[INTP] INTPs. How do you experience your Inferior Fe?.

[INFtha14]

That can also be Fi, it's not really clear.
Fi marches to one's inner vision and resists imposition.



Again, I'm not sure if Fe makes one more susceptible or less. There's a compliance issue on the surface; there's a "repulsion" issue underneath... and the face that Fe is not a primary or secondary but further down the line means it gets used differently.

My INFJ daughter used to try to boss her older brothers around. Interestingly, the INTP just sort of shrugged her off -- he was offended at first because she was unfairly trying to control him, but pretty quickly he decided it was no threat (he was the oldest) and would just gently shrug her off, and they quickly developed this "eldest/youngest" kinship where they are just sweet together.

It was the ESFP brother she had the worst time with... and who freaked out the most and couldn't handle even the suggestion that she might tell him what to do. They still fight over this sort of thing, years later. His Fi is secondary for him, her Fe is secondary for her. But again, if he was introverted, would it be different?

hmm...See i would of been all offended and be stubborn. The INTP shrugging it off, i can sometimes walk away but most times resentment comes out or rebelliousness peaks it's ugly head as "she's not my mother, who does she think she is?" etc. That quite a skill your son's got there, maybe that's why I admire and respect INTPs so much. They really have a good insight into situations. Sounds so loving those two, big bro and little sis .

ooh now the auxilary Fi *ESFP* and would it be different? I don't know, similar enough but i seem to be more retreating but also harboring that anger with her which is not good to do.

I still would react but not externally, internally first in the sense of
" do i deserve to put up with this? is it right for her to think she can boss me around?" Also i'll feel really annoyed with the person depending on the context though like my sister we don't get along too well. We can be civil though . Fi-Si is really bad loop to get into of resentment and anger. I usually avoid the person if i'm feeling that starting to bubble as it's in the best of our interests to steer clear of one another.

Simply put mother and i were having a discussion which led to my sister siding with my mother. Naturally i went inside and thought " who does she think she is to stick her nose in this? Dad's in the other room if anyone should butt in, it's him not her." So after running over it mentally i said *eek* " uumm not trying to be rude ----*her name* but this is between mother and I.

I got scolded for being disrespectful to my sister . My responce to that was just " just saying your my mother, I was talking with you not her, she has no right to butt in." It was a discussion a mother and daughter have together and no need to have any extra input exept from my father who i wouldn't of spoke to like that as i perceived him having authority over me to do so .

I feel i'm getting somewhere with all this.
This has been something i've been trying to improve on and recognize the Fi-Si loop i get myself into which is just awful and very negative. Doesn't help for self-improvement/growth which is what i'm after.
I hear alot about Ti-Si loop how's that go?

Thanks Jennifer. I'm hungry going to get some yummy lunch .

 

[Eric B]

NTs really do try to examine the outer world and derive principles that are definitive, by which they can either exert control -- either by forcing certain outcomes to occur (Te) or definitively labeling things as their true selves (Ti). Either way, they're stating something truthful about the world.

NFs typically are not interested as much in impersonal truth about something as much as its relevance to them. Elsewhere someone (Xander?) mentioned that an INFP friend would get upset if their ideas were dissed because the ideas were special to THEM and reflective of THEIR reality even if they could acknowledge the idea might not hold up in the external world. There is a "true path" for a particular individual that resonates with them, etc.; the framework is the things they value and thus see as true, but these values might not be self-evident to everything like the NT, which derives them from observable and intuitable reality.

Look at it another way: Things exist, but "meaning" is ascribed. This is very general to say, but NTs describe what exist or CAN exist, while NFs ascribe meaning or potential meaning.

I think it can be mistyping if it is taken to be the universal definition of something. However, NF's "naming" something actually is quite accurate and not a lie at all... if you remain aware that they are not describing the universal essence of something but simply the thing's relevance to them. In that sense you are getting a VERY clear picture of their view of meaning.

I still don't fully understand some of that regarding NF's. Like I valued my ideas on type theory (and some used this to insist I was an F), but that's just because of the symmetries, and I seemed to find out how two seemingly unrelated but elegant theories fit together. (And when something doesn't seem to fit; I do, as Xander mentioned, asky "why", and try to find the resolution, or if the framework or correlations might need to be tweaked. I would never say "because I just want it to", without some logical reason, such as the elegance of the symmetry).
Some, perhaps taking from Jung suggest that the ego (of any type) will have an emotional investment in the things of its dominant function. That would eliminate the stereotype that T's are never emotional. But that still leaves the question for me of how NF's like Xander's friend look at the same things we do, and have ideas of them that are "special" to them in themselves, and not based on the logic of them.
Feeling seems to be more about ethics or personal issues. I imagine the ideas would be about how these things improve self, or something? Like "I liked this just because it did something good for me; now don't go knocking it, OR taking it apart and analyzing it"?

Actually, I've seen it in ISFx but not as much in ESFx... they're far more willing to engage.

Certainly true! I'm the one often trying to brush the issue away!

However EFs often seem afraid to address dark emotions even if they express them readily.

Also true! Then, it's like a total turnaround.

I hear alot about Ti-Si loop how's that go?

You form frameworks of how things are, and when things don't make sense according to them (like if things change), you turn to your next introverted function, Si (the Tertiary Temptation) for concrete remembrances. We then become nostalgic about frameworks we remember from the past.

 

[Totenkindly]

I still don't fully understand some of that regarding NF's.

I wish we had an INFP here (hint hint!) to help discuss this, since I'm not quite sure I've got it right... and I'm operating purely from experience with them + theory. I'm not sure.

I know I don't quite get it, because I can't hold onto things that make no sense; all of my precious keepsakes are still vulnerable to my T rationality. It doesn't matter how much I want to believe something or how much meaning it has, if I reach the conclusion that it doesn't make sense, then I have to reject it. (My old spiritual heritage was one of those things.) Sometimes that really sucks.

Like I valued my ideas on type theory (and some used this to insist I was an F), but that's just because of the symmetries, and I seemed to find out how two seemingly unrelated but elegant theories fit together. (And when something doesn't seem to fit; I do, as Xander mentioned, asky "why", and try to find the resolution, or if the framework or correlations might need to be tweaked. I would never say "because I just want it to", without some logical reason, such as the elegance of the symmetry).

Well, yes, you're trying to make it fit in order for it to have theoretical balance. It's just not "right" otherwise.

Some, perhaps taking from Jung suggest that the ego (of any type) will have an emotional investment in the things of its dominant function. That would eliminate the stereotype that T's are never emotional.

That's true. We cannot go so far as to say that T's never cling to their ideas and sometimes make rational errors because of that. (I'm wondering whether that happens more with INTJ vs INTP, though... considering the INTJ Fi tertiary. No idea, just wondering. INTP seems more focused on the theory being right, INTJ seems more focused on it accomplishing the goal and take challenges personally.)

But that still leaves the question for me of how NF's like Xander's friend look at the same things we do, and have ideas of them that are "special" to them in themselves, and not based on the logic of them. Feeling seems to be more about ethics or personal issues. I imagine the ideas would be about how these things improve self, or something? Like "I liked this just because it did something good for me; now don't go knocking it, OR taking it apart and analyzing it"?

yes, it's like a completely new framework. Set your impersonal logical rules aside and try to deduce a completely new set based on what you have experienced and learned over your life, based on what you value, and what has had meaning -- relationships, things, whatever else -- and derive your rules from that.

Here's another example: In a situation where someone who has done some wonderful things for the company and made sacrifices but is now a hindrance or broken legacy, I believe INTP would be more inclined (regretfully, sometimes very much agonizing over it!) to say the person should be let go if that made sense in terms of the biggest picture of keeping the company afloat etc., whereas INFP might be more inclined to say, "No, that's not fair, we CAN'T let this person go, we have to find another way -- they mean too much to this company and have given everything for it!"

You form frameworks of how things are, and when things don't make sense according to them (like if things change), you turn to your next introverted function, Si (the Tertiary Temptation) for concrete remembrances. We then become nostalgic about frameworks we remember from the past.

Yes, Si is like the next line when Ti+Ne can't figure out what to do or needs some sort of support -- it gropes back to past example.

I'm wondering if Ti+Ne gropes back to Si as a substitute for Fi in regards to know how to manage its relationship, using it to evoke mood and determine direction in light of its inability to sense personal preference... Since it can't figure out what it wants, it recalls what it had in the past and what felt good. If that is true, to balance it we'd say Fi+Ne gropes back to Si if it gets stuck trying to work an issue as a Ti replacement.

But meh, that could all just be conjecture, I'm really just tossing stuff out and seeing what sticks if anything.

 

[INFtha14]

I still don't fully understand some of that regarding NF's. Like I valued my ideas on type theory (and some used this to insist I was an F), but that's just because of the symmetries, and I seemed to find out how two seemingly unrelated but elegant theories fit together. (And when something doesn't seem to fit; I do, as Xander mentioned, asky "why", and try to find the resolution, or if the framework or correlations might need to be tweaked. I would never say "because I just want it to", without some logical reason, such as the elegance of the symmetry).
Some, perhaps taking from Jung suggest that the ego (of any type) will have an emotional investment in the things of its dominant function. That would eliminate the stereotype that T's are never emotional. But that still leaves the question for me of how NF's like Xander's friend look at the same things we do, and have ideas of them that are "special" to them in themselves, and not based on the logic of them.

Feeling seems to be more about ethics or personal issues. I imagine the ideas would be about how these things improve self, or something? Like "I liked this just because it did something good for me; now don't go knocking it, OR taking it apart and analyzing it"?

Certainly true! I'm the one often trying to brush the issue away! Also true! Then, it's like a total turnaround.

You form frameworks of how things are, and when things don't make sense according to them (like if things change), you turn to your next introverted function, Si (the Tertiary Temptation) for concrete remembrances. We then become nostalgic about frameworks we remember from the past.

ooh . Are Ti "frameworks" principles?
I would consider my values "frameworks".

 

[Gewitter27]

Answer: I don't.

I just don't.

 

[Totenkindly]

I'm hungry going to get some yummy lunch .

INFP...
^^ homage to Jack Flak



I don't know any INTP woman who would come within 500 paces of uttering that word in casual conversation!

 

[INFtha14]

INFP...
^^ homage to Jack Flak



I don't know any INTP woman who would come within 500 paces of uttering that word in casual conversation!

what about a homage to jack flak?. "yums heh"

you rang for an INFP above. Tah dahhhhhh...what did you and Eric want to want to know about it?

I'm kinda confused as i don't know what part of the post you guys are wondering about for INFPs? from posts #82 and 83.

My brain is slow for some reason tonight .

 

[Eric B]

ooh . Are Ti "frameworks" principles?
I would consider my values "frameworks".

Frameworks I would say consist of principles. Symmetry is a principle, and type or temperament are frameworks made up of symmetries.

I have also heard Fi users here describe their value systems as "frameworks" (such as "moral framework"). And they are (just like "principles" and "values" can be interchangeable as well).

you rang for an INFP above. Tah dahhhhhh...what did you and Eric want to want to know about it?

I'm kinda confused as i don't know what part of the post you guys are wondering about for INFPs? from posts #82 and 83.

My brain is slow for some reason tonight .

Basically, this part:

an INFP friend would get upset if their ideas were dissed because the ideas were special to THEM and reflective of THEIR reality even if they could acknowledge the idea might not hold up in the external world. There is a "true path" for a particular individual that resonates with them, etc.; the framework is the things they value and thus see as true, but these values might not be self-evident to everything like the NT, which derives them from observable and intuitable reality.

Look at it another way: Things exist, but "meaning" is ascribed. This is very general to say, but NTs describe what exist or CAN exist, while NFs ascribe meaning or potential meaning.

 

[INFtha14]

I still don't fully understand some of that regarding NF's. Like I valued my ideas on type theory (and some used this to insist I was an F), but that's just because of the symmetries, and I seemed to find out how two seemingly unrelated but elegant theories fit together. (And when something doesn't seem to fit; I do, as Xander mentioned, asky "why", and try to find the resolution, or if the framework or correlations might need to be tweaked. I would never say "because I just want it to", without some logical reason, such as the elegance of the symmetry).

Some, perhaps taking from Jung suggest that the ego (of any type) will have an emotional investment in the things of its dominant function. That would eliminate the stereotype that T's are never emotional. But that still leaves the question for me of how NF's like Xander's friend look at the same things we do, and have ideas of them that are "special" to them in themselves, and not based on the logic of them.

Feeling seems to be more about ethics or personal issues. I imagine the ideas would be about how these things improve self, or something?

Frameworks I would say consist of principles. Symmetry is a principle, and type or temperament are frameworks made up of symmetries.

I have also heard Fi users here describe their value systems as "frameworks" (such as "moral framework"). And they are (just like "principles" and "values" can be interchangeable as well).

Basically, this part:

an INFP friend would get upset if their ideas were dissed because the ideas were special to THEM and reflective of THEIR reality even if they could acknowledge the idea might not hold up in the external world. There is a "true path" for a particular individual that resonates with them, etc.; the framework is the things they value and thus see as true, but these values might not be self-evident to everything like the NT, which derives them from observable and intuitable reality.

Look at it another way: Things exist, but "meaning" is ascribed. This is very general to say, but NTs describe what exist or CAN exist, while NFs ascribe meaning or potential meaning.

hmm...I try to just be honest with myself about what type I am. So I usually try not to get to attached * NF's like Xander's friend look at the same things we do, and have ideas of them that are "special" to them in themselves, and not based on the logic of them* in that way. It's all down to just finding the key to self improvement and growth and to me that's being honest with myself and not holding onto "it" too tightly.

What do you mean by "the logic of them"? like if they are fitting the MBTI model? I want it to fit to the model but only as to truly want it to fit, not what i want it to be or what type i'd want to be. I don't want to fool myself thinking i'm another type or use another function if i don't cause then i'd be fooling myself. It's just it's all for self-growth and that i believe involves being honest with ones self.

What about the " INFP friend would get upset if their ideas were dissed because they are special to them"?. Me personally I wouldn't mind my ideas questioned it's probably more how they are questioned. Like if i feel like i'm being picked apart and such "harshly" I may take it personal or wrong. I've learned lately though that stuff like that it's not personal etc. So i've gotten much better about not taking stuff as an attack and they are just asking/clarifying .

There is a "true path" for a particular individual that resonates with them hmm...trying to understand this one. "there destiny? or potential?"

the NT, which derives them from observable and intuitable reality.
hmm...could you tell me about what it is (principles?) NTs derive from observable and intuitable reality?

I hope this is helpful . If not, don't be afraid to ask more questions .

 

[Eric B]

hmm...I try to just be honest with myself about what type I am. So I usually try not to get to attached * NF's like Xander's friend look at the same things we do, and have ideas of them that are "special" to them in themselves, and not based on the logic of them* in that way. It's all down to just finding the key to self improvement and growth and to me that's being honest with myself and not holding onto "it" too tightly.

What do you mean by "the logic of them"? like if they are fitting the MBTI model? I want it to fit to the model but only as to truly want it to fit, not what i want it to be or what type i'd want to be. I don't want to fool myself thinking i'm another type or use another function if i don't cause then i'd be fooling myself. It's just it's all for self-growth and that i believe involves being honest with ones self.

The logic of them could include something like the symmetry. I like symmetry; just something cool about it. Even though there is an "emotional investment" in it, it is still ultimately "detached", meaning from me in practical terms. "What does that [my interests] do for you and your growth?" my parents and some others would ask. I couldn't answer. It was just something that was cool that I liked to ponder on or discuss, but to others, it was a lack of proper prioritization of importance. Values were supposed to be internal, while logic, external (efficiency, order such as neatness, etc). I was thrown a big loop last year with a whole notion in which the emotional investment in itself was "Feeling", or personal "valuing" as it was put, and T's sometimes painted as these Spocks who are totally "detached" in emotional investment altogether. some of the books's or sites' descriptions of T vs F seemed to go along with this sometimes, and you often saw some of this here, when people struggled between T and F (like the early "Mistyped Members" thread).
So I guess that answers part of my question: the priority of "importance". I guess a theory that helps with self-improvement is deemed more important than others, regardless of the elegance of the symmetry. Hence, they will just want to take it like it is, and not bother so much with breaking it down to its parts.

What about the " INFP friend would get upset if their ideas were dissed because they are special to them"?. Me personally I wouldn't mind my ideas questioned it's probably more how they are questioned. Like if i feel like i'm being picked apart and such "harshly" I may take it personal or wrong. I've learned lately though that stuff like that it's not personal etc. So i've gotten much better about not taking stuff as an attack and they are just asking/clarifying .

I've been there. The whole gist of the Fi (and Te) analysis on me was that the supposed functions annoyed the person. Then, the whole thing was twisted around so that INTP's were these totally benign types who never annoy anyone with their logic or any kind of enthusiasm. Hence, it seemed very hard to fit into the type, knowing how much emotion I have inside. But as I learned the processes and archetypes more (and also got a lot of input from INTPc and a few other INTP's), it became clear that most of that emotion was negative and destructive, and on the other hand, because I had experienced the negative emotions so much, it also developed to the point that I could access the positive side of the function as well. (enjoying the things I like, and hence being more enthusiastic about the aspects of the theory I like).
Yet when I reacted with anger at how I was misled, that was taken as the ultimate proof that I was just a Feeling type "emotionally attached" to a Thinking type and totally irrational toward the analysis. But that really makes no sense, when you consider that when one function is preferred, the other is rejected. Why would someone have an emotional attachment to a rejected function? The emotional attachment, rather than being fixed to the Feeling function, instead is another big clue as to which one is really most accepted by the ego.

the NT, which derives them from observable and intuitable reality.
hmm...could you tell me about what it is (principles?) NTs derive from observable and intuitable reality?

Again, symmetry is one of them. It's an observable and intuitive "mirror" dynamic of opposites, and even double-opposites that are identical, though reversed. I know one INTP who even rejects the Keirsey temperaments and Interaction Styles, because they are not symmetrical to the MBTI framework. In those groupings, the letters do not have the same meaning across the board. For S's; T/F is Interaction Style, and J/P is temperament, and for N's, it is the reverse. So this person, committing himself to the MBTI framework, prefers groupings like E/I + J/P (which some here have been mentioning a lot recently), or T/F + J/P.

For me, the symmetry I am "committed" to is the FIRO framework (sort of an extension of the old Galen temperament matrix), and I find that it maps to Keirsey temperament and Interaction Styles. So I can't have a complete symmetry in the MBTI system, because I'm maintaining the symmetry of the other system. Yet it is interesting to see how the two cross, and there is at least some partial common symmetry.

Of course, this is NTP. For NTJ's, the principles will be more external, based on what is efficient. They would look at the two and pick one based on which is more useful. MBTI uses easy four letter codes for its types, while FIRO uses score ranges. MBTI type notation is simpler, and therefore more efficient, and hence, what became more popular.

 

[INFtha14]

Frameworks I would say consist of principles. Symmetry is a principle, and type or temperament are frameworks made up of symmetries.

I have also heard Fi users here describe their value systems as "frameworks" (such as "moral framework"). And they are (just like "principles" and "values" can be interchangeable as well).

The logic of them could include something like the symmetry. I like symmetry; just something cool about it. Even though there is an "emotional investment" in it, it is still ultimately "detached", meaning from me in practical terms. "What does that [my interests] do for you and your growth?" my parents and some others would ask. I couldn't answer. It was just something that was cool that I liked to ponder on or discuss, but to others, it was a lack of proper prioritization of importance. Values were supposed to be internal, while logic, external (efficiency, order such as neatness, etc). I was thrown a big loop last year with a whole notion in which the emotional investment in itself was "Feeling", or personal "valuing" as it was put, and T's sometimes painted as these Spocks who are totally "detached" in emotional investment altogether. some of the books's or sites' descriptions of T vs F seemed to go along with this sometimes, and you often saw some of this here, when people struggled between T and F (like the early "Mistyped Members" thread).
So I guess that answers part of my question: the priority of "importance". I guess a theory that helps with self-improvement is deemed more important than others, regardless of the elegance of the symmetry. Hence, they will just want to take it like it is, and not bother so much with breaking it down to its parts.

Again, symmetry is one of them. It's an observable and intuitive "mirror" dynamic of opposites, and even double-opposites that are identical, though reversed. I know one INTP who even rejects the Keirsey temperaments and Interaction Styles, because they are not symmetrical to the MBTI framework. In those groupings, the letters do not have the same meaning across the board. For S's; T/F is Interaction Style, and J/P is temperament, and for N's, it is the reverse. So this person, committing himself to the MBTI framework, prefers groupings like E/I + J/P (which some here have been mentioning a lot recently), or T/F + J/P.

For me, the symmetry I am "committed" to is the FIRO framework (sort of an extension of the old Galen temperament matrix), and I find that it maps to Keirsey temperament and Interaction Styles. So I can't have a complete symmetry in the MBTI system, because I'm maintaining the symmetry of the other system. Yet it is interesting to see how the two cross, and there is at least some partial common symmetry.

Of course, this is NTP. For NTJ's, the principles will be more external, based on what is efficient. They would look at the two and pick one based on which is more useful. MBTI uses easy four letter codes for its types, while FIRO uses score ranges. MBTI type notation is simpler, and therefore more efficient, and hence, what became more popular.

I've been thinking of a way i could add to how i use symmetry as I definitely find it fascinating similar to your style. I recall you saying something that Xander said if something doesn't fit, find out why. When I was looking into the Enneagram I eventually realized I was 6w7 and for the variants SP SX SO. My tri-fix I only just figured out but it makes since too.

I also wanted to figure out my Oldham styles. There's symmetry and that is very cool. It's similar to your way but I think it's to understand myself more and definitely in the service of Fi. I was thinking last night how I relate so much with the finding symmetry like I was trying to see how an INFP can also be 6w7 etc. It just fits, it's what makes me "me". It's symmetry of a different kind like I'm using the models but it has to have that symmetry for parts of me that "INFP" doesn't explain. When i found it INFP 6w7 etc. It was a beautiful symmetry, especially cause I wanted to remain true to the models.

""importance". I guess a theory that helps with self-improvement is deemed more important than others, regardless of the elegance of the symmetry. Hence, they will just want to take it like it is, and not bother so much with breaking it down to its parts..

The whole breaking it down to it's parts, honestly that's how I've been learning mbti. I really like clarity and precision. Honestly thing my Ti has been getting practiced since I've been studying the mbti. Just cause of the breaking it down to it's parts. I do love to do that. I've done that with everything though. I definitely prefer Te cause I like things in there most simple terms and when they can they can be applied *learning math I have a hard time learning it so i just want to know how it can be applied. Anything I enjoy learning I break it down it's parts and examine them as to grasp it.

The elegance of the symmetry is very important as i am following the model cause with that I am understanding how to better "self-improve".
That's how i use Ti in following the model and taking it down to it's final parts, Ti is Fi's right hand helper in it's mission to find the self, define it and use the model to be a catalyst for inner growth and external improvement on behaviors. My Ne i think coupled with a decent Ti does allow me to have alittle fun with playing with it and breaking it down. It's alot of fun to refine it even if i already know what type i am.

Just thought i'd add more thought to this, when i let my brain sink in the information. I just realize how Ti i use especially with this MBTI stuff but it's all in the flavor of Fi. For instance one of my thoughts last night were that it's like Ti is the introverted auxiliary for me in a way. It supports my Fi as Ne supports it as well. Like Fi Ne Ti Si Te or Fi Ti Ne Si Te etc.

My Ti is not as refined as yours though hehe. It's definitely Fi's pawn XD.

How has emotion been negative for you? Cause you mentioned that somewhere in one of these posts that you recognized emotion was usually negative for you but because you were in that emotion so much you got to see the positive side etc.

Thanks Eric B :hi:.

 

[Totenkindly]

Oldham is interesting. I didn't find it comprehensively useful on its own, but mixed with other type systems it gives more nuance.

For background:

In 1984, John Oldham M.D. began work on a personality system for normally healthy people based on the neurotic categories of the psychiatrist's "bible", the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, referred to in shorthand as DSM. The first edition (DSM-I) was published in 1952, DSM-II in 1968, DSM-III in 1980, DSM-III-R in 1987, and finally the latest, DSM-IV in 1994. Dr. Oldham worked on the committee for DSM-IV...

More info on Oldham can be found here.

When I took it, I came out Idiosyncratic / Sensitive / Solitary (fairly close together, #4 was a big leap down). I think this gives flavor to the INtP 5w4 sx/sp reading. It also makes sense, considering the personality disorders that I most approximate (albeit on a lesser lever than the diagnosable disorders) are the counterparts to these three positive personality schemas.

 

[Eric B]

I've been thinking of a way i could add to how i use symmetry as I definitely find it fascinating similar to your style. I recall you saying something that Xander said if something doesn't fit, find out why. When I was looking into the Enneagram I eventually realized I was 6w7 and for the variants SP SX SO. My tri-fix I only just figured out but it makes since too.

I guess I could ask if you use the symmetries for their own sake, or is the focus more personal. I guess some of the liking of symmetry might be from the Ne also. Bu tNe + Ti will focus squarely on what makes up the symmetry; how the reflective parts mirror each ther, etc.

I also wanted to figure out my Oldham styles. There's symmetry and that is very cool. It's similar to your way but I think it's to understand myself more and definitely in the service of Fi. I was thinking last night how I relate so much with the finding symmetry like I was trying to see how an INFP can also be 6w7 etc. It just fits, it's what makes me "me". It's symmetry of a different kind like I'm using the models but it has to have that symmetry for parts of me that "INFP" doesn't explain. When i found it INFP 6w7 etc. It was a beautiful symmetry, especially cause I wanted to remain true to the models.

6w7 is usually ENFP. I guess INFP is going to be not that far. And hat you're saying there does sound more NFP.

""importance". I guess a theory that helps with self-improvement is deemed more important than others, regardless of the elegance of the symmetry. Hence, they will just want to take it like it is, and not bother so much with breaking it down to its parts..

The whole breaking it down to it's parts, honestly that's how I've been learning mbti. I really like clarity and precision. Honestly thing my Ti has been getting practiced since I've been studying the mbti. Just cause of the breaking it down to it's parts. I do love to do that. I've done that with everything though. I definitely prefer Te cause I like things in there most simple terms and when they can they can be applied *learning math I have a hard time learning it so i just want to know how it can be applied. Anything I enjoy learning I break it down it's parts and examine them as to grasp it.

The elegance of the symmetry is very important as i am following the model cause with that I am understanding how to better "self-improve".
That's how i use Ti in following the model and taking it down to it's final parts, Ti is Fi's right hand helper in it's mission to find the self, define it and use the model to be a catalyst for inner growth and external improvement on behaviors. My Ne i think coupled with a decent Ti does allow me to have alittle fun with playing with it and breaking it down. It's alot of fun to refine it even if i already know what type i am.

Just thought i'd add more thought to this, when i let my brain sink in the information. I just realize how Ti i use especially with this MBTI stuff but it's all in the flavor of Fi. For instance one of my thoughts last night were that it's like Ti is the introverted auxiliary for me in a way. It supports my Fi as Ne supports it as well. Like Fi Ne Ti Si Te or Fi Ti Ne Si Te etc.

My Ti is not as refined as yours though hehe. It's definitely Fi's pawn XD.

Yeah, all of that sounds NFP. If you say you like clarity and precision; I know that is usually associated with Ti, but it seems Te likes it as well. That's probably a mistake of many of the process descriptions, or it's just ambiguous at times. Hence, what I say about there really being only four functions, and the attitude is just where the ego choosed to apply the function. Te will demand pclarity and precision for more external reasons, while Ti wll desire them for internal reasons.

You say you do like breaking it into its parts, but sometimes you hear that for Te as well. And you also said the elegance of the symmetry. But I'm sure there is a more "efficient' reason for all of that. Like the self-improvement. With me, it's all about the workings of the parts of the theory; oh; and it also happens to help you understand yurself and others too!

How has emotion been negative for you? Cause you mentioned that somewhere in one of these posts that you recognized emotion was usually negative for you but because you were in that emotion so much you got to see the positive side etc.

I'm getting ready to write more about my Fi use; basically the whole history of it and the different ways it manifests. I'll probably put it on my blog. You can get a sense of it in what I first wrote in this thread, and the similar long self-relevatory posts I made in the "Do You Regret Waiting" thread, and the one about emotions at death.
But emotions would come up in negative situations, often strongly though not always expressed, and otherwise, I'm like "whatever". I think a lot of the stuff I went through also gave me a greater sense of my emotions, as well as enjoyment of things, which makes it seem like I might be F. But when really looking at the context the Feeling is used in, it is usually negative. (Including using positive emotions, and enjoyment to counter negative things).

 

[zago]

About a lot of things (but not all), I could hardly care less about what other people think. This may be reflected in my bum-like appearance and sometimes hygiene. I have virtually no compulsion to climb the social ladder, nor do I have the charm to do so. If I didn't control what I said at all, my speech would be wildly inappropriate--as evidenced by the private dialogs I have with an ISTP friend. We seem to have come up with our own language of obscenity, because we simply don't care about whatever sensitivities come with any given word.

Overall I'd say I'm also relatively blind to a lot of social cues as well. Too often for my liking I realized a girl might have been interested in me long after the chance had passed. Furthermore, I have almost no interest in what is going on in friends' lives and what the latest gossip is. I have no propensity to keep current with things like sports, the news, whatever is 'hip.' Lastly, I guess, I often neglect to keep up appearances when I know damn well that I should.

It's all been nicely summed up by my mother, recently: "why can't you just try to be normal," she pleaded with me as I told her that I would rather be a bum than have a full time job. FEH to that. People can suck my balls, and so can their stupid rituals.

 

[INFtha14]

Oldham is interesting. I didn't find it comprehensively useful on its own, but mixed with other type systems it gives more nuance.

For background:


More info on Oldham can be found here.

When I took it, I came out Idiosyncratic / Sensitive / Solitary (fairly close together, #4 was a big leap down). I think this gives flavor to the INtP 5w4 sx/sp reading. It also makes sense, considering the personality disorders that I most approximate (albeit on a lesser lever than the diagnosable disorders) are the counterparts to these three positive personality schemas.

ooh...forgot these posts.

You said you took it? Online test?

Zago
I find gossip annoying too could that be an (I?)NP thing?
what do you mean by you came up with your own language of
obscenity?

If any other INTPs who haven't answered want to continue to share there experience that would be cool as I would think there's never enough info heh.

Or maybe even if INTPs are curious about INFPs I can try the best I can to help a fellow INTP understand the INFP, if so you can leave a message on my wall or here I just don't want to mess with the topic of discussion .

I thank you all for your patience *especially Jennifer, Eric B, some others I'm forgetting. Sorry* and I'd gladly return the favor
if any are curious enough .

 

[Unique]

About a lot of things (but not all), I could hardly care less about what other people think. This may be reflected in my bum-like appearance and sometimes hygiene. I have virtually no compulsion to climb the social ladder, nor do I have the charm to do so. If I didn't control what I said at all, my speech would be wildly inappropriate--as evidenced by the private dialogs I have with an ISTP friend. We seem to have come up with our own language of obscenity, because we simply don't care about whatever sensitivities come with any given word.

Overall I'd say I'm also relatively blind to a lot of social cues as well. Too often for my liking I realized a girl might have been interested in me long after the chance had passed. Furthermore, I have almost no interest in what is going on in friends' lives and what the latest gossip is. I have no propensity to keep current with things like sports, the news, whatever is 'hip.' Lastly, I guess, I often neglect to keep up appearances when I know damn well that I should.

It's all been nicely summed up by my mother, recently: "why can't you just try to be normal," she pleaded with me as I told her that I would rather be a bum than have a full time job. FEH to that. People can suck my balls, and so can their stupid rituals.

lol, love this.

 

[sonickel77]

About a lot of things (but not all), I could hardly care less about what other people think. This may be reflected in my bum-like appearance and sometimes hygiene. I have virtually no compulsion to climb the social ladder, nor do I have the charm to do so. If I didn't control what I said at all, my speech would be wildly inappropriate--as evidenced by the private dialogs I have with an ISTP friend. We seem to have come up with our own language of obscenity, because we simply don't care about whatever sensitivities come with any given word.

Overall I'd say I'm also relatively blind to a lot of social cues as well. Too often for my liking I realized a girl might have been interested in me long after the chance had passed. Furthermore, I have almost no interest in what is going on in friends' lives and what the latest gossip is. I have no propensity to keep current with things like sports, the news, whatever is 'hip.' Lastly, I guess, I often neglect to keep up appearances when I know damn well that I should.

It's all been nicely summed up by my mother, recently: "why can't you just try to be normal," she pleaded with me as I told her that I would rather be a bum than have a full time job. FEH to that. People can suck my balls, and so can their stupid rituals.

Bloody hell. You could have described me here.
And I'm a woman, which just makes things worse.

I have no clue why women get so obsessed with fashion, jewellery, hair styles and gossip. It's led to me being fired from jobs because I'm not part of the team, and don't even make an effort to join in because it's so stupid. My marks at uni were great, but I've ended up un/underemployed because I can't negotiate well the social aspects of working. I have few friends - women who are more acquaintances than deep and meaningful with me, and unconventional women who share some of the same world views with me. I don't think my family know where I came from...

PS Fe comes out all or nothing in wildly inappropriate ways. It's not something I can really manage, besides trying not to get into stressful situations in the first place....

 

[milkyway2]

inferior fe

I experience my inferior fe when I get in a fight with my boyfriend. It's pretty much the only time I ever do feel feelings since I don't like feelings that much, and I tend to just bottle them up until we get in a fight and they all come out at once. What always happens is he'll be upset about something and he'll be acting like an asshole all day and being rude to me for no reason. So eventually I will get upset and sad and start thinking about why he's upset instead of just asking. But I don't want to get upset and start crying (because i allllllways cry when i'm sad) so I sit there trying to make myself stop being upset and thinking, my mind going in circles.. So I try to analyze my emotions and stop them from coming all at once, but it doesn't help because they still come. But then when I am feeling sad I feel like I lose all ability of rational thought and I just want to go away and cry until I don't feel sad anymore because I can't think straight. So then when we are fighting it's just him saying things like "you dont make any sense!" and "why are you crying when im the upset one!" and me trying to figure out and tell him why I am upset. So pretty much my it just confuses me and complicates things in relationships.

 

[tcda]

Well I'm good at "getting along" and disarming people - when I want - but I think this would be Ne not Fe.

I would say I experience Fe as a feeling inmy stomach which I can't explain at first, which will then pour out uncontrollably after a sufficient storing up period.