ChocolateMoose123
New member
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2008
- Messages
- 5,278
- Instinctual Variant
- sx/sp
cultivate distance
D- Demonstrate Value
E- Engage Physically
N- Nurture Dependence
N- Neglect Emotionally
I- Inspire Hope
S- Separate Entirely
cultivate distance
D- Demonstrate Value
E- Engage Physically
N- Nurture Dependence
N- Neglect Emotionally
I- Inspire Hope
S- Separate Entirely
Idk... no type in particular I guess.. but Ni/Se and Se/Ni kind of more often than not ime.
Only the popular vote. The electoral votes haven't been counted yet![]()
Infjs and infjs from what I have noticed. I am NOT saying that the most beautiful women I know/I have met are of those two types but a comparatively higher percentage of women belonging to these two types are attractive to me.
Also infj women are usually tall. I like tall women.
What's funny is that majority of "INFJs" who claim to be INFJs aren't even INFJs lmao.
What's funny is that majority of "INFJs" who claim to be INFJs aren't even INFJs lmao.
Preach. So many people who type as INFx are mistyped ISFJs.
What's funny is that majority of "INFJs" who claim to be INFJs aren't even INFJs lmao.
It all depends on how the category is defined. When it is given traits focused primarily on the Ni definitions of Jung, then yes, it is rare, and when the category is broadened to focus on Fe with a wider ranging set of attributes for the internal workings of Ni, then it is a bigger category. These definitions are not intrinsic truth, but ways of organizing reality, so whether a category is rare or common is entirely up to the people creating the theoretical construct.Only MBTI encourages favouritism that makes INFJs seem rare and special. Jung never intended that, and that was the consequence of leaving it to someone who misinterpreted his work. But she didn't do too bad. This whole thing that INFJs must be rare is a load of baloney.