[MBTI General] INFJ or INFP or another Type?

["?"]

I have been going to her site(s) for a few years as she developed it. Vicky Jo is a remarkable person and if I could afford to spend the money, would hire her as a coach. The sites are good and she puts things in such a common sense manner. I just started a thread on the feeling dichotomy, but for years I have wondered how gender expectations effect males, in particularly INFJs. It would seem that since the type is the most cerebral and conceputal of all NFs, the type could easily confuse itself as NT or a strong T. I would think it is more prevalent in males.

 

[Dark Razor]

I have been going to her site(s) for a few years as she developed it. Vicky Jo is a remarkable person and if I could afford to spend the money, would hire her as a coach. The sites are good and she puts things in such a common sense manner. I just started a thread on the feeling dichotomy, but for years I have wondered how gender expectations effect males, in particularly INFJs. It would seem that since the type is the most cerebral and conceputal of all NFs, the type could easily confuse itself as NT or a strong T. I would think it is more prevalent in males.

Yea I've been wondering for some time now whether I am actually an NFJ, especially now that I work together with many TJs I have noticed that I am not quite like them. Though I also do not really identify with the INFJ profile.

 

[zarc]

I have been going to her site(s) for a few years as she developed it. Vicky Jo is a remarkable person and if I could afford to spend the money, would hire her as a coach. The sites are good and she puts things in such a common sense manner. I just started a thread on the feeling dichotomy, but for years I have wondered how gender expectations effect males, in particularly INFJs. It would seem that since the type is the most cerebral and conceputal of all NFs, the type could easily confuse itself as NT or a strong T. I would think it is more prevalent in males.

I think it might seem more prevalent in males, depending on how they were raised and their enviornment, but if females were allowed to develop w/o the natural bias placed on them to appear more girly-whathaveyou, it may seem more prevalent in them too. Or with any other Type, both ways.

I think INFJ seems easily confused b/c one might not be able to see the motivation (Fe) which is personal to the INFJ but they may not display that as hard as they can in a more 'emotional way' for fear of seeming biased (Fi is weak, they initially distrust it)--- unless they are so upset/disturbed that they seem more 'emotional' than usual and are deemed out of character as they might normally seem a 'cool' and nice person.

I don't like using one 'letter T' to describe a whole type, NT or NF etc is more preferrable but not entirely so. I say this b/c any xxTx or an xxFx Type can seem more gushy or more cold, dependent on their entire life's upbringing and other factors. It's in understanding the differening motivations and how one might come across that can help discern types.

For instance, my 15 yr old sis is an INTJ. She is very much openly and overly affectionate with ME and my best/f whom she trusts but with no one else. We both loathe our parents, she considers me more a parental figure (I'm only 7 years older). She maintains a 'cool' or sarcastic demeanor with her 'friends' (whom she tolerates). She used to be very critical of others, whom rightly deserved it, but I taught her to be more patient and understanding--- she's mostly changed, and she does blame me for it lol, but sometimes she'll argue (if I disagree with her) that "This person deserved it. I could care less of their 'past' molding them into the ass they are now. Too bad. Your past can hurt you but it shouldn't make you any more stupid than you naturally are!" or something like that lol She's learned to restrain from commenting on the stupidity she sees around her but sometimes she'll Freudian slip a "Jackass" or "Are you stupid?!" by mistake and then apologise to the kid/s... her first year of gr.9 is ruining my efforts!

With most people she's nice but she's not open with them as she doesn't feel comfortable if she doesn't know people that well. INTJs, from what I've learned, will show their true colours/feelings to those they trust/love/care for and will not to others, unless they have evolved emotionally.

I'm wondering, myself, how to one day display the differences of females and males within Types.

 

[cascadeco]

I'm wondering, myself, how to one day display the differences of females and males within Types.

You know...once you factor in experiences, maturity, healthiness, gender, etc etc etc....don't you move farther and farther away from mbti type being practical? By the time you factor in everything, it seems to me you're just starting to talk more about people on an individual level (i.e. 'We're all different and we're all unique'), and you start removing Type completely from the picture. Of course I ultimately think this is more 'real' anyway, because we ARE all individual and complex, but it seems the more you dig into it, the less of a 'point' there is in even using type. Just to play devil's advocate here.

(and by the way, my usage of 'You' in that paragraph is directed at everyone at large, not you in particular, DeliriousDisposition!)

 

[zarc]

You know...once you factor in experiences, maturity, healthiness, gender, etc etc etc....don't you move farther and farther away from mbti type being practical? By the time you factor in everything, it seems to me you're just starting to talk more about people on an individual level (i.e. 'We're all different and we're all unique'), and you start removing Type completely from the picture. Of course I ultimately think this is more 'real' anyway, because we ARE all individual and complex, but it seems the more you dig into it, the less of a 'point' there is in even using type. Just to play devil's advocate here.

(and by the way, my usage of 'You' in that paragraph is directed at everyone at large, not you in particular, DeliriousDisposition!)

kekeke I figured you'd play the devil's advocate once I began reading your post! And yes, you're very right, we move away from the typical understanding of our Type if we all become emotionally healthy and use well the full spectrum of CP. People are balanced then (hurray!) but the only difference in discerning b/w Types at that point is in knowing the person's motivations and how one might express oneself based on Type. An INFJs motivations and expressing will still be different than an ESTPs, for the most part. Also, it still shows that while an INFJ will become more outgoing (and sometimes is initially seen so anyway), they might not handle it as well as an ESTP as being around too many people might be hard to 'focus' + it drains them (just not as quickly lol), whereas an ESTP might learn to appreciate being alone but will still feel 'energized' by being with others. (I don't know ESTPs, but am just using them as an example )

And even an evolved INFJ is different than another evolved INFJ as we take in all life exp. and their personal preferrences based on their life exp. But their motivations and expressions will be similar but may be displayed differently at different times. Hope I made sense lol

 

[cascadeco]

And even an evolved INFJ is different than another evolved INFJ as we take in all life exp. and their personal preferrences based on their life exp. But their motivations and expressions will be similar but may be displayed differently at different times. Hope I made sense lol

Yes, this does make sense. I think my point also was that when type descriptions/theory become so cumbersome and complicated as to be rather unwieldy, etc, not many people are going to be drawn to explore it anyway.

I guess the beauty of the 16 types is that it is fairly straightforward..on the surface. But obviously to fully understand, you have to dig a lot deeper and then nuances emerge...and that's when I think it becomes more individualized and you're starting to look into basic human psychology -- forget type! And...going with your quote above....in a sense if all INFJ's can behave rather differently...then, well, how useful is Type? (even though yes, fundamentally, INFJ's will be quite different from, say, your ESTx's). So yeah, I get what you're saying, but also think what you're saying can both support mbti AND discredit mbti, depending on how you look at it. ;-)

 

[nightning]

kekeke I figured you'd play the devil's advocate once I began reading your post! And yes, you're very right, we move away from the typical understanding of our Type if we all become emotionally healthy and use well the full spectrum of CP. People are balanced then (hurray!) but the only difference in discerning b/w Types at that point is in knowing the person's motivations and how one might express oneself based on Type. An INFJs motivations and expressing will still be different than an ESTPs, for the most part. Also, it still shows that while an INFJ will become more outgoing (and sometimes is initially seen so anyway), they might not handle it as well as an ESTP as being around too many people might be hard to 'focus' + it drains them (just not as quickly lol), whereas an ESTP might learn to appreciate being alone but will still feel 'energized' by being with others. (I don't know ESTPs, but am just using them as an example )

And even an evolved INFJ is different than another evolved INFJ as we take in all life exp. and their personal preferrences based on their life exp. But their motivations and expressions will be similar but may be displayed differently at different times. Hope I made sense lol

Oh no... I'm don't think you should be let off the hook so easily! What's the purpose of this thread again? To help people determine their type? While it's true that we all are individuals and so will be different, there are still underlying principles that a typical INFJ or INFP believe in, their approach to life (group aggregate... call it central tendency, mean, median, mode whatever! Sorry... I'm frustrated with a stat assignment at the moment. Don't mind me. )

I think there needs to be more emphasis of type by thinking processes. Your MBTI type is not determined by behaviour or actions, but by what goes on inside your head. The process of thinking, gathering info to make a decision. Sure knowledge, experience and background can influence the decision. But in the end, I believe your dominant function will always be the easiest to utilize. The thinking process will inherently reflect that dominant function (Ni or Fi). Thus people should look at that to determine whether they're INFJ or INFP or something else.

 

[zarc]

Yes, this does make sense. I think my point also was that when type descriptions/theory become so cumbersome and complicated as to be rather unwieldy, etc, not many people are going to be drawn to explore it anyway.

Hmm, I don't think of it as complicated. At least,not anymore, anyway, once I started seirously looking into it. I'd imagine most people, currently? or more of the older generations, won't be drawn to it or find it as astrology and such. It's okay to discount it if it doesn't appeal to you.

I guess the beauty of the 16 types is that it is fairly straightforward..on the surface. But obviously to fully understand, you have to dig a lot deeper and then nuances emerge...and that's when I think it becomes more individualized and you're starting to look into basic human psychology -- forget type!


So yeah, I get what you're saying, but also think what you're saying can both support mbti AND discredit mbti, depending on how you look at it. ;-)

True! I think it's fine not knowing about your Type if you don't find the value of it. I think it's a good tool if you want to explore differenes in people. But, let's be frank, most people in this world are largely unevolved due to so many factors inhibiting them.

And...going with your quote above....in a sense if all INFJ's can behave rather differently...then, well, how useful is Type? (even though yes, fundamentally, INFJ's will be quite different from, say, your ESTx's).

It is useful in knowing the motivations and expressions of the Types. We all can't be evolved 100% of the time. Stress happens, chaos and crises happen. If we can understand where this person is coming from and how they're reacting, we can better help them. My ISTP best/f for example. She can BLOW UP when she's finally pushed enough. People around her erroneously think to "touch" and comfort her. She BLOWS UP again! I've learned to give her space when she gets angry at people, but she's more welcoming if I "hug" or comfort her immediately than other people. I'm probably the only one she allows to do that, not even her family can do that.

I recall our first big argument years ago (and the only one). I kept trying amd trying to "reach" (Fe) her by talking the problem out as I found it was a misunderstanding and she didn't like it b/c she wanted to be alone (Fi is an ISTPs last CP). I stopped, told her I'd give her a moment to compose herself and then we discussed and resolved. This was at a time when I didn't know anything about CP or Types (except mine), mind you, but I've been looking back on how I've re/acted + on other people whose Types I know of. It's helped me understand how to approach people better for the future. It's valuable to me in one sense for that. If others don't value it, that's fine too To each their own!

 

[nightning]

in a sense if all INFJ's can behave rather differently...then, well, how useful is Type?

Type is a model and only a model. It is only as useful as its predictive abilities whether it can explain behavior (under the assumption that unconscious thinking processes manifest themselves in our thoughts and actions). The underlying theories in typology is irrefutable... for we can never directly access the unconscious. So the basis of MBTI type cannot be proven. With that said, if all INFJs can and do in fact behave differently (on correlation between type and behavior at all) then MBTI is useless. Nobody has done much in depth testing though. Or perhaps they have and noticed it failed time and time again... but since corporates started using it and they hate to admit that they made some decisions based on something that's wrong (*whistles*)... Those studies have be swept aside as irrelevant.

 

[zarc]

Oh no... I'm don't think you should be let off the hook so easily! What's the purpose of this thread again? To help people determine their type? While it's true that we all are individuals and so will be different, there are still underlying principles that a typical INFJ or INFP believe in, their approach to life (group aggregate... call it central tendency, mean, median, mode whatever! Sorry... I'm frustrated with a stat assignment at the moment. Don't mind me. )

I think there needs to be more emphasis of type by thinking processes. Your MBTI type is not determined by behaviour or actions, but by what goes on inside your head. The process of thinking, gathering info to make a decision. Sure knowledge, experience and background can influence the decision. But in the end, I believe your dominant function will always be the easiest to utilize. The thinking process will inherently reflect that dominant function (Ni or Fi). Thus people should look at that to determine whether they're INFJ or INFP or something else.

But I doooo take that in with CP! Have you seen my posts! lolol CP is as much thinking processes as it is acting and reacting processes. What goes inside your head will come out sooner or later (I hope!) by either acting or reacting on your thoughts or due to the thoughts/acting/reacting of others. Learning about CP is multifunctional tool for oneself and for us all!

 

[cascadeco]

Hmm, I don't think of it as complicated. At least,not anymore, anyway, once I started seirously looking into it.

I guess I say it's 'complicated' because this thread is now 100+ posts long, detailing differences between INFJ and INFP (and also addressing other types and misconceptions), and to be honest if it's in some cases that difficult to determine ones' type, well...there you go. It doesn't mean what you've mentioned about cognitive processes/growth/experiences/maturity is invalid or wrong, but really...this thread, and Vicki Jo's site, is rather overwhelming!! Informational? Certainly! But most people are not going to have the time to seriously look into it, or might find inconsistencies between various models/indicators to be used in determining type.

Type is a model and only a model. It is only as useful as its predictive abilities whether it can explain behavior (under the assumption that unconscious thinking processes manifest themselves in our thoughts and actions). The underlying theories in typology is irrefutable... for we can never directly access the unconscious. So the basis of MBTI type cannot be proven. With that said, if all INFJs can and do in fact behave differently (on correlation between type and behavior at all) then MBTI is useless. Nobody has done much in depth testing though. Or perhaps they have and noticed it failed time and time again... but since corporates started using it and they hate to admit that they made some decisions based on something that's wrong (*whistles*)... Those studies have be swept aside as irrelevant.

Nothing really for me to comment on this..but yes, I agree with what you wrote.

 

[nightning]

But I doooo take that in with CP! Have you seen my posts! lolol CP is as much thinking processes as it is acting and reacting processes. What goes inside your head will come out sooner or later (I hope!) by either acting or reacting on your thoughts or due to the thoughts/acting/reacting of others. Learning about CP is multifunctional tool for oneself and for us all!

So will you agree with me that definitively identifying your type is useless? The ideal person is one who is typeless? MBTI itself doesn't matter... only the process of self development and learning to deal with people do. So it's just one of many different methods. Dare we expand this further and say personality types might be artificially created?

 

[zarc]

I guess I say it's 'complicated' because this thread is now 100+ posts long, detailing differences between INFJ and INFP (and also addressing other types and misconceptions), and to be honest if it's in some cases that difficult to determine ones' type, well...there you go. It doesn't mean what you've mentioned about cognitive processes/growth/experiences/maturity is invalid or wrong, but really...this thread, and Vicki Jo's site, is rather overwhelming!! Informational? Certainly! But most people are not going to have the time to seriously look into it, or might find inconsistencies between various models/indicators to be used in determining type.

Not all posts are by me. I've made 6 specific posts on the differences b/w INFP and INFJ. And 7 posts trying to stop the stereotyping from the reponses of others or to help highlight them. A few of my posts are in responses to ppl liking or explaining themselves as their type. The majority belong to others. Recall that initial bickering when bad blood was shed on INFP? Grrr!

If people didn't respond, then it'd be all nice and neat and just all of me with my 10 or so posts! But then I wouldn't get feedback, oh noes! Nooo, Fe needs it from others and from yours too!

I wonder if I was more clear on explaining MBTI and CP as a model as nightning did, I'd get the same response from you!

 

[zarc]

So will you agree with me that definitively identifying your type is useless? The ideal person is one who is typeless? MBTI itself doesn't matter... only the process of self development and learning to deal with people do. So it's just one of many different methods. Dare we expand this further and say personality types might be artificially created?

Nope. I like knowing how to understand myself in relation to others and to understand others in relation to me and to eachother and beyond! I don't even just look into MBTI but in other models (Western/Chinese/etc astrology, Enneagram + others). MBTI is the one I appreciate the best and find most useful in appealing to modern people. I appreciate the others as they were childhood first loves, still look into them and understand them, and see how they work well when used well (and not generalised by lumping everyone into one month Sign or year Sign etc, it's more deeper than that).

The ideal person, IMHO, isn't typeless. They've evolved their type, they can use the full spectrum of CP w/o being hindered by them or the lower CPs as they might've initially been. They are emotionally healthy, can appreciate their faults when they err and overcome them much better than others who aren't as evolved as they are. They can appreciate the faults of others, and not excuse them or sympathise, but know when to critise them and when to empathise for them. They've embraced themselves and the others who express in the positive and negative aspects they can recognise or once recognised in themselves. They are balanced.

Oii, I feel so romantic!

 

[cascadeco]

wonder if I was more clear on explaining MBTI and CP as a model as nightning did, I'd get the same response from you!

Oh, I don't know, I was just using the entire thread as an example of how all of it can get overwhelming - like I said, I felt the same way about Vicki Jo's site.

Anything else I add would just be repeating what I've already said in my other posts in this thread!! I think I just approach all of it slightly differently, that's all...although I hope you understand I'm not questioning the information you have presented, as it does follow theory.

But I question what is done with the information and how it is integrated and used, and therefore I suppose I'm questioning the validity of some of the theories themselves - how they tie together, or don't tie together, as the case may be - which is not really what this thread is about. So on that end, I guess I'm being counterproductive, as that's not the purpose of this thread.

 

[zarc]

Oh, I don't know, I was just using the entire thread as an example of how all of it can get overwhelming - like I said, I felt the same way about Vicki Jo's site.

Yup, can be. I'd say it's mostly due to misunderstandings (as when putting down the INFPs happened) and then too much loss of focus (which is what I didn't want but it happens and I'm okay with that lolol). Which sites of Vicky Jo's confused you? Was it only the INFJ or INFP? or the sole INFJ one? btw, I'm putting the links mostly for others who haven't read anything yet and are just glancing at the last page here lol

Anything else I add would just be repeating what I've already said in my other posts in this thread!! I think I just approach all of it slightly differently, that's all...although I hope you understand I'm not questioning the information you have presented, as it does follow theory.

You're being critical of it all and that's a good thing. Anyone who takes info blindly and doesn't disect it is going to be at the mercy of it later should they fear it contradicts them if it should happen. Knowledge isn't power alone, it's being aware of that knowledge and how it applies itself as a practical tool and as a self-observing one. We've spoken on it and I know you're not questioning my info but as you said the application of it. The application is given to others to do as they please as I have no control on how they mis/perceive nor do I wish to control others by telling them how to apply. I'd like to give people the option in figuring how they'd, themselves, like to choose that application process.

Never fear, I rarely get insulted personally on anything anymore!

But I question what is done with the information and how it is integrated and used, and therefore I suppose I'm questioning the validity of some of the theories themselves - how they tie together, or don't tie together, as the case may be - which is not really what this thread is about. So on that end, I guess I'm being counterproductive -- but the only reason I started posting in this thread was because I didn't think it was as black and white. Tis all!

Nah, not counterproductive to me, but explaining your views which is good. It may seem so to others who don't know where you're coming from. We've discussed personally when trying to figure each other's motives, recall? These new folks and even old folks may not know where you're coming from, so perhaps, to them it may seem counterproductive or it may not. I dunno, I'm gonna get scared now!

I just hope I showed to you or to others how MBTI/Type/CP/life! is not black and white but very coloured and then transcendingly colourful so as to not even display colour on the outside except on the inside which only they know for themselves!

 

[TexasChaos]

Delirious, would LOVE your insight on this thread: http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/other-psychology-topics/4080-how-does-chronic-illness-affect-type.html#post142595

 

[nightning]

Perhaps it'll make it easier for people to understand if you go back to your first post and put down a summary of everything you've discussed. With a link to the relevant post so they can read more if they wanted to.

 

[Lateralus]

Yup, can be. I'd say it's mostly due to misunderstandings (as when putting down the INFPs happened) and then too much loss of focus (which is what I didn't want but it happens and I'm okay with that lolol). Which sites of Vicky Jo's confused you? Was it only the INFJ or INFP? or the sole INFJ one? btw, I'm putting the links mostly for others who haven't read anything yet and are just glancing at the last page here lol

She didn't say confused, she said overwhelmed.

 

[cascadeco]

Yup, can be. I'd say it's mostly due to misunderstandings (as when putting down the INFPs happened) and then too much loss of focus (which is what I didn't want but it happens and I'm okay with that lolol). Which sites of Vicky Jo's confused you? Was it only the INFJ or INFP? or the sole INFJ one? btw, I'm putting the links mostly for others who haven't read anything yet and are just glancing at the last page here lol

I wasn't confused by them - I understood everything she was saying and what she was illustrating. But yes, I do think they are overwhelming. It would take a couple hours to go through the site thoroughly.

It sounds like most people who have piped into this thread have found her site immensely helpful and useful, so I think I'm very much in the minority.

But in my case it did not assist me much, and I had some issues with some of the anecdotes/ways of differentiating the two. Yes, I learned a lot about the various theories, misunderstandings, misconceptions, stereotypes, etc, but that was about it. I came away from it questioning all of it even further, but I have already covered my issues/concerns in my other posts. So I'm done! I really don't want to take away any more from the rest of this thread, what it's supposed to be about, and what other people might think about all of it.


EDIT: and to further clarify my word usage....

'Confusing' for me in this context is more that I see inconsistencies or have issues or disagree with the content, which causes me to question. Theories that conflict, things that I see that don't line up with each other, real-life examples that go counter to theory, that sort of thing. Also, specifically, I was referencing past confusion over my own type, and what Type exactly means, for anyone.

'Overwhelming' to me is different because it's just information overload, which means one would need time to fully digest it, and one would need to have the desire to dig into it. Overwhelming is tied to sheer volume of material to sift through. So 'overwhelming' involves a time factor for me, not a lack of comprehension.