INFp Turning into INFj

[Lethe]

The former makes more sense to me. My initial response to Brave New World is "Totalitarianism is bad". Then I read 1984 and also say "Totalitarianism is bad."

Therefore, I can connect the dots and say that both books, while different, fall under a common theme.

However, I know that both authors obviously had strong convictions against totalitarianism, so who really cares in the end? What is the result?

You would be connecting the dots by individual values: morality (Fi) or logic (Ti).

What's "bad" or "good" falls under the scope of Fi.

(When I connect the dots, I connect them by a similar theme -- Ti, Te, Fi, Fe -- that I may not necessarily be interested in. So Ni is unbiased and flexible in this aspect. Yet when I need to accomplish something, I filter out anything that doesn't fit into my Te. I might use the discarded information for another time.)

 

[Ginkgo]

You would be connecting the dots by individual values: morality (Fi) or logic (Ti).

What's "bad" or "good" falls under the scope of Fi.

Haha, right.

Would a Ti user simply state "Totalitarianism exists"?

Is it my Fe+Ni that tells me that the 2 books are rather frivolous because both of the authors' Fi told them that "Totalitarianism is bad"?

 

[Lethe]

Haha, right.

Would a Ti user simply state "Totalitarianism exists"?

Is it my Fe+Ni that tells me that the 2 books are rather frivolous because both of the authors' Fi told them that "Totalitarianism is bad"?

A Ti user would want to nitpick at the concept of Totalitarianism by measuring how it compares to their idea of logic (Ti).

Saying "Totalitarianism exists" is done with a perceiving function (Ni, Ne, Si, Se) as the data remains unaltered. [This saying is most likely going to be stated by a Se user since it perceives objects/ideas as they simply are by itself.] The judging functions (Te, Ti, Fi, Fe) tell what the individual does with the information: (ex: Totalitarianism is bad.)

Fe would deem the books rather frivolous if it doesn't meet up to Fe's standards. I doubt Fi (personal good & evil) would play that strong of a role here.

 

[Ginkgo]

A Ti user would want to nitpick at the concept of Totalitarianism by measuring how it compares to their idea of logic (Ti).

Saying "Totalitarianism exists" is done with a perceiving function (Ni, Ne, Si, Se) and that is most likely going to be stated by a Se user. The judging functions (Te, Ti, Fi, Fe) tell what the individual does with the information: (ex: Totalitarianism is bad.)

Learning about different people is awesome.

So Ti might say "Ti is effective because..."

Question: Do Fi users often try to justify their morality by using their Te or even Ti?

 

[Lethe]

Learning about different people is awesome.

So Ti might say "Ti is effective because..."

Question: Do Fi users often try to justify their morality by using their Te or even Ti?

Ti is accurate because...
Te is effective because...

Fi dominant users would justify their morality with how they feel (i.e - certain emotions are good or evil) about them, including whether or not it syncs together into their existing morals.

As an INTJ, I often justify my morality with Te.

 

[Ginkgo]

Ti is accurate because...
Te is effective because...

Fi dominant users would justify their morality with how they feel (i.e - certain emotions are good or evil) about them, including whether or not it syncs together into their existing morals.

As an INTJ, I often justify my morality with Te.

Correct, that is the direct cause.

However, if an Fi user was in a debate with a Ti user, would she or he back up the morality with fact, lest they be defeated?


Edit: I see.

Have you drawn a conclusion as to what my order of preference is? Am I a generic INFP?

 

[Lethe]

Correct, that is the direct cause.

However, if an Fi user was in a debate with a Ti user, would she or he back up the morality with fact, lest they be defeated?

For pure conceptual understanding, I will assume we're speaking about the classic MB types.

Facts: Sensing
Theories: Intuiting

Yes, INFPs would use Si (standardized data over time) to support their reasoning, while an ISFP would rely on Se (immediate sensory data). Sometimes, they may want to use Ti or any non-preferential function because it is the only way they can continue upholding their Fi.

Have you drawn a conclusion as to what my order of preference is? Am I a generic INFP?

The more I speak to you, the more I can see your INFP side. But as for being a generic INFP, I still have yet to find out. So I am roughly adhering to my initial interpretation of your preferences until there's a better reason not to. I might withdraw the guess on your tertiary Fe, though. It may be your Fi mimicking that function.

 

[Ginkgo]

The more I speak to you, the more I can see your INFP side. But as for being a generic INFP, I still have yet to find out. So I am roughly adhering to my initial interpretation of your preferences until there's a better reason not to. I might withdraw the guess on your tertiary Fe, though. It may be your Fi mimicking that function.

Thank you for using smilies for emotional appeal.

I know my Fe is high because I can't watch horror movies, surgical documentaries, or anything where people are being beat up and bruised.

I know it's not my Fi because my reactions are not based on my own definition of morality. I literally feel discomfort when I see things like that. I could never be a medical doctor. I'm so much more concerned with the human psyche.

EDIT: In fact, last week, I met an Emergency Paramedic who had the bright idea of showing me a picture of a corpse with his iPhone. The scene was a result of a drunk driving accident in which a man was literally severed in half. Consequentially, I nearly threw up on the spot, and I was thinking about it for the rest of the day.

I kept imagining this guy rolling around on the pavement with his entrails all over. Ugh.

 

[Lethe]

Thank you for using smilies for emotional appeal.

I know my Fe is high because I can't watch horror movies, surgical documentaries, or anything where people are being beat up and bruised.

I know it's not my Fi because my reactions are not based on my own definition of morality. I literally feel discomfort when I see things like that. I could never be a medical doctor. I'm so much more concerned with the human psyche.

I use smilies whenever I'm aware that someone is paying attention to the emotional content of my posts. I don't want them to misinterpret my analysis as a hidden form of hostility, arrogance or any expression I did not intend. Funny enough, it's the Ts that does this to me. I suppose I underestimate their tertiary or inferior F.

Fi can include other people. Introverted feeling would say, "I believe we shouldn't be allowed to beat up and bruise other people regardless of what other people, or this society, believe(s). It's immoral." Extroverted feeling would say that beating up and bruising other people violates the social mores their society agreed on. (Of course, they won't explicitly mention "society".)

If you ever wondered why some think introverted feeling is black and white, this is the reason.

 

[Ginkgo]

Fi can include other people. Introverted feeling would say, "I believe we shouldn't be allowed to beat up and bruise other people regardless of what other people believe. It's immoral." Extroverted feeling would say that beating up and bruising other people violates the social mores their society agreed on. (Of course, they won't explicitly mention "society".)e

It's not that simple. I literally feel it, as if their pain is being projected on me in some weird way. My nerves pinch. This was part of the reason the INFJ profile spoke to me. I believe it said that "INFJs may experience physical problems when their loved one's are in danger/sick/whatever.

 

[Lethe]

It's not that simple. I literally feel it, as if their pain is being projected on me in some weird way. My nerves pinch. This was part of the reason the INFJ profile spoke to me. I believe it said that "INFJs may experience physical problems when their loved one's are in danger/sick/whatever.

Check out these posts where Eric B explains to Aphrodite-gone-awry how the feeling functions work.

Here, Here and Here

[The discussions starts in this thread, near the end.]

 

[Ginkgo]

Check out these posts where Eric B explains to Aphrodite-gone-awry how the feeling functions work.

Here, Here and Here

[The discussions starts in this thread, near the end.]

SO insightful! Thank you for that link, and thank you for your time!

I'll keep reading on. I know my Fi is stronger than my Fe for sure. One interesting thing is that Fe can actually be encapsulated within Fi to some extent.

I feel bad letting this thread go on for so long. Most other people's threads are only 2 or 3 pages.

 

[Lethe]

I feel bad letting this thread go on for so long. Most other people's threads are only 2 or 3 pages.

Meh.

There's no page limit to knowledge.

SO insightful! Thank you for that link, and thank you for your time!

I'll keep reading on. I know my Fi is stronger than my Fe for sure. One interesting thing is that Fe can actually be encapsulated within Fi to some extent.

I recognize these differences. Thank you for tackling the needs.

I don't really know what to say to this, really. Other than that's the way it is.

You think the Fi+Ne mindset is effective because it allows people to identify with each other, correct?

Not a problem.

I noticed that Ne needs other people to acknowledge their point of view (even if they disagree with it), while I could honestly care much, much less about having just any random person do the same. Consequently, I am more selective concerning whom I share my ideas with, due to an innate desire for productivity (Te) involving the proper execution of a broader individual purpose. If people do not bother listening, or with freely exchanging the ideas I'm anticipating, I'll instantly move onto someone else.

And the purpose I am aiming for in this thread is to see how well I could translate and comprehend various mindsets with my understanding of the Jungian functions. I also wanted to make sure this becomes a learning experience that I, as well as others, can utilize. So I relied on Ni to perceive the shared intention (to be understood) and conflict (why can't someone understand me?) amongst the participants. (Human need #1.) I did find it foreign as to why someone would require so much external validation, but I figured it's simply their deeply ingrained way of processing information and connecting to the world. (Human need # 2.) I contemplated whether I should directly challenge this habit as the others did, though decided against it because that task would require even more effort and time than I am willing to spare. (Re: I like to finish what I started.)

As for the effectiveness of each mindset, I saw how they were useful in achieving different ends. Fi+Ne is great for figuring out someone's personal dilemmas and emotional state of mind, while Ne+Ti is great for exploring multiple, impersonal theoretical concepts.

My Ni writes those fresh insights into the 'How To' book, and Te categorizes them by area of effectiveness. It was personally entertaining to see how and why their misapplication occurs.

Basically, the INTJ BestFit Profile explains my life's mission: "Over time I have built a world-view, like constructing a map of the cosmos, and from this, essentially everything is understandable and anything is possible. All the things I’ve done, have been self-taught by picking up on or asking myself good, clear, penetrating questions to expose and articulate the hidden structures that underlie the experience of living."

I do this actively and frequently in my waking hours.

 

[Ginkgo]

Meh.

There's no page limit to knowledge.





Not a problem.

I noticed that Ne needs other people to acknowledge their point of view (even if they disagree with it), while I could honestly care much, much less about having just any random person do the same. Consequently, I am more selective concerning whom I share my ideas with, due to an innate desire for productivity (Te) involving the proper execution of a broader individual purpose. If people do not bother listening, or with freely exchanging the ideas I'm anticipating, I'll instantly move onto someone else.

And the purpose I am aiming for in this thread is to see how well I could translate and comprehend various mindsets with my understanding of the Jungian functions. I also wanted to make sure this becomes a learning experience that I, as well as others, can utilize. So I relied on Ni to perceive the shared intention (to be understood) and conflict (why can't someone understand me?) amongst the participants. (Human need #1.) I did find it foreign as to why someone would require so much external validation, but I figured it's simply their deeply ingrained way of processing information and connecting to the world. (Human need # 2.) I contemplated whether I should directly challenge this habit as the others did, though decided against it because that task would require even more effort and time than I am willing to spare. (Re: I like to finish what I started.)

As for the effectiveness of each mindset, I saw how they were useful in achieving different ends. Fi+Ne is great for figuring out someone's personal dilemmas and emotional state of mind, while Ne+Ti is great for exploring multiple, impersonal theoretical concepts.

My Ni writes those fresh insights into the 'How To' book, and Te categorizes them by area of effectiveness. It was personally entertaining to see how and why their misapplication occurs.

Basically, the INTJ BestFit Profile explains my life's mission: "Over time I have built a world-view, like constructing a map of the cosmos, and from this, essentially everything is understandable and anything is possible. All the things I’ve done, have been self-taught by picking up on or asking myself good, clear, penetrating questions to expose and articulate the hidden structures that underlie the experience of living."

I do this actively and frequently in my waking hours.

Very interesting. I like your mission to explore and categorize the world we live in. And of course, you must analyze the mind and perceptions before you can be conclusive about anything in the external world. That is probably why you are here, and I hope analyzing me has given you another "piece to the puzzle", so to speak.

You did your job effectively, and I'm glad if you have helped anyone else learn something from this thread. Please keep doing what you do best

Yes, I am sure that my need for external validation indicates that one of my strongest functions is Ne. This is why so many people stopped informing me. Ironic, isn't it?

Maybe I should have searched for information elsewhere, as to not waste people's time. However, because I am F user, I enjoy personal interaction.

It's much more logical to move on to other people once you realize that others don't understand you. In fact, ever since I started learning about MBTI, this kind have behavior seems much more useful, seeing as some archetypes have communication barriers with others. However, it can be SO rewarding to rework your own communication style to be understood.

Of course, there are also behavior differences as well. This is where the lines between archetypes become clearly defined. As an INFP, you won't find me following the "mob mentality" any time soon. I'm sure you won't either.

Me ---> Them---->

 

[simulatedworld]

Hmmm, I'm not seeing what's so heinous about his distinction. Would it make things better if he also mentioned that the external community standards by which Fe operates are also arbitrary? Is it not true that morality comes from within, for an Fi dom? Is it not true that this morality is pretty independent of externally imposed standards or systems of ethics? Is it not true that attaining the most moral perspective (i.e., finding a personal worldview that is the most ethical) is an end in itself for an Fi dom?

I mean, I'm no Fi user, but those things seem to be pretty much in line with the function definition. But if any of those things is not true in an explicit sense (none of this, "oh well we're all influenced by society so in a way we all get our morality externally"- this is true but useless since the Fi-Fe distinction is purely for conceptual clarity) then I could see why that might be offensive. But as you said, you're just reacting to word choice.

And I don't see how turning the OP off of Fi should be a concern. I'm sure the OP can think for his/her self.

No, none of this is true at all, and furthermore you're a horrible person with a clear and deep-seated hatred for INFPs.

 

[simulatedworld]

Congrats to gaining his approval :rolli:. Can't say I want it.

I made my point in my first post in here. There is a clear bias in his views of Fi, and I explained how I came to that conclusion (and why his biased view is not helpful in the context of someone typing themselves). He's the one who will not address that post directly and has tried to make this about inferring emotion that isn't there or about how he hates other types also. I take this to mean I am right, or else he would address the actual issue.

And no, he has lumped all INFPs together in his posts in here (see above), which is why I felt compelled to speak out.

I think perhaps you could benefit from a little Ni use here.

You've used Ne to find a clear pattern of negative descriptions of Fi on my part, but you don't bother to put that into a broader context by asking: "Why does a pattern of sharp criticism of Fi indicate specific bias against Fi (as opposed to other functions)?"

Have you ever heard me talk about ESTJs? Ironically, the type I dislike most is your exact opposite. I don't think half of them have gotten the memo that they're not your parents.

You're suggesting that I treat Fi differently from the way I treat other functions/types. In actuality, I'm sharply critical of virtually every function and type, and most people.

Wouldn't establishing such a pattern require more context as to determine how the way I treat Fi relates to the way I treat other functions and types?

Your suggestion that how I feel about other functions is irrelevant displays a clear lack of Ni in a situation where it's pretty important. Ne is so excited about its pattern and showing it to others that you haven't bothered to ask yourself why this pattern is even significant (which it's not when you have context about my broader posting patterns.)

 

[Thalassa]

Just curious: Could you strongly use both Ti and Fi at the same time?

As for my top three preferences, I can't use them actively at the same time because there will be too much conflict. They work better as a tag-team.

I know someone who has high Fi and high Ti. He's an INTP, and he's extremely ethical.

 

[Ginkgo]

In actuality, I'm sharply critical of virtually every function and type,

There's really not much to gain from criticizing someone for their functions. That's about as inherently prejudiced as racism.

 

[Thalassa]

It's not that simple. I literally feel it, as if their pain is being projected on me in some weird way. My nerves pinch. This was part of the reason the INFJ profile spoke to me. I believe it said that "INFJs may experience physical problems when their loved one's are in danger/sick/whatever.

I can feel other people's pain, too. Well, specifically real people. I love horror movies. I'm a fan. What I don't love is the evening news - that's what gives me emotional pain - real life. I would rather watch bloody horror film than watch a touching drama about someone dying of cancer if I wanted to avoid pain. Reality is what brings on my sympathetic hurt. I also strongly hurt for animals. I honestly don't know if this is Fi or Fe.

And my ex and I used to be able to communicate...not exactly telepathecally, but I could feel him coming around a corner even if I didn't consciously know he was there. We had a very strong empathetic connection, and it was largely due to the fact that we BOTH had the ability, rather than just one or the other.

I'm just saying...I don't know that these things would make a person an INFJ. I'm an xNFP and I'm pretty certain he's an ISFP.

 

[Lethe]

Very interesting. I like your mission to explore and categorize the world we live in. And of course, you must analyze the mind and perceptions before you can be conclusive about anything in the external world.That is probably why you are here, and I hope analyzing me has given you another "piece to the puzzle", so to speak.

I've actually analyzed every single person and their ideas in this thread. So far, I received the following puzzles:

- INFJs with strong Fe emphasis
- More NT vs. NF differences
- How Fi is mistaken for Fe; specifically in INFPs
- How Ne works in NPs
- Why separating oneself from one's perception is a challenging endeavor
- The ever-imposing human needs and way it affects our decisions
- The consequences of rejecting someone's human need
- How to communicate to NTPs and NFPs
- More on how I could successfully reach out to people when cooperation is required

Yeah. I don't need a plethora of outside information to gain insights.

You did your job effectively, and I'm glad if you have helped anyone else learn something from this thread. Please keep doing what you do best

Thanks, I'm flattered.

Yes, I am sure that my need for external validation indicates that one of my strongest functions is Ne. This is why so many people stopped informing me. Ironic, isn't it?

Maybe I should have searched for information elsewhere, as to not waste people's time. However, because I am F user, I enjoy personal interaction.

I'm too pragmatic (Te) to participate in a situation that delivers slow and disappointing results, when there's a faster way of getting them right next door.

In your case, I would recommend the same conclusion for a different reason: saving your social reserves as a strong introvert, gaining quality personal interactions and inviting less moral troubles (Fi) for yourself.

Conflict is sometimes necessary to help people expand on their thinking. We just need to be vigilant of when to start and where to stop. These boundaries are mainly up to each individual to determine for themselves.

It's much more logical to move on to other people once you realize that others don't understand you. In fact, ever since I started learning about MBTI, this kind have behavior seems much more useful, seeing as some archetypes have communication barriers with others. However, it can be SO rewarding to rework your own communication style to be understood.

For someone who is a naturally terrible communicator like myself, it's a long, long procedure with countless failures. I have to keep reminding myself why reworking my communication style is suitable for excelling in my other goals.

Of course, there are also behavior differences as well. This is where the lines between archetypes become clearly defined. As an INFP, you won't find me following the "mob mentality" any time soon. I'm sure you won't either.

INFPs are considerably too individualistic to go along with the "mob mentality" without prior deliberation. Introverted feeling's flaws result in something else.