[ENFP] Are ENFPs a logical type poll

[Lady_X]

wasn't mad..you silly thing...read that...haha

 

[EcK]

me neither, I just enjoy using strong words in any situation

 

[sculpting]

I guess if most ENFPs are awesome at logic then INTPs are just NFs with shitty social skills. But then, most of the ENFPs in here probably already figured that out..being so awesome at logic and everything.

haha! Well you will be better at logic than me, no doubt, but I promise I wont laugh when you come to work with your pants on backwards.

I luv INTPs.

 

[autumn]

If there had been an option somewhere between "okay at logic" and "awesome at logic," I would have chosen that.

I do think I have a good facility with logic. I attribute a fair part of that to my education, but there is a natural propensity there as well...there had to have been fertile material to work with in the first place. That being said, it's primarily a Ti-type logic that I am able to use well. Te is definitely not in the forefront, though I've worked to develop it during my years on the job and can make good use of it when necessary.

I think the key here is that I don't seem to seek out logical puzzles and arguments (argument as in "reasoned discourse") to the same degree or in the same way as the NTs I know. I value logic and take care to use it well, and I enjoy it. However it's usually as a tool to help achieve some other end, not as an amusement in itself. And with the NTs I know best, it seems like something they automatically do, all day. They can't help but make categories, spot flaws in someone else's explanations, and delight in little puzzles. If it's useful for something else too, that's awesome, but it doesn't necessarily need to be. Does that seem correct?

autumn

 

[booyalab]

INTPs beat me at pure logic too, for this reason. Not because they are better thinkers. They are just willing to go ABC and write the whole thing out, rather than constantly trying to put the problem in its simplest form.

Erinavery's right, it was a well-articulated post. But your explanation of INTP-ENFP differences is incredibly shallow. For instance, you seem unaware of the importance of mental organization and detail in logical analysis. You can't say you suck at the first things but you're just as good at the latter as anybody. Thinking requires discipline.

 

[BlueScreen]

Erinavery's right, it was a well-articulated post. But your explanation of INTP-ENFP differences is incredibly shallow. For instance, you seem unaware of the importance of mental organization and detail in logical analysis. You can't say you suck at the first things but you're just as good at the latter as anybody. Thinking requires discipline.

I am aware of the importance INTPs place on these things in their approach, but I think you misunderstand ENFPs' approach. I suck at working with fine details because my natural approach to problems is from the top down. We're Ne dominant, so big picture thinkers, with very good thought organisation. Your idea that things need to have principles and frameworks is due to your Ti, but your thought organisation is from your Ne auxiliary. And your Si helps you accumulate data by reading through tonnes of stuff, something that I find annoying. The fact you rely on principles and frameworks means you are naturally less likely to step outside them. You tend to need the answer justified to you, rather than seeing how they might have justified it and working from there.

ENFPs have a definite advantage over your type in seeing connections and flaws in systems quickly. They have higher awareness of thought patterns. Less awareness of frameworks and principles, but a high awareness of consistency. I ignore the framework, not because I can't work within it, but because it is restricting.

For info, these are the function descriptions of my first three functions.

Ne: Seeing meanings and connections between contexts. Seeing what things could be. Noticing what is not said, and not in a system (filling in blanks, seeing the system).

Fi: Approaching problems by looking for their underlying truths. Noticing what is out of place. Considering the value of things. Looking for clarification and connection. (normally used for people stuff, but works quite well with logical systems too, I can debug code and see the mistakes in it faster than any INTP or INTJ I know. I actually found I have more attention to detail like mistypes than INTJs too.)

Te: Making systems more efficient. Creating structure and systems. Applying logic. Seeing consequences, boundaries, etc. (Normally just means I like simplifying problems, optimising my computer system, etc.)

I normally see the system. I figure out what it is based on, and what makes it tick. Then I simplify to a useful form that someone can read. If you catch me part way, the info is normally a mess. If you get me at the end the answer is right, easy to understand, and simple.

p.s. Maybe you should rephrase it to Ti requires discipline. Logic is just something you use; if you know how to use it, you use it. Problem solving is just something you do; you have a problem, you solve it.

 

[Kalach]

ENFPs have a definite gain over your type in seeing connections and flaws in systems quickly. They have higher awareness of thought patterns. Less awareness of frameworks and principles, but a high awareness of consistency.

That, sir, is just silly. Ti is all about consistency. It is the function that spots inconsistency. Innit? And INTPs have the Ne as well.

I ignore the framework, not because I can't work within it, but because it is restricting.

Restricting to what?


ENFPs have Te as third function, yeah? Which means it functions best in service of Ne/Fi. So...

Ne: Seeing meanings and connections between contexts. Seeing what things could be. Noticing what is not said, and not in a system (filling in blanks).

Yeah

Fi: Approaching problems by looking for their underlying truths. Noticing what is out of place. Considering the value of things. Looking for clarification and connection. (normally used for people stuff, but works quite well with logical systems too, I can debug code and see the mistakes in it faster than any INTP or INTJ I know. I actually found I have more attention to detail like mistypes than INTJs too.)

Then you, sir, are an ENTP.

Because that description of Fi is a description of Ti.

 

[BlueScreen]

That, sir, is just silly. Ti is all about consistency. It is the function that spots inconsistency. Innit? And INTPs have the Ne as well.



Restricting to what?


ENFPs have Te as third function, yeah? Which means it functions best in service of Ne/Fi. So...



Yeah



Then you, sir, are an ENTP.

Because that description of Fi is a description of Ti.

. I'm not an ENTP. Fi is way less directed and structured than Ti. And Ti people wouldn't feel the urge to kill me as often.

INTP can spot inconsistency really well, but way slower than ENFP. And on a different level. From experience, they see logical inconsistency on a very localised level. We see system inconsistency. We aren't set off if you misuse a word, or anything, or misstate a principle. We see round it. Correct you nicely if it matters.

yes, Te just picks up the loose ends.

p.s. I figured out what an INTJ is the other day. I'm in no way smarter than them. I'm not really smarter than INTPs either, in terms of usefulness.

Yes, some of my arguments were stupid. If I argue this stuff enough though, someone might meet me half way . You guys have a perspective of ENFP as a walkover in these areas. We're not and you have probably met a few in the course of your life, and thought anything but walkover. I'm not sure people always make the connection though between on here and what we are.

 

[Kalach]

Yes, some of my arguments were stupid. If I argue this stuff enough though, someone might meet me half way .

Ah ha! That sounds like an ENFP. Welcome back!

You guys have a perspective of ENFP as a walkover in these areas. We're not and you have probably met a few in the course of your life, and thought anything but walkover. I'm not sure people always make the connection though between on here and what we are.

Oh, no, ENFPs aren't a walk over.

There's an irritating unwillingness to draw conclusions, and an oddball willingness to draw bizarre conclusions that nonetheless end up being true in some fashion. Not walkovers, though.

For instance, it really seems hard to see how Fi would be useful for solving code problems. If you're judging good code to be morally valuable to you, and bad code to come from the devil, then okay, I can see it working. But that's an odd use of Fi.

If, say, you loved your job, and liked doing it well, then Ne would be attuned to practical details and Te could kick in some organisational thinking and assessments of what'll work and what follows... Ne for awareness, Te for practical solution, and Fi humming along in the middle feeling good about working hard and loving stuff. Something like that, I guess.

Buddy of mine is ENFP--big time ENFP, fun fun fun all the time--and also used to be a code jockey. He quit when he discovered the evil at the core of all multi-nationals. He still writes video games on his home PC for fun sometimes.


And anyway, just looking over your sig, you've got Te and Ti working, so there's your coding skill base. (Presumably.)

And any-anyway, I don't really know. I'm just making up stuff because that characterization of Fi sounded strange.

 

[Tiny Army]

I am fairly handy at solving code problems. I am really good at spotting mistakes. Then I theorise a bizarre idea to solve my problem. Then I google my theory.

Sound like Ne to anyone?

 

[simulatedworld]

OP kind of misses the point here, I'm afraid. Of course any type will tell you they're rational if you ask them; everyone's definition of "logical" is different.

 

[Kalach]

What we really need is a poll to prop up the INTJ sense that we're just about the best judges of moral iniquity and heaven-sent goodness there are. We can let the other NTs participate too, but that'll be just for show.

 

[BlueScreen]

OP kind of misses the point here, I'm afraid. Of course any type will tell you they're rational if you ask them; everyone's definition of "logical" is different.

Yes, but if you take into account that we are a type who is normally honest, and has a decently grounded perspective, then the fact the poll ratio is so high should have something to say to you. There are 3 other types on the list, they don't have as many votes, but none is the same sort of landslide.

The point I was making is it is a normal characteristic for an ENFP to be very capable in logical and problem solving areas. The smartest student in an Engineering or Science course is as likely to be an ENFP as ENTP, INTP or INTJ. But there seems to be this endless denial because there is an F in our type. Many NTs instantly see F and have that reaction before they even consider what is in front of them. This is in no way being detached and logical. It is jumping to conclusions and assuming you are right with zero data to support it except your ego.

As I said before, if you look for real life ENFPs they look like Ne dominants. You seem to have an idea what an ENTP is, so start from there. I know this idea makes you jump up and down and say, "No NFs in our territory", and whatever other unfounded illogical crap NTs feel like coming up with, but it is not a misleading comparison. Your ENFP in your course could easily be better than the ENTPs, INTPs and INTJs. It just depends on the people from each type. And no it is not a rare one in a million thing. I explain this as much for NTs understanding as for our benefit. I think most of us like slipping under the radar. Do your normal thing. Research and learn, because the majority NT response on this seems to be wrong. Do you guys actually think the ENFP in these areas will be battling? Because if you do you better bring some evidence to the table which can contradict the reality of the situation. First rule to learn is, if something is shown to be wrong with confidence, the formula folds, not the reality.

 

[Tiny Army]

I just think ENFPs (because of their dominant Ne and tertiary Te) are very good at using intuitive logic which is different than the logic that rational types use. Dominant Te or Ti results in an ability to create complex systems. Ne results in an ability to interpret complex systems.




(Fun fact: Statistically, INFPs on average have the highest IQs out of all MBTI types. Rock on, INFPs!)

 

[simulatedworld]

Yes, but if you take into account that we are a type who is normally honest, and has a decently grounded perspective, then the fact the poll ratio is so high should have something to say to you. There are 3 other types on the list, they don't have as many votes, but none is the same sort of landslide.

The point I was making is it is a normal characteristic for an ENFP to be very capable in logical and problem solving areas. The smartest student in an Engineering or Science course is as likely to be an ENFP as ENTP, INTP or INTJ. But there seems to be this endless denial because there is an F in our type. Many NTs instantly see F and have that reaction before they even consider what is in front of them. This is in no way being detached and logical. It is jumping to conclusions and assuming you are right with zero data to support it except your ego.

As I said before, if you look for real life ENFPs they look like Ne dominants. You seem to have an idea what an ENTP is, so start from there. I know this idea makes you jump up and down and say, "No NFs in our territory", and whatever other unfounded illogical crap NTs feel like coming up with, but it is not a misleading comparison. Your ENFP in your course could easily be better than the ENTPs, INTPs and INTJs. It just depends on the people from each type. And no it is not a rare one in a million thing. I explain this as much for NTs understanding as for our benefit. I think most of us like slipping under the radar. Do your normal thing. Research and learn, because the majority NT response on this seems to be wrong. Do you guys actually think the ENFP in these areas will be battling? Because if you do you better bring some evidence to the table which can contradict the reality of the situation. First rule to learn is, if something is shown to be wrong with confidence, the formula folds, not the reality.

Ummmm actually I like many NFs better than NTs, and I don't have any bias against Fs whatsoever. The types I have the most friction with are typically SJs; I prefer having NFs in almost all creative teamwork situations. I play in a band with three NFs and only one other NT, and I tend to prefer having a lot of Ns of either subgroup there for idea generation.

I work with more NFs than NTs and I find them to be much more pleasant people who often have a better grasp of the attitudes necessary to actually succeed in working people into situations instead of just facts and ideas (introverted NTs are especially bad about neglecting this.) INFJ is absolutely one of my favorite types, and I have many friends in all the NF types (except ENFJ, for some reason, but still a couple there) whose opinions I consider worthwhile and (generally) pretty rational. Much more rational than those of many SJs, for sure.

Thanks for making a huge load of outrageous and totally unfounded assumptions about me and what I think based solely on my MBTI type, though. That shows real NF rationality, wouldn't you say?

 

[BlueScreen]

Sorry, all except the first part was general. I just attached to your post, because I was initially answering it before I went off on a tangent. I sort of misinterpreted also. I thought you were making a more directed rather than general statement, saying we made the claim we were good at the stuff because we had our own rationale, hence we believed we were good at it because of this and didn't take the rationale of other types into account when doing that, so won't making a true global comparison.

Sorry again if it seemed more directed at you. Your post didn't really say much that could be worth all that. It was a general whinge at the whole F=thinkingly retarded thing. And it wasn't really that personal I just said their logic was crap, and pointed out what they did most of the time in these threads. Which is basically that: stroke their ego by saying rational=more intelligent, because some type description said they were smart. Also ENTPs tend not to do it. They make quality jokes, and are laid back. I've got no prob with you at all and actually quite like your posts. It was an insightful statement.

 

[Kanamori]

Wrapping yourselves up in being good at logic isn't worth it, regardless of your type, IMO.

 

[BlueScreen]

Wrapping yourselves up in being good at logic isn't worth it, regardless of your type, IMO.

Agree. I more wanted to prove a point to unwrap them, than move anywhere myself. I know what I can do anyway, four MBTI letters don't change that. Plus I was getting a little sick of having to rejustify things in threads because there is an ENFP next to my posts. Never had it discussing science or anything on any other board or in any other forum. The normal deal is you make a point and people consider it. Especially if it is a good one. I might change it to ENTP for a while to see if responses change.

Like you can know otherwise on a deeper level, but if you cop the stuff long enough you start to believe it. I'd never been scared that I had any limitation rationally before coming on here. And I'd never had any lack of confidence about it. But I tend to read into things a lot and take stuff on board. If enough people believe you are, then you think maybe I am, you give their opinion credit.

In every other way the board has been great for development. But that side of it has done more damage than constructive stuff. I never feel compelled to write out a million steps when problem solving, but my rational side is still okay enough to beat reversi on the impossible level more than 50% of the time, and still okay enough to have completed two of the most difficult degrees at university without much trouble. But somehow this stuff still gets to me. Like people ask me for the answers, and I'm less sure I'm right. I trust it less. I don't trust that they will trust it. I'm an ENFP, one of those imperfect calculators...

I don't mind if we end the discussion on this, cos I quite like all the NT types and I am tending to start more arguments than useful stuff. Apologies for all the bits where I stepped over the line.

 

[sculpting]

The whole time I was in grad school I was by far the shittiest student in my program-I was in with a bunch of ENTP/INTP/INTJ physicists. Amoung the biochemists I was actually likely at the 80-90% range. A lot of them were just dumber than me.

The INTPs have got the rest of us beat on pure, abstract, detailed logic. They think slowly-to the point where some of them almost seem stoned or autistic-but in an exceptionally thourough manner. The final answer will be logical to a flaw. They miss the fuzzy logic introduced by people though.

the entps still beat the hell out of enfps at logic given that bright shiny Ti that hides within (quit Ne-ing me you perverts). These guys are much better at the big picture than the intps and do a better job with fuzzy poeple stuff as well. However while much quicker on thier feet than the intps, they sometimes will trip over thier Ne, and introduce flaws that I dont think you see with the pure Ti the INTP has.

ENFPs are interesting. We take big ass, fucking leaps of logic constantly. We are all over the place. But consistantly what I get feedback from others-my grad school PI, my bosses, my collegues-is the ability to take an enormously complex problem, fly way above it, look down upon it and find the flaw. I dont even have to understand the whole thing.

it's like my brain cant even always process the whole situation individually so it has to see evrything.

And in seeing everything, the "glitches" stand out. The inconsistances, the turns where things should be straight. Then I ask a few questions and the suddenly the delicate, belly underside of the problem is revealed. Dont ask me to solve the fucking problem, but i can point you to where the problem is.

 

[Lady_X]

noigmn.. i just wanted to say, i really appreciate your thoughts on this and admire your ability to express them. i have a really hard time verbalizing why i know things or the process that lead to the conclusion but do feel pretty confident in my ability to problem solve...just don't ask me to explain it to you, you know?