A few more contrasts:
Generally speaking INFPs seem to have a more consistent autonomy while INFJs haves times of involvement and then times to retreat from people. INFPs have a deeper sense or romanticism and nostalgia while INFJs have a pragmatism and can project systems into the future.
I think this is true, although INFPs are not totally resistant to "joining". We can get really committed to an external group of sorts which resonates with our ideals & values. The projecting systems into the future is a good distinction, as this is probably a blind spot for many INFPs (inferior Te logistics). This is not to say we don't have innovative ideas for the future, but it tends to be very Ne - possibilities based on potential we see emerging & then exploring that potential in real time.
Fi dom concerns itself with considering all values as well. (This is something we are wired to discern and cannot ignore.) The difference lies in what happens next. An INFP leader will try to accomplish what we set out to do whilst supporting the existence of all those unique value systems. It's tricky stuff.
We would use the outcome as motivator, not the vision itself. Although now an ENFP comes to my mind who's very vision-oriented, gets people on board with his 'religion'.
And as far as feelings validation, I do think that again there's some wire-crossing going on between enneagram instincts and function attitudes. As an Fi-dom so-dom I know what it's all about to place value on getting along with everyone. I don't know what the solution is, because
Fe is purported to be the 'be nice to everyone' function whilst Fi gets relegated to 'selfish self-centeredness' status.
Ah well,
Yeah the bottom bolded bugs me. When you read Jung, he actually makes Fe sound more "selfish" in that notoriously manipulative manner they get accused of (unfairly as well;
and also why I see Jung as Ti-dom, as he's the least unbiased with Fe, IMO). Yet, he describes Fi as very noble & sometimes acting heroically on refined values pertaining to human needs across contexts of culture/time -
It may, perhaps, break out in some extravagant form, leading to some astounding act of an almost heroic character, quite unrelated to either the subject herself or to the object that provoked the outburst. Well, that's how I read it
. It's also why most INFP profiles note a great willingness to self-sacrifice for a "cause", one which supports a value-concept (or several) which is not about their own individual needs but fundamental
human needs. We use Ne to kind of keep our eye out for vehicles which could possibly be used & steered by us to support these fundamental concepts of what is good for humanity.
Concerning the top bolded, I feel like Fi values work similarly - motivators, not specific visions. The value is a "an image which has no existence in reality", & things which don't fit with it are ignored, and things which do are embraced. So it's a gauge for when to act or not, what to pursue & support or not, rather than something to conform things to fit. Because Ne likes to consider multiple realities, there's never "one way to skin a cat", or one way to reach some end which fits a very abstract concept of value.
INFJs seem to have much more specific visions, and so their concept of "harmony" is backed by a very subjective view of what that looks like. They may indeed use externally defined value-concepts, but as the means to a Ni end. This is why Van Der Hoop calls INJs tyrants within their own circles (unfair as well, but makes a point). They seem to want to use these external systems to keep reality inline with their very individual vision. This is perfectly fine when that vision is operating off of a deep insight into how things will pan out & what needs to be done to reach a better end (better being defined with "Fe", and any unselfishness or self-sacrifice is very necessary to balance Pi).
[MENTION=18408]Castameare[/MENTION] 's post about Beebe's model is really helpful, IMO. Most of it suits me anyway, except the Si attitude in INFJs can be similar to one in NPs in general. For instance, a common Si attitude known as the "Fi-Si loop" in INFPs is feeling like the past has made a cage for us, that we cannot escape it (a haunting of sorts); yet not using personal experience to navigate the future but instead blowing it out of proportion as a sort of doom for the future (perhaps also a mix of how Ni is supposed to work for us). The past is sort of irrelevant as anything useful, but still a dark cloud hanging over you. I have a tendency to trust or believe in my theories over what my first-hand experience has told me. I find it difficult to approach a novel problem or new situation using my own concrete experience, which I deem too specific or narrow to reflect the multiple realities that could unfold. It's like "that was then, this is now, variables have changed, so that is irrelevant". The problem here is when it actually leads to you repeating the same mistakes because you stupidly think that enough has changed that the same action will lead to new results. It's kind of crappy Ne because it's using Si to not change yourself (poor Si In NFPs is "I will not change who I am in a factual/concrete way!!!" ie "I will not wear your uniform!"), but not using it to see how certain realities signal outcomes you can trust to unfold, therefore you must change yourself to produce the reality you want.
