INFP, ENFP, or some other type?

[fItNeSsGrAmPaCeRtEsT]

sorry for the extremely long video (and bad lighting)
I start talking about specific types at the end of the video (1:24:00 to the end) and that's kinda where the video falls apart and becomes really cringey oops (especially my descriptions of why I think I use/don't use certain functions)

EDIT: I edited the cringe stuff out

 

[tommyc]

Wow, you made a two hour video about MBTI!!

Its cool youre doing some introspecting, trying to figure yourself out. In terms of typology, its of course much easier for you to work out than us, but I have some ideas.

I would nornally start by ascertaining if youre an Introvert or Extrovert - from the fact that you made a two hour video about yourself, it seems you enjoy introspecting. Extroverts can do it, but will usually display discomfort. You seem relaxed and quite happy. So introvert.

Id next try and see what your Extraverted process is. This is the outer self, the face you show the world. Its tricky to figure this out without seeing you interact with others, one on one and in groups.

You seem to be more of an Intuitive not a Sensor. You jump from topic to topic, spinning off in different directions. You seem energised by possibilities and ideas more than reality, actualities. More imaginative than matter-of-fact.

Putting these together, Id say you were an INXX of some kind. Im not sure what your dominant processes are, internally or externally, but Im fairly sure of those two letters.

 

[Pionart]

What I noticed first is two main modes of speaking you have,

The first and primary one consists of an inwardly drawing and emotive voice, paired with a wavy and indefinite quality. You speak of general patterns and personal qualities of yourself.

The second is a more neutral voice, with a more outward flow of energy, where you are more focused on providing definite facts, in response to the ideas that came up in the primary phase.

The first is Ne paired with Fi, the second is Te paired with Si, indicating that you are an NFP, as you suspected.

Furthermore, I get the impression that you can more easily shift from an emotive, personal discussion, to neutralising that emotion, but have a harder time with shifting from generalities (terms like "kind of", "I guess") into something more definite, indicating that it is intuition which is the dominant function.

I was also able to moreorless track the progression from your dominant function (Ne) down to your 8th function (Se), seeing the full range of Ne-Fi-Te-Si--Ni-Fe-Ti-Se. I can expand on that aspect if you'd like.

(i.e. I type you as ENFP)

 

[raskol]

sorry for the extremely long video (and bad lighting)

INTP. Hands down.

Ti dom (reflective, deductive, pensive) and auxiliary Ne (ever-inquisitive, associative, tangent-hopping) link up with tertiary Si (impression-based, procedural, restrained) and inferior Fe (normativity, social cues). You also express some of the typical TiNe traits, such as the occasional puppeteer hands and start-stop sentences as well as a slight emotional distance (Ti-Si).

Musical activities will make you test for ISFP (FiSe) and ISTP (TiSe), mainly due to persisting biases, but having seen your interactive style there really is no noticeable Se (capricious, improvising, thrill-seeking).

 

[fItNeSsGrAmPaCeRtEsT]

I was also able to moreorless track the progression from your dominant function (Ne) down to your 8th function (Se), seeing the full range of Ne-Fi-Te-Si--Ni-Fe-Ti-Se. I can expand on that aspect if you'd like.

If you don't mind, I'm very curious about this progression.

 

[fItNeSsGrAmPaCeRtEsT]

INTP. Hands down.

Ti dom (reflective, deductive, pensive) and auxiliary Ne (ever-inquisitive, associative, tangent-hopping) link up with tertiary Si (impression-based, procedural, restrained) and inferior Fe (normativity, social cues). You also express some of the typical TiNe traits, such as the occasional puppeteer hands and start-stop sentences as well as a slight emotional distance (Ti-Si).

Musical activities will make you test for ISFP (FiSe) and ISTP (TiSe), mainly due to persisting biases, but having seen your interactive style there really is no noticeable Se (capricious, improvising, thrill-seeking).

Hmm. I'm curious about maybe specific examples where I exhibited these traits?

 

[raskol]

Hmm. I'm curious about maybe specific examples where I exhibited these traits?

Pick any timestamp, and you'll see examples of these very traits. I'd also add that they are rather self-explanatory, from pensive (Ti) to tangent-hopping (Ne). At some point you mentioned a hesitation before social cues (Fe inferior), not to mention the exhausting nature of debates/argumentation (Te), which clarifies introverted thinking as the preferred function. You also "speak with your hands" in a way that's supplemental, not to direct or command (Te).

As you are not interacting with anyone, it isn't possible to tell whether you are an initiator, but you are definitely informative in your approach. Type can also be established by considering the axes pairs of our perceiving functions (Ni/Se or Ne/Si) and judging functions (Ti/Fe or Te/Fi). On the perceiving axis, it comes down to Ne versus Se, as you can't have two extraverted functions on the same axis, and I settled for Ne through visual typing. We can now form the function stack, since Ne necessitates Si while Ti necessitates Fe. That leaves four remaining possibilities, but I settled for Ti over Ne.

All 16 personalities appear in accordance with subsets of four joint function axes, so you can consider the alternatives by a process of elimination.

 

[Pionart]

Ok, watch your video from pretty much anywhere, and I reckon you'll be able to see this pattern/formula:

You'll finish up a section that you were speaking about and will say something like "And after that..." and begin a new section/phase. (1)

You'll be setting the scene for a bit, and then you'll start really focusing on how it relates to you as a person and your identity. (2)

Then you'll become more fact-driven, perhaps telling the details about some event, with your voice having a more unemotional confidence to it (3), and there will be some detail, or some aspect in terms of "how it looked" that you'll hone in on (4).

Then you'll go almost silent, maybe with a few short phrases as you try to figure out where to go next with it (5), and then suddenly you'll become really expressive and passionate about something (6), before slowing down and trying to figure out some technical aspect of what you're saying (7).

Then you'll focus on something very specific, an "actuality" of the situation which finishes up that phase (8),

And then the cycle repeats.

 

[fItNeSsGrAmPaCeRtEsT]

Ok, watch your video from pretty much anywhere, and I reckon you'll be able to see this pattern/formula: You'll finish up a section that you were speaking about and will say something like "And after that..." and begin a new section/phase. (1) You'll be setting the scene for a bit, and then you'll start really focusing on how it relates to you as a person and your identity. (2) Then you'll become more fact-driven, perhaps telling the details about some event, with your voice having a more unemotional confidence to it (3), and there will be some detail, or some aspect in terms of "how it looked" that you'll hone in on (4). Then you'll go almost silent, maybe with a few short phrases as you try to figure out where to go next with it (5), and then suddenly you'll become really expressive and passionate about something (6), before slowing down and trying to figure out some technical aspect of what you're saying (7). Then you'll focus on something very specific, an "actuality" of the situation which finishes up that phase (8), And then the cycle repeats.

Thank you so much for this insight; this seems about right
However, based on that information, how do you know that my cognitive functions are also in that order of strength?

 

[Pionart]

Thank you so much for this insight; this seems about right
However, based on that information, how do you know that my cognitive functions are also in that order of strength?

Cognitive function order refers to an ordering from most conscious to most unconscious, but that is also the default order that the functions manifest in. Other orderings of functions are possible but atypical.

 

[fItNeSsGrAmPaCeRtEsT]

Cognitive function order refers to an ordering from most conscious to most unconscious, but that is also the default order that the functions manifest in. Other orderings of functions are possible but atypical.

Ok, maybe I worded my question wrong, but I guess what I'm trying to say is how were you able to tell that I'm a Ne-Fi-Te-Si user, in (roughly) that order?

 

[fItNeSsGrAmPaCeRtEsT]

Pick any timestamp, and you'll see examples of these very traits. I'd also add that they are rather self-explanatory, from pensive (Ti) to tangent-hopping (Ne). At some point you mentioned a hesitation before social cues (Fe inferior), not to mention the exhausting nature of debates/argumentation (Te), which clarifies introverted thinking as the preferred function. You also "speak with your hands" in a way that's supplemental, not to direct or command (Te). As you are not interacting with anyone, it isn't possible to tell whether you are an initiator, but you are definitely informative in your approach. Type can also be established by considering the axes pairs of our perceiving functions (Ni/Se or Ne/Si) and judging functions (Ti/Fe or Te/Fi). On the perceiving axis, it comes down to Ne versus Se, as you can't have two extraverted functions on the same axis, and I settled for Ne through visual typing. We can now form the function stack, since Ne necessitates Si while Ti necessitates Fe. That leaves four remaining possibilities, but I settled for Ti over Ne. All 16 personalities appear in accordance with subsets of four joint function axes, so you can consider the alternatives by a process of elimination.

Thank you so much!
I guess one of the main things I've been struggling with was whether I'm a stronger Ti or Fi user, and I feel like I'm kind of getting split responses on that (among with other types as well.)

 

[raskol]

Thank you so much!

You're welcome.

I guess one of the main things I've been struggling with was whether I'm a stronger Ti or Fi user, and I feel like I'm kind of getting split responses on that (among with other types as well.)

I initially considered INFP (Fi/Ne and Si/Te), which ties in with your self-expression, particularly the music. But there is a certain kind of bubbliness associated with FiNe, while you were quite restrained, calm, collected. Chess is also to be considered, as it is highly associated with Ti, activated by symmetries and logical puzzles, and much less so with FiNe.

I saw that you play piano. It would be interesting to see how you'd describe your learning pattern and how it ties in with your performance.

 

[fItNeSsGrAmPaCeRtEsT]

I saw that you play piano. It would be interesting to see how you'd describe your learning pattern and how it ties in with your performance.

Honestly, I'm terrible at piano. I only know how to play basic chords, and that's pretty much it.

I used to be decent at it when I was around 6-7 years old; I don't remember anything specific from that time period but I want to say I was probably a fast learner at it. Then I suddenly wasn't enjoying piano anymore, so I quit. I decided to get back into it in middle school, and I pretty much had to start all over again (after 5-6 years of hiatus, I had lost all my piano skills.) The learning process was much more of a struggle at this age (I would assume due to lack of motivation and possibly a lower level of brain plasticity); and even after 2 more years of piano lessons, I was still terrible at it. Then I decided to quit again because it wasn't something I really enjoyed, and my teacher made me perform in recitals, which was something I kind of dreaded. I only restarted piano because I wanted to develop practical musical skills (to accompany my songs, for example), but I didn't want to perform classical pieces that I don't get to choose in front of an audience.

It's been two and a half years since I quit, and I basically forgot how to play everything on piano besides just basic chords.

 

[raskol]

Honestly, I'm terrible at piano. I only know how to play basic chords, and that's pretty much it.

That's very clarifying, especially as regards extraverted sensing (Se).

I used to be decent at it when I was around 6-7 years old; I don't remember anything specific from that time period but I want to say I was probably a fast learner at it. Then I suddenly wasn't enjoying piano anymore, so I quit. I decided to get back into it in middle school, and I pretty much had to start all over again (after 5-6 years of hiatus, I had lost all my piano skills.) The learning process was much more of a struggle at this age (I would assume due to lack of motivation and possibly a lower level of brain plasticity); and even after 2 more years of piano lessons, I was still terrible at it. Then I decided to quit again because it wasn't something I really enjoyed, and my teacher made me perform in recitals, which was something I kind of dreaded. I only restarted piano because I wanted to develop practical musical skills (to accompany my songs, for example), but I didn't want to perform classical pieces that I don't get to choose in front of an audience.

This answer clears up my initial mistake, as it reflects Fi (I feel) and Si (I experience) rather than Ti (I think), and I admit that the chess factor put me on the wrong path. The paragraph is saturated with personal values, estimations, and qualifiers that form a nuanced emotional and experiential palette. It also leaves me thinking of your dread pertaining to recitals and public performances, likely because they were forced on you, mirroring social expectations (Fe) rather than your own personal self-expression (Fi).

Typologically, I misidentified your leading judging function (feeling and thinking). When introverted, both functions carry similar traits (receding energy, disengaging eyes, composure), which I mistook for Ti due to my lingering "chess bias."

In short, your function stack is Fi, Ne, Si, and inferior Te, which makes INFP. Albeit a somber rather than a bubbly INFP.

 

[fItNeSsGrAmPaCeRtEsT]

ok that's kinda what I thought

thanks!

yea, having to prepare for performances and stuff was just too much work; and I also would rather have worked on developing a wider variety of skills rather than just focusing in on one or a few pieces that have nothing to do with my personal piano goals, I guess. I was also kind of self-conscious about my piano skills because I thought they were pretty terrible, so I didn't feel ready to showcase them in front of audiences yet.

EDIT: why INFP instead of ENFP? Just wondering

 

[raskol]

why INFP instead of ENFP? Just wondering

Visually speaking, an extraverted perceiving function involves bursts of energy and vibrancy, and Ne dom is the "bubbliest" of all types. I recommend searching YouTube for examples of ENTP and ENFP women, as their antics are easily recognizable. But we could also consider your interactive style, as well as the inside-out approach (ego-then-world) that you presented in the above paragraph.

Simplifying typology, we can think of the functions according to interactive modes (see below). With this in mind, introversion is the interactive starting point that begins with I want/experience/feel/think as opposed to acting on what others want/experience/feel/think.

N (perceiving) what I/others will/desire.
S (perceiving) what I/others experience.
F (judging) what I/others feel.
T (judging) what I/others think.

As an INFP, you ...
... primarily act in accordance with what you feel (Fi).
... act responsibly/comfortably with what others want (Ne).
... are careless/childish with what you experience (Si).
... avoid/are fearful of clashing with what others think (Te).

There are far more dimensions to the function stack, but it would be overwhelming to lay it all out in one post. Now that you know your type, I recommend a visit to the site's wiki before moving on to the next level.

 

[fItNeSsGrAmPaCeRtEsT]

Visually speaking, an extraverted perceiving function involves bursts of energy and vibrancy, and Ne dom is the "bubbliest" of all types.

This actually sounds a lot like me but only some of the time; I think it's related to my mood swings, which I mention in the video (beginning at 1:05:57). During the video, I was definitely somewhere in the "tired" phase of my mood swings, which I guess is part of the reason why I came off really dry and dispassionate.

... avoid/are fearful of clashing with what others think (Te).

Yea, I've heard that this is a common trait for INFPs, but I can't relate to it, which I guess is one of the reasons I've been having such a hard time figuring out which type best fits me. I'm kind of opinionated, and if I have the energy for it, I sometimes initiate debates voluntarily. I guess for me, while I have mentioned that it can be tiring to debate people sometimes (especially if it's about particularly sensitive topics where I have to be more careful with what I say), it's a great opportunity for me to expand my knowledge and gain new insights on various topics. I'm not sure how important of a point that is, though, because one can be a certain type without relating to all of the type's general descriptions.

 

[raskol]

This actually sounds a lot like me but only some of the time; I think it's related to my mood swings, which I mention in the video (beginning at 1:05:57). During the video, I was definitely somewhere in the "tired" phase of my mood swings, which I guess is part of the reason why I came off really dry and dispassionate.

I moved back and forth across the timestamps to pick up on variations, but your mannerisms and energy levels were consistent. Put differently, I am not questioning your bubbly side, it's definitely there, I just didn't see it that strongly in the clip.

Regarding your mood swings, however, your description--unstable energy levels, variable motivation, shifting from highs and lows--fits with the melancholic temperament (introverted judging) rather than the sanguine (extraverted perceiving). There are, of course, melancholic-sanguine hybrids just as there are ambiverts, although I miss the rashness I would have expected of a sanguine temperament (such as my own).

Yea, I've heard that this is a common trait for INFPs, but I can't relate to it, which I guess is one of the reasons I've been having such a hard time figuring out which type best fits me. I'm kind of opinionated, and if I have the energy for it, I sometimes initiate debates voluntarily. I guess for me, while I have mentioned that it can be tiring to debate people sometimes (especially if it's about particularly sensitive topics where I have to be more careful with what I say), it's a great opportunity for me to expand my knowledge and gain new insights on various topics.

INFPs enjoy debating insofar as they're sharing their outlook (Fi/Te). But it primarily happens in accordance with the caveat you raised, that is, if their energy or motivation allows for it. In other words, the one big struggle for INFPs (and INTPs) is to figure out strategies to expand their comfort zone, so that they simultaneously can generate new, exciting experiences (new places, new faces).

As an ENFP, my stress function is Si, highlighting internalized experience and memories that I am consistently overlooking and unconsciously pushing aside. When I de-stress, I sit down and write, doing my utmost to assemble that big jumble of overlooked sensations, channeling them through a worthy medium. In other words, the process here is reversed. The place where I face my inner experiences is the fearful step outside of my comfort zone.

These two distinctions, inside-out versus outside-in, will hopefully make it easier for you to identify which one is the likelier outlook.

I'm not sure how important of a point that is, though, because one can be a certain type without relating to all of the type's general descriptions.

I'd nonetheless say it's important, as the four functions in the stack are all conscious, albeit in a descending order. The functions also express tandem features, which could be worth considering.