that. Actually sometimes I do take way longer than a few seconds to make a decision, but I think I am particularly indecisive for a J.

And yeah, second-guessing is a pain, I do it a lot.

Wait but I was disengaging like you said it happens with introverted judgment. That was the two second thing and that's all I needed to make the plan. Actually, it's like I have half a second with the "picture flash" and I just analyse that somehow really quickly and weigh up stuff for optimisation. All that happens quickly.

And yeah there is the thing about what feels comfortable or enjoyable etc (body-wise, not moralistic), and that helps because I can "measure" how comfortable or enjoyable something is and then I can use that info for the optimising. The other kind of info that is used to optimise is just plain reasoning about it (x thing works because y but z thing doesn't because of x and so on).

Yeah, linking to other things would indicate intuition, I think. I suppose, for me, things I do are generally framed as an ethical decision, even drinking a glass of water, but that's more about the actions I'm taking. I still have a perception of things as they are in "reality", i.e. drinking a glass of water is just drinking a glass of water.

Lol interesting, can I ask how is drinking a glass of water an ethical decision, can you say more on this?

Fuzzy perception... well, "stare into space", make your vision unfocused. You're still aware of what's there, just not in as fine detail. It allows the mind, I think, to form connections around what you're looking at.

Thanks that explained it well. It's just hard for me to imagine it because it doesn't work like that for me:

I can stare into space but that doesn't make my mind form any connections. I still just see the space and stuff around me just less in focus, but my mind remains "empty" (and that's how I like it).

Well, you did something similar with the food example by thinking about e.g. the sardines going off. I suppose you would have looked at them and known they wouldn't last long.

No I didn't look at them. When I look I DON'T WANT TO think about the future lol. That's what would take me away from the present and is draining.

In the example I simply remembered that I had had the sardines opened for 2 days and my rule is I don't eat canned fish 2 days after originally opening it. It gets thrown out instead.

To be clear, if I just look at stuff like you described in your experiment, so I just look at the sardines*, I would NOT want to think about any of this. When I decide it's time to eat dinner and need to decide on what to eat is when I do the above thinking. Maybe it is future oriented then, I don't know, to me it's just about making a decision. Where I do that thing with disengaging for 2 seconds to make the decision.

*: Except ofc if I'm looking at them and they have a really bad smell and look like rotting lol, then yeah I'll just throw them out immediately. (This is hypothetical, I'm not a slob, and don't let food rot like that)

With Ni, things in the environment are inwardly viewed in terms of moving the story forward, so to speak. Like Si, there's a sense of looking for something and it can be hard to say what it is exactly (unless, I suppose, you really are looking for a specific thing like a lost item).

Yeah there is no story with the sardines

I don't understand the Si thingie here. I have no problem verbalising specific concrete things and I'm always concrete about these things, not vague, so that's not Si then, or?

I mean, I really am more specific than "a sense of looking for something and it can be hard to say what it is exactly". For me it is easy to say what it is exactly.

Heh, I guess to someone who does a lot of scanning, staying in one place would seem pointless and aimless.

I don't stay in one place

I like to move more than that

The specific objects I was looking at weren't too relevant, it's more that the environment itself was just more alive than usual. Usually things are just "there", and I'm aware of it but have little interest in it, but when I tried to be an SP, it's like I actually wanted to explore what was around me.

I see, I think I still find this too emotional for myself. Alive environment... I'm really not that emotional. And just exploring all day without some goal and achievement (yes competition too), that seems really aimless to me. I mean I'd feel like there is no...no higher purpose?

The "leading to who knows where" phrase seems to indicate an intuitive function. It's in a sensory context though, so it makes sense. Generally, the weaker functions can be enjoyed when they're done in the context of the stronger functions. The emphasis on things being "controlled" suggests a J type mentality I think, although it could possibly also suggest introverted judgment. It wouldn't suggest Se though. Though everyone has Se, and for an SJ, Se is a function which is enjoyable/energising, it's just that it's hard to wield in an intentional/controlled manner (since it's unconscious).

The "leading to who knows where" thingy, it's something I feel for a second but I don't think about it at all. It would kill my head to try and think about it further LOL (would also be draining, I have NO capacity for this)

What is it like when Se is wielded in an intentional controlled manner?

It's not that the Si wasn't about details. I was looking at the details, but it's like I was looking at them for a specific reason, like I was looking for something. But I don't know what I was looking for. With more practice I should be able to get a better understanding of the Si process.

Um, if I look at something's details for a specific reason it's usually for some (immediate/concrete) goal like, actual example, here's this new type of tin/can I never saw before and no I don't know how it works, so... so I'll look at its details closely, poke it a bit (I somehow learn faster when I do that), then I'll try to make myself extra analytical with the details (not my default beyond a point I think), to do logical reasoning about how it works and how to open it properly. If I get methodical that helps too, to avoid frustration. It really helps with avoiding extra frustration and anger, so if I remember to do so then I try to slow down and do things methodically plus all the methodical analysis as above. But I have to first remember

Or I'm looking at it because I want to see if I'm going to buy this item or some other item instead.

Or I just enjoy looking at it for a short time bc it's cool. I wouldn't spend hours on that though lol, I move on if I don't want to do anything with it beyond looking at it.

These are the examples I thought of but these seem basic, lol. I tried to analyse out though how I do it, so maybe that'll help for the typing. Thanks again for your input, it's actually interesting stuff too



PS: I realised you said earlier "sees an artistic item, and feels a sense of personal transformation regarding the item". For the INFJ example. I forgot to say that I don't do that either and I don't even understand this but it sounds cool.