# I've reset my type to unknown, because I got four options on the go...



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

I may not be an ISFP, I got INTJ, INFP and ENFJ as possibilities and I am pretty sure I am type 9. I originally came to this site hoping to narrow my type down to one and because of things I have read or that people have posted, I am less sure now. I'm not going to pretend Im an ISFP if I am really not , because you might meet me in person and be like 'this guy isn't one of us' , so I'm leaving the four up in the air, and I will just assume ISFP until I feel I've found a definite fit.

Just a note, I don't expect anyone to reply to this thread, it's pretty straightforward.


----------



## firedell (Aug 5, 2009)

Noooo, losing another ISFP. Nah, I understand, it takes a lot of find your type, even if you go back to the first one.


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Don't worry I'm not leaving you lol, I'm going to be the guy in the ISFP forum who is like your best mate who hangs around your apartment, yet won't move out to find one of his own lol...


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

Were you looking for any assistance regarding your type, or was this more of a 'letting you know' thread?


----------



## Just_Some_Guy (Oct 8, 2009)

There's nothing wrong with being balanced and straddling two or more types, you know. Do you feel you _must _be _one _type? If so, why?


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

@Grey - Both, where do we start?

@ETG I feel that I must be one because surely we can't be a combination of several? Besides I would like to be honest and I feel that it damages my integrity by pretending to be something I am not.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

Well, I don't think an INTJ would ever score F.


----------



## Just_Some_Guy (Oct 8, 2009)

cardinalfire said:


> @ETG I feel that I must be one because surely we can't be a combination of several?


Balance is a sign of a healthy personality. Being constricted to one personality is a weakness. You should be both proud and thankful for having this balance. A balanced individual is who you are. Pretending to be only one type seems superficial. I would just go with it. Maybe be mindful of what circumstances cause you to use your various functions? The fact that you can use all of these seems wonderful. Many cannot readily use their other functions and sometimes are even afraid of them. Consider yourself blessed.


----------



## Keno (Nov 24, 2009)

from what i have read, you come across as an isfp decently enough (atleast to me). although i am aware some people appear differently online.

and i agree with promethea on the intj observation.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

INTJs can score as Fs - I do when taking tests at times, but I feel this doesn't make me anything but an INTJ. It may be the effect of pushing yourself to be more sensitive, as most of the questions for F take a Fe slant, something that the INTJ naturally has to push to do.

So, if you'd like to explore types, Cardinal, how about we start with functions? What do you think yours are?


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

This is going to be difficult, because I don't know what any of them are really, certainly off by heart. I know some of the names, I just don't know what each function does, and how dominant they are in me, I find it hard to observe myself in these kind of tests, and when I read a functions description sometimes I have difficulty remembering how often I do it or whether one is more prominent.

How about we do this backwards, you present me with a scenario and I'll tell you what I would do in that situation and then you can hazard a guess as to what function it is? 

Some of the T functions I've read I don't actually understand what they mean or the frequency of occurences I am suppsed to do them. I read something like "puts things into logical systems" and it seems so broad and quite vague I have no idea what it is talking about. That's just an example, they usually are more expanded than that obviously.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

Doing it backwards will be difficult, but I will do my best.

A close friend of yours comes rushing to you for comfort (assume that this is after a nice day, and you're not incredibly annoyed at the interruption of what ever it is you're doing). They're even a bit hysterical, but attempt to tell their story to you. Assume it's something negative that happened, such as their pet went missing. As you roll the situation over in your head, attempting to decide a course of action, what are the components you consider, and what action do you decide to take?


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Well I'd first say : Come on in out of the rain, no use standing there crying on my doorstep... lol

I'd ask them what happened. I'd be thinking about how I was going to solve this problem, saying things like 'Don't worry I'm sure we can get him back , he is only a dog , he can't have gone that far.' Id offer a hugroud:

I'd consider that they are feeling better before they left to go home, and were in better spirits from having come to me. I may or may not tell them ideas about how we could find the dog. Depends on what they said, expressions on their face or how I perceived them to be feeling. I would wait to see what they said about the missing dog and try to latch onto what was important about the dog maybe, so I could offer a way to give them that feeling whilst we look for the dog over the weekend. lol it's the weekend in this scenario, I've just decided.:wink:

They may not even want me to do anything, they may just want someone to talk to, in which case I would just sit and listen. I certainly wouldn't say 'oh I'm busy right now , can you come back later', certainly not if they were at my doorstep. I'd ask them what they were going to do about it, usually before I offered any help. I'd hope the dog would be alright too, and not run over or anything, though I wouldn't say that to them because it might upset them further. I'd offer a cup of tea or coffee and asked if they wanted to stay at mine that night or go out looking for him, depends on what they say. Someone else may be out looking for the dog.

Does any of this help? I'm thinking about 'components' like you said, or the things I would consider or what would be running through my mind as this was happening. Tell me if there is any specific thing I'm not mentioning, I might not be doing this right.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

It does, but I think it only shows your preferences, and not your natural ways. No real way to tell if it's just something you've learned or if it's really 'you'.

In contrast with the situation, would you like me to explain the functions and try to personalize it to who you are as a person? The situations idea is good, but I'm having a bit of trouble with it.


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Ok sure, first explain what you mean when you say 'it only shows your preferences, not your natural ways'. How does one tell the difference? You would have to assume that I am not lying right? <---- that may not be worded right... anyway... 

:happy: yeah .... go ahead with the functions, we'll have a crack at that and see where we get to.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

A lot of people 'learn' to accommodate and care for a grieving friend, even if it is not in their natural way of doing things - and eventually, they may convince themselves it is, when it really isn't. Part of the process of determining your type has to do with digging through all of your learned behaviors to see who you really are inside, beyond your own self-image.

I'll start simple. The standard model of functions is four of the eight, even though we use all eight functions throughout our lives. The dominant, or the first function, we develop as soon as perception begins. The supportive, or second function, develops as we begin to mature (usually around the pre-teen age). Our tertiary, or third function, begins conscious development in our twenties and thirties, although you may notice that, as you are or were going through teenage years, you began to grasp the concept of your tertiary function. Some of us begin development of it consciously even in teenage years, but that is very uncommon. The last, or inferior function, is developed in the forties and fifties, but may not be developed at all, depending on how well the other preferences are rounded.

That is the natural order of things. Frequently, however, we find that life throws all sorts of hurdles at us that delay natural development and mask it, and even force the unnatural development of some functions. Occasionally, this can be good, such as developing one of the functions to better deal with a living situation, but often times, this unnatural development is bad, and it may impair your true perception of yourself.

I didn't actually get into functions, but do you understand the relative order now?


----------



## Karen (Jul 17, 2009)

As an example of what a Se Ti would do... I'm not as good at touchy-feely but I am good at doing, so I'd go through the "I'm really sorry" routine, because I truly could identify, and then I'd say "Let's go." I'd get the info from the person in the car on the way over then help make a logical plan, such as walking around calling the dog, knocking on neighbors' doors, driving in ever-widening circles, etc. If nothing worked, I'd help the person print out a "lost" picture of the dog with an address and phone number and pass it around. And I'd hope she'd have someone else to turn to for any more comfort, because I'm just a little awkward at it. That's what I'd fall into naturally, and I think it's a good scenario, Grey, since I could immediately see my functions in how I'd handle the situation.


----------



## thehigher (Apr 20, 2009)

you seem very isfp....i'd bet money on it


----------



## Karen (Jul 17, 2009)

Cardinalfire did talk more about dealing with feelings rather than how to logically help find the dog. Which isn't a value judgment, since that's always needed in this type of thing, and I'm not very good at it. :happy:


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Grey said:


> A lot of people 'learn' to accommodate and care for a grieving friend, even if it is not in their natural way of doing things - and eventually, they may convince themselves it is, when it really isn't. Part of the process of determining your type has to do with digging through all of your learned behaviors to see who you really are inside, beyond your own self-image.
> 
> I'll start simple. The standard model of functions is four of the eight, even though we use all eight functions throughout our lives. The dominant, or the first function, we develop as soon as perception begins. The supportive, or second function, develops as we begin to mature (usually around the pre-teen age). Our tertiary, or third function, begins conscious development in our twenties and thirties, although you may notice that, as you are or were going through teenage years, you began to grasp the concept of your tertiary function. Some of us begin development of it consciously even in teenage years, but that is very uncommon. The last, or inferior function, is developed in the forties and fifties, but may not be developed at all, depending on how well the other preferences are rounded.
> 
> ...


Yep. Fire away.:mellow:


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Karen said:


> Cardinalfire did talk more about dealing with feelings rather than how to logically help find the dog. Which isn't a value judgment, since that's always needed in this type of thing, and I'm not very good at it. :happy:


Yes and like Grey says I may have learnt to do that, there isn't a way to tell if that's my natural functions going on there.


----------



## Halfjillhalfjack (Sep 23, 2009)

Mh, I have to say I'd rather react very similarly to Cardinal......


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

This is going to be complicated, but please bear with me and ask questions as you may.

ENFJ: Fe-Ni-Se-Ti.
INFJ: Ni-Fe-Ti-Se.
INFP: Fi-Ne-Si-Te.
ENFP: Ne-Fi-Te-Si.

ENTP: Ne-Ti-Fe-Si.
INTP: Ti-Ne-Si-Fe.
INTJ: Ni-Te-Fi-Se.
ENTJ: Te-Ni-Se-Fi.

ISFJ: Si-Fe-Ti-Ne.
ISTJ: Si-Te-Fi-Ne.
ESTJ: Te-Si-Ne-Fi.
ESFJ: Fe-Si-Ne-Ti.

ESFP: Se-Fi-Te-Ni.
ISFP: Fi-Se-Ni-Te.
ISTP: Ti-Se-Ni-Te.
ESTP: Se-Ti-Fe-Ni.

That is the standard four-function list for every type. However, you will be determining your eight functions, and trying to fit them into the four function model. Here are a few key tips as you go on that, if you determine one of your dominant or supportive functions but can't figure out the rest, you can determine at least one letter of your type.

Fi, Introverted Feeling: Corresponds to values and beliefs in the inner mind. Those who use Fi may be stubborn in their beliefs and values and may even be easily offended if someone goes against what their beliefs are, even if they do not say anything about it. Although you may think of a man arguing all of the time, those who lead with Fi are INFPs and ISFPs, so they often may not even express their emotions to the fullest extent. Fi corresponds to: Dominant (ISFP, INFP), Supportive (ENFP, ESFP), Tertiary (INTJ, ISTJ), Inferior (ENTJ, ESTJ). If you determine Fi is your dominant or supportive function, you can determine that you are an xxFP.

Fe, Extroverted Feeling: Corresponds to the desire and working for outer harmony. Those who use Fe may be overly focused on everyone getting alone - in worse scenarios, they may interpret a small argument as a full-blown battle, even between two other people who aren't interacting with the Fe user. Those who use Fe have a great ability to tell and to care for the well-being of others, though, so you may think of the camp counselor when you think of someone using Fe. Those using Fe are more likely to press down their own needs for the sakes' of others in the beginning, but may be prone to complaining behind their backs. Fe corresponds to: Dominant (ENFJ, ESFJ), Supportive (INFJ, ISFJ), Tertiary (ENTP, ESTP), Inferior (INTP, ISTP). If you determine Fe is your dominant or supportive function, you can determine that you are an xxFJ.

Ti, Introverted Thinking: Ti focuses on specifying, analyzing, and defining within the inner world. Those who use Ti have an inner system in which they categorize everything, and these categories may be very specific. The Ti mind is a very natural analyst. Those who use Ti seek clarity, and may, at times, come across as too complicated to others, even if this is not the case. Ti corresponds to: Dominant (INTP, ISTP), Supportive (ENTP, ESTP), Tertiary (INFJ, ISFJ), Inferior (ENFJ, ESFJ). If you determine that Ti is your dominant or supportive function, you can determine that you are a xxTP.

Te, Extroverted Thinking: Te focuses upon organization and efficiency within the outer world. Those who use Te have a drive to make things as efficient as possible, whether to solve problems, manage things, or even to carry out their future plans. Those who use Te seek results over clarity, and may press for work to be done and decisions to be made even if they do not have enough proper information. Those using Te become impatient when no results are made, but are easily pleased when they see objective progress. In striving for efficiency, however, Te may be prone to neglect personal feelings, whether their own or the feelings of others in the process. Te corresponds to: Dominant (ENTJ, ESTJ), Supportive (INTJ, ISTJ), Tertiary (ENFP, ESFP), Inferior (INFP, ISFP). If you determine Te is your dominant or supportive function, you can determine that you are a xxTJ.

Those are the major judging functions. The T and F scales represent how we make decisions, as you may know. The way the functions are set up are that we have one N function, one S function, one T function, and one F function. The N and S functions serve as our perceiving functions, and we prefer one as the major perceiving function, and the other as a minor perceiving function. The same is for the T and the F functions: we each have a major judging function, and a minor judging function within the model. My major judging function as an INTJ, for example, is Te, and my major perceiving function is Ni. My perceiving function leads, however, so my judging function serves to make the 'whims' of the perceiving function possible, much like the perceiving function of someone who has a T or F function as their dominant would serve the judging function.

After that, I can go over the perceiving functions.


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Well we can rule out Te I'm one hundred percent certain that it isn't me at all. I don't care about results at all , and I don't drive for efficiency or anything like that at all. I never press for work done or decisions made.

So one down, three to go. I'm torn between the first two, Fi and Fe, I care about others feelings as much as mine, though it varies and depends on the situation at hand. I'm not a people pleaser ,though I like people to get along and their to be outer harmony, though I'm happy to walk away if people aren't getting along and accept it as their problem, not mine.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

Maybe you should try considering what your motive behind wishing for outer harmony is, and whether or not it's more in line with Fe's motives or Fi's motives.

Extroverted Sensing, Se: Se is often misconstrued as the function that always needs excitement, always involved in some zany activity or another. This is not usually the case, but can be in more extreme situations. Se, as a perceiving function, perceives the present 'as is', and can actually be energized by taking in information that way. Se also seeks stimulation to keep perceiving, which may lead those using Se to involve themselves in risky or at least odd activities. With Ti as a partner, Se may seek stimulation through such objective experiences (or anything interesting), or with Fi as a partner, may seek stimulation through connections with others. Se corresponds with: Dominant (ESTP, ESFP), Supportive (ISFP, ISTP), Tertiary (ENTJ, ENFJ), and Inferior (INTJ, INFJ). If you determine Se is your dominant or supportive function, you can determine that you are an xSxP.

Introverted Sensing, Si: Si is, at its basics, associated with past memory and recollection. Si does not actually correspond to memory, however. Si perceives information in the present through a 'lens', one of that of the past. What that means is that Si is always situated in the past, and uses those experiences to perceive and draw information from what is going on in the present. This can give those who use Si a 'worn' feel to others, in that they seem to focus _too much_ on the past instead of what's going on right now. That is how Si naturally functions, however, so it ought not be discouraged. Si corresponds with: Dominant (ISTJ, ISFJ), Supportive (ESFJ, ESTJ), Tertiary (INTP, INFP), and Inferior (ENTP, ENFP). If you determine Si is your dominant or supportive function, then you can determine that you are an xSxJ.

What do you think of the S functions?


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Grey said:


> Maybe you should try considering what your motive behind wishing for outer harmony is, and whether or not it's more in line with Fe's motives or Fi's motives.
> 
> Extroverted Sensing, Se: Se is often misconstrued as the function that always needs excitement, always involved in some zany activity or another. This is not usually the case, but can be in more extreme situations. Se, as a perceiving function, perceives the present 'as is', and can actually be energized by taking in information that way. Se also seeks stimulation to keep perceiving, which may lead those using Se to involve themselves in risky or at least odd activities. With Ti as a partner, Se may seek stimulation through such objective experiences (or anything interesting), or with Fi as a partner, may seek stimulation through connections with others. Se corresponds with: Dominant (ESTP, ESFP), Supportive (ISFP, ISTP), Tertiary (ENTJ, ENFJ), and Inferior (INTJ, INFJ). If you determine Se is your dominant or supportive function, you can determine that you are an xSxP.
> 
> ...


I'm certainly not Si, at all. I don't care much for the past at all, and don't really live there either way. I'll consider my motives for the Fe and Fi. I also don't feel I have a 'worn' feel, or imagine that I give that impression to others. I feel pretty fresh to use a different analogy. My cousin for example can remember a lot about the past when we were growing up, I find certain parts of my childhood very hard to remember, like it went by so quickly. I tend to feel that now to, that I could always use a bit more time, though I'm sure that has got nothing to do with this.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

My apologies for the late post - I hadn't even realized you had replied. Here are the N functions:

Extroverted Intuition, Ne: Ne is a connector - when perceiving information, those using Ne are capable of constant connection from one item to the next, making them capable of creating and employing unique solutions in dealing with the world. Ne is a very present-oriented function, using the present as a lens for viewing the future.  Those who use Ne may be viewed as 'hyper-active' or 'random', and may even trip up others in conversation, including fellow Ne users who may not follow their exact chain of thought. One classic example of how Ne perceives and connections information is the letter example. Assuming A is the beginning and Z is the conclusion to something, Ne follows a trail not unlike this: A-C-L-S-U-Z. As such, Ne users may be perceived as jumping around from wall to wall with nothing to anchor them. Ne corresponds with: Dominant (ENFP, ENTP), Supportive (INTP, INFP), Tertiary (ESTJ, ESFJ), and Inferior (ISFJ, ISTJ). If you determine Ne is your dominant or supportive function, you can then determine that you are an xNxP.

Introverted Intuition, Ni: Ni perceives information and looks for patterns in the outer world, relating the perceived info to the inner world. Much like Ne, Ni has an eye for the future, but in the reverse sense of how Ne functions: Ni uses the future as a means of looking at and perceiving the present. Ni is a very unconscious function, and as such, those who use Ni may be perceived as relying on their 'gut feeling' too much, as they often have a hard time explaining how they arrived to a certain conclusion. One classic example of how Ni perceives information is the letter example. Assuming A is the beginning and Z is the conclusion to something, Ni follows a trail like this: A-C-L-S... Z! Instead of the conscious connections that Ne makes, Ni is more of a quiet analyzer, coming to a sudden conclusion all at once, skipping ahead as the pieces all fall into place. This can be thought of as an 'ah-ha!' moment, but not quite so dramatic. Ni corresponds with: Dominant (INTJ, INFJ), Supportive (ENFJ, ENTJ), Tertiary (ISFP, ISTP), and Inferior (ESTP, ESFP). If you determine Ni is your dominant or supportive function, you can then determine that you are an xNxJ.


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

cardinalfire said:


> I may not be an ISFP, I got INTJ, INFP and ENFJ as possibilities and I am pretty sure I am type 9. I originally came to this site hoping to narrow my type down to one and because of things I have read or that people have posted, I am less sure now. I'm not going to pretend Im an ISFP if I am really not , because you might meet me in person and be like 'this guy isn't one of us' , so I'm leaving the four up in the air, and I will just assume ISFP until I feel I've found a definite fit. Just a note, I don't expect anyone to reply to this thread, it's pretty straightforward.


Cardinal, this is indicative of what occurs if you merely trust in assessments and reading descriptions. Determining your best fit type takes work. A sure way of determining your type is first to determine which core values you most relate to. Like type, we also have secondary temperaments so you may prefer SP/NF, NT/NF, etc. I generally refer people to *this* test because it makes you weed out the other comparisons and the results are your two most preferred. Don’t stop there, I have posted a comprehensive description of each temperament on the respective temperament forums. See if you share the same values. 

Afterwards, try and determine your interaction style. Although the desriptons here: http://bestfittype.com/interactionstyles.html can give you some idea. I still recommend getting the booklet _*Understanding Yourself and Others: An Introduction to Interaction Styles*__*.*_ There are great first person descriptions. If you determine these two things, the type will be revealed. It takes our subjectivity out of the equation. After determining the type, don’t look at descriptions to see what is different, see what you share. At some point you quickly decipher between the stereotypes.


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Thanks Function, I'll have a look at those links tomorrow. I may do the test later tonight.

Grey, I honestly don't know which of the N functions seem more like me. I'm trying to remember my scool mathematics lessons, did I need to go through the whole calculation or did I work out the answer before knowing how to work it out? 

I may have needed to go through it step by step. Though maths is like that in general, so I'm attempting to think of when I have made 'random' connections or whether I am more focused toward 'gut feeling'. I may be a gut feeler as I regularly score type 9 on enneagram, though we have discussed this before, that enneagram and type bare no similarities to each other. I'll ponder that and get back to you. I may read that leaflet that Function suggested.

Is anything by Kiersey good at working out type? I have done the test on his site several times yet my results have varied on that too.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

I think that Keirsey is probably the best for deciding your temperament, but I wouldn't put stock into his descriptions. They're often very confusing for those who are having trouble with their type. I hope you can come to a conclusion about the N functions, but if you can't think of how you use them, it might be an indicator it's your tertiary or inferior function.


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

cardinalfire said:


> Is anything by Kiersey good at working out type? I have done the test on his site several times yet my results have varied on that too.


No, Keirsey is temperament. At best you may see yourself in a couple of types under the same temperament (i.e. INTP/INTJ), or if your temperament is weak, you may relate to your second preference and miss the boat all together.


----------



## fiasco (Dec 25, 2009)

edit: Wow, I'm blind again.

I see what to do now :crazy:
Sorry.


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

fiasco said:


> edit: Wow, I'm blind again.
> 
> I see what to do now :crazy:Sorry.


No problem, but why do you believe that you prefer Behind the Scenes interaction style? Based on what you initially said, all indications would say INTP.


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Grey said:


> I think that Keirsey is probably the best for deciding your temperament, but I wouldn't put stock into his descriptions. They're often very confusing for those who are having trouble with their type. I hope you can come to a conclusion about the N functions, but if you can't think of how you use them, it might be an indicator it's your tertiary or inferior function.


 
If this is the case what would then that suggest?


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Functianalyst said:


> Cardinal, this is indicative of what occurs if you merely trust in assessments and reading descriptions. Determining your best fit type takes work. A sure way of determining your type is first to determine which core values you most relate to. Like type, we also have secondary temperaments so you may prefer SP/NF, NT/NF, etc. I generally refer people to *this* test because it makes you weed out the other comparisons and the results are your two most preferred. Don’t stop there, I have posted a comprehensive description of each temperament on the respective temperament forums. See if you share the same values.
> 
> Afterwards, try and determine your interaction style. Although the desriptons here: http://bestfittype.com/interactionstyles.html can give you some idea. I still recommend getting the booklet _*Understanding Yourself and Others: An Introduction to Interaction Styles*__*.*_ There are great first person descriptions. If you determine these two things, the type will be revealed. It takes our subjectivity out of the equation. After determining the type, don’t look at descriptions to see what is different, see what you share. At some point you quickly decipher between the stereotypes.


I did the test and here are my results, and I answered as honestly as I could:

*The temperament pattern you rated highest:*

*Catalyst:*Want to be authentic, benevolent and empathic. Search for identity, meaning and significance. Are relationship oriented, particularly valuing meaningful relationships. Are romantic and idealistic, wanting to make the world a better place. Look to the future. Trust their intuition, imagination, impressions. Focus on developing potential, fostering and facilitating growth through coaching, teaching, counseling, communicating. Generally are enthusiastic. Think in terms of integration and similarities and look for universals. Are gifted in the use of metaphors to bridge different perspectives. Are diplomatic. Frequently are drawn to work that inspires and develops people and relationships. 
*The temperament pattern you rated second:*

*Improviser:* Want the freedom to choose the next act. Seek to have impact,to get results. Want to be graceful, bold, and impressive.Generally are excited and optimistic. Are absorbed in the actionof the moment. Are oriented toward the present. Seek adventureand stimulation. Hunger for spontaneity. Trust impulses, luck,and their ability to solve any problem they run into. Think in terms of variation. Have the ability to notice and describerich detail, constantly seeking relevant information. Like freedom to move, festivities, and games. Are natural negotiators. Seize opportunities. Are gifted tacticians, deciding the best move to make in the moment, the expedient action to take. Are frequently drawn to all kinds of work that requires variation on a theme. 

It seems I am more NF then secondly I am SP.


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

cardinalfire said:


> It seems I am more NF then secondly I am SP.


No, all you have done so far is take an assessment that resulted in you possibly being NF or SP. That's all any assessment can do, is give you results based on your honest assessment. Do you know enough about the NF temperament core values to make that call? I have posted some comprehensive temperament descriptions on each temperament sub-forum. 

Once you have worked out your temperament, the next thing to do is work out your interaction style. Keyword is "work" . Because only you can determine your type.


----------



## fiasco (Dec 25, 2009)

Functianalyst said:


> No problem, but why do you believe that you prefer Behind the Scenes interaction style? Based on what you initially said, all indications would say INTP.


I only read the brief descriptions, but these two fit me the best:



Behind-the-Scenes → Designer Theorizer said:


> *The theme is getting the best result possible*. People of this style* focus on understanding and working with the process to create a positive outcome*. They see *value in many contributions and consult outside inputs to make an informed decision*. They aim to *integrate various information sources and accommodate differing points of view. They approach others with a quiet, calm style that may not show their strong convictions. Producing, sustaining, defining, and clarifying are all ways they support a group's process.* They typically have more patience than most with the time it takes to gain support through consensus for a project or to refine the result.
> 
> Becoming an expert.* Seeing new patterns and elegant connections. *Talent for design and redesign. Crossing the artificial boundaries of thought. *Activate the imagination. Clarifying and defining. Making discoveries. Reflect on the process of thinking itself. Detach to analyze. Struggle with attending to the physical world.*





Chart-the-Course → Analyzer Operator said:


> The theme is having a course of action to follow. People of this stylefocus on knowing what to do and keeping themselves, the group, or the project on track. They prefer to enter a situation having an idea of what is to happen. They identify a process to accomplish a goal and have a somewhat contained tension as they work to create and monitor a plan. The aim is not the plan itself, but to use it as a guide to move things along toward the goal. Their informed and deliberate decisions are based on analyzing, outlining, conceptualizing or foreseeing what needs to be done.
> 
> *Actively solving problems. Observing how things work.* Talent for using tools for the best approach. Need to be independent. Act on their hunches or intuitions. *Understanding a situation. Taking things apart. Making discoveries. Sharing those discoveries. Unsettled by powerful emotional experiences.*


I bolded what fits so well that I couldn't pretend it's not me, and Chart-the-Course fit me so well that I didn't bother to bold it. The thing is, Designer Theorizer fits me much more than Analyzer Operator, so I thought to go ahead and choose Behind-the-Scenes anyway. I think I'm more Behind-the-Scenes in my head, but what actually comes out when I interact with people is Chart-the-Course. I think I'm trying to be useful by keeping everyone on track, but everyone else tends to think it's really bossy and insensitive... Likewise, I want to hear other people's input, but I won't accept it if I think it's faulty, irrelevant, or risks setting us back too far. Sometimes I can get impatient, and the more impatient I get, the less tactful I get. Then from the outside it might sound like I'm ripping their view to shreds because I'm already sure that _I'm_ right. But for me, I think it's Behind-the-Scenes. I just want to get it done, with a strong emphasis on getting it done _right_. Everyone is always free to offer their input so long as it's useful or helps us be more efficient.


----------



## Brie (Nov 26, 2009)

cardinalfire said:


> I did the test and here are my results, and I answered as honestly as I could:
> 
> *The temperament pattern you rated highest:*
> 
> ...


I didn't even get SP when I took this. I got SJ and then NF. I didn't think any of them really described me though. It seems you are closer to ISFP than I am.:laughing:


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Brie said:


> I didn't even get SP when I took this. I got SJ and then NF. I didn't think any of them really described me though. It seems you are closer to ISFP than I am.:laughing:


HA! We'll see... I'm going to read through the temperament posts that function made and make some notes of what I feel applies to me. I started reading the NF one last night, and some of the introverted parts didn't describe me, or at least that's what I felt.


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

I've read the Catalyst post Function and some parts of it I relate to. The part about being authentic and having a self image, I also tend to become stationary when I am under stress and find it very hard to get motivated to do anything when I have fallen out of step.

I don't do anything like write poems and then keep them hidden, as the example of Emily Dickenson that it gives. In my language I often tend to generalise as well and go to specifics, though it depends.


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Grey said:


> This is going to be complicated, but please bear with me and ask questions as you may.
> 
> ENFJ: Fe-Ni-Se-Ti.
> INFJ: Ni-Fe-Ti-Se.
> ...


I may be more Fi, is there another way I can determine this? What things can I consider to make my decision here? I'm just going with my gut at the moment, I want something more certain than that.


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Concrete language use reflects a focus on tangibles rather than ideas and concepts:

The communication [associated with the Artisan pattern] can be said to be concrete in that [people expressing Artisan] are apt to talk mostly of what is going on at the moment and what is immediately at hand. Most [such people] spend little time considering things that cannot be observed or handled. This means that they are likely to take things literally rather than figuratively and, when making comparisons, to use similes more often than metaphors. Their everyday speech is typically filled with details and devoid of planning, and they are more inclined to be specific rather than to generalise. [K] 

... writes Function in his post about SPs.

What is the difference between a simile and a metaphor? I often use a lot of 'like...' (similes) when making comparisons.

How important is this langauge thing in determining type?

I read the SP descriptions and they don't seem like me. I don't feel particularly hedonistic and I wouldn't describe myself as 'compulsive' in any way. I like having freedom to do my own thing though I don't feel that it is important by itself. I relate more to the being true to oneself of the NF post.

I'm certainly not an NT, just reading Functions post on them gave me a headache, lol.

I don't tend to strategise or anything like that, it seems too much of a 'controlling' temperament. I may be wrong in that and I don't mean to offend, it's just the way I have choosen to describe it, NTs seem to be very much about a driving to get things done and to the point, and i'm not like that at all.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

I merged several of your posts - if you must, please make only one new post to 'bump' your topic.




> I may be more Fi, is there another way I can determine this? What things can I consider to make my decision here? I'm just going with my gut at the moment, I want something more certain than that.


Well, you can try to determine your inferior - that's directly opposite to your dominant, no matter what. Of the other functions, which one do you identify with least?


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Grey said:


> I merged several of your posts - if you must, please make only one new post to 'bump' your topic.
> 
> 
> Well, you can try to determine your inferior - that's directly opposite to your dominant, no matter what. Of the other functions, which one do you identify with least?





Without a doubt Te is the one I relate to the least...

Also it wasn't because I was wanting to bump my post, it was just that I was reading them separately and wanted to post my thoughts before I forgot them. I'm glad you did put them together actually , it looks neater.


----------



## fiasco (Dec 25, 2009)

cardinal, like INFPs, ISFPs are dominant Fi and so I'd assume being true to themselves is equally important. Just as well, because of dominant Fi they also have inferior Te. So far you say no N(T), which eliminates half of the types already. Then you say you're definitely not Si and Te, which would eliminate xSFJ types for sure and throw a slight mark against the xNFP types. I think if you're deciding between ISFP and INFP, contrasting Se and Ne would be the best to get to. Have you done this yet? They are very, very different from each other, so it should be considerably easy to do so. My personal guess is that you are more ISFP, however.

edit:



cardinalfire said:


> What is the difference between a simile and a metaphor? I often use a lot of 'like...' (similes) when making comparisons.
> 
> How important is this langauge thing in determining type?


A simile would be a simple comparison between two unlike things. "Your smile is as radiant as the sun" and "We danced like cowboys" are two examples of similes. Metaphors are much more analogical, so usually what's being compared will have something in common. I think the goal of the metaphor is to highlight the main idea or feeling and explain it in a way that makes it explicit. They are usually more abstract than are similes, which is why they tend to be used more by N types than S types.

I'd say the language thing isn't _too_ important. Fairly significant as far as understanding their way of thinking, but very far from being a deciding factor.


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

fiasco said:


> I only read the brief descriptions, but these two fit me the best:
> 
> I bolded what fits so well that I couldn't pretend it's not me, and Chart-the-Course fit me so well that I didn't bother to bold it. The thing is, Designer Theorizer fits me much more than Analyzer Operator, so I thought to go ahead and choose Behind-the-Scenes anyway. I think I'm more Behind-the-Scenes in my head, but what actually comes out when I interact with people is Chart-the-Course. I think I'm trying to be useful by keeping everyone on track, but everyone else tends to think it's really bossy and insensitive... Likewise, I want to hear other people's input, but I won't accept it if I think it's faulty, irrelevant, or risks setting us back too far. Sometimes I can get impatient, and the more impatient I get, the less tactful I get. Then from the outside it might sound like I'm ripping their view to shreds because I'm already sure that _I'm_ right. But for me, I think it's Behind-the-Scenes. I just want to get it done, with a strong emphasis on getting it done _right_. Everyone is always free to offer their input so long as it's useful or helps us be more efficient.


Based on what you are saying, I would start looking at INTP as your best fit type. Don't just buy this as your type, but do an honest self-assessment. We tend to become a type instead of asking how that type fits me, not how it fits others. Again the first person descriptions at best fit are great in my opinion, because they are written by other confirmed types, not in the third person who laces them with stereotypes. If you read the INTP, you will notice these folks do not share the same biases that you see in other descriptions.


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

cardinalfire said:


> ... writes Function in his post about SPs.
> 
> What is the difference between a simile and a metaphor? I often use a lot of 'like...' (similes) when making comparisons.


Maybe *this article* will help.


cardinalfire said:


> How important is this langauge thing in determining type?


Very important. One of the reasons that I thought I was INT for years was based on my connotation of words. When I started to discern the differences, I appreciated that although some words seem interchangeable, the authors used them to show the slight differences in the temperaments. Keirsey did this and after I started noticing the differences, I began to appreciate his work more. For example where NTs types use intuition, SP types use instinct. There is a difference.


cardinalfire said:


> I read the SP descriptions and they don't seem like me. I don't feel particularly hedonistic and I wouldn't describe myself as 'compulsive' in any way. I like having freedom to do my own thing though I don't feel that it is important by itself. I relate more to the being true to oneself of the NF post.
> 
> I'm certainly not an NT, just reading Functions post on them gave me a headache, lol.
> 
> I don't tend to strategise or anything like that, it seems too much of a 'controlling' temperament. I may be wrong in that and I don't mean to offend, it's just the way I have choosen to describe it, NTs seem to be very much about a driving to get things done and to the point, and i'm not like that at all.


Keirsey used the word hedonist, but Berens moved away from it, I don't think most SP types relate to that word. As for everything you have written thus far Cardinal, you claim to prefer NF, so the next question for me would be, which interaction style do you prefer. I have my thoughts, but it's always your choice.


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Grey said:


> Extroverted Sensing, Se: Se is often misconstrued as the function that always needs excitement, always involved in some zany activity or another. This is not usually the case, but can be in more extreme situations. Se, as a perceiving function, perceives the present 'as is', and can actually be energized by taking in information that way. Se also seeks stimulation to keep perceiving, which may lead those using Se to involve themselves in risky or at least odd activities. With Ti as a partner, Se may seek stimulation through such objective experiences (or anything interesting), or with Fi as a partner, may seek stimulation through connections with others. Se corresponds with: Dominant (ESTP, ESFP), Supportive (ISFP, ISTP), Tertiary (ENTJ, ENFJ), and Inferior (INTJ, INFJ). If you determine Se is your dominant or supportive function, you can determine that you are an xSxP.





Grey said:


> Extroverted Intuition, Ne: Ne is a connector - when perceiving information, those using Ne are capable of constant connection from one item to the next, making them capable of creating and employing unique solutions in dealing with the world. Ne is a very present-oriented function, using the present as a lens for viewing the future. Those who use Ne may be viewed as 'hyper-active' or 'random', and may even trip up others in conversation, including fellow Ne users who may not follow their exact chain of thought. One classic example of how Ne perceives and connections information is the letter example. Assuming A is the beginning and Z is the conclusion to something, Ne follows a trail not unlike this: A-C-L-S-U-Z. As such, Ne users may be perceived as jumping around from wall to wall with nothing to anchor them. Ne corresponds with: Dominant (ENFP, ENTP), Supportive (INTP, INFP), Tertiary (ESTJ, ESFJ), and Inferior (ISFJ, ISTJ). If you determine Ne is your dominant or supportive function, you can then determine that you are an xNxP.





fiasco said:


> cardinal, like INFPs, ISFPs are dominant Fi and so I'd assume being true to themselves is equally important. Just as well, because of dominant Fi they also have inferior Te. So far you say no N(T), which eliminates half of the types already. Then you say you're definitely not Si and Te, which would eliminate xSFJ types for sure and throw a slight mark against the xNFP types. I think if you're deciding between ISFP and INFP, contrasting Se and Ne would be the best to get to. Have you done this yet? They are very, very different from each other, so it should be considerably easy to do so. My personal guess is that you are more ISFP, however.


 
Well I'm not always seeking stimulation or extreme pleasures like Se and I am not hyper active or random like Ne, so i'm having difficulty deciding this. Any advice?


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Functianalyst said:


> Maybe *this article* will help.Very important. One of the reasons that I thought I was INT for years was based on my connotation of words. When I started to discern the differences, I appreciated that although some words seem interchangeable, the authors used them to show the slight differences in the temperaments. Keirsey did this and after I started noticing the differences, I began to appreciate his work more. For example where NTs types use intuition, SP types use instinct. There is a difference.Keirsey used the word hedonist, but Berens moved away from it, I don't think most SP types relate to that word. As for everything you have written thus far Cardinal, you claim to prefer NF, so the next question for me would be, which interaction style do you prefer. I have my thoughts, but it's always your choice.


I'd say either Behind the scenes or get things going interaction style. Perhaps more the latter.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

Consider that, if Fi is your dominant, then Se or Ne within you will appear very subdued - the descriptions I offer more refer to those who use it in a dominant position. If you were to 'decrease' the effects of the descriptions, what would you identify more with?


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Grey said:


> Consider that, if Fi is your dominant, then Se or Ne within you will appear very subdued - the descriptions I offer more refer to those who use it in a dominant position. If you were to 'decrease' the effects of the descriptions, what would you identify more with?


I reckon Ne, could you write 'decreased' descriptions of them?


----------



## fiasco (Dec 25, 2009)

Does this site help at all? I don't know whether or not you've already seen it.



> *Sources of Confusion*
> Several descriptors used for iNtuiting misled these individuals to self-report on the MBTI® or self-select a preference for "N."
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

fiasco said:


> Does this site help at all? I don't know whether or not you've already seen it.


Thanks for that. I relate to this so far:

*Introverted iNtuiting* - Recognizes that the forest is deeply symbolic of all of life in its interconnectedness and constant recycling and growth and foresees that this forest will soon be torn down for a housing development... 



followed by the Se...



I'm still reading more of the site though.... this may be wrong...

I certainly don't feel that it will be built for a housing development.

I go into a forest, I look around at the trees, I see everything about them, I care for them and realise that these have been here for a long time, people will see them in the future and people have seen them in the past and they will live on after I am gone. It's a good forest, nobody would want to tear this tree down!

That's what I feel. I might be more Se than I realise maybe. I'm still reading the rest of that site, it seems interesting for Ne and Se differences.


----------



## fiasco (Dec 25, 2009)

I think it could be somewhat helpful to compare these, as well:

INFP Learning Style
ISFP Learning Style

If nothing else, I believe it could help gain a little more insight on how all 3 (and 4) functions work together for each. I think it shows very well how the INFP is Abstract-Abstract-Abstract, while the ISFP is Abstract-Concrete-Abstract.


----------



## fiasco (Dec 25, 2009)

cardinalfire said:


> Thanks for that. I relate to this so far:
> 
> *Introverted iNtuiting* - Recognizes that the forest is deeply symbolic of all of life in its interconnectedness and constant recycling and growth and foresees that this forest will soon be torn down for a housing development...
> 
> ...


Well, if it helps (or is even valid at all), I get from you that you are pretty present and detail-oriented and focus more on what exactly is being said instead of the overall feel or general idea. You also seem to invest yourself in something primarily if you can apply it towards your personal growth and development, something I'd say seems very Fi, and you seem to focus on the everyday applications of the MBTI system rather than any theoretical uses or implications, something I'd say seems very down-to-earth, practical, and reflects the immediateness of Se. Really, S types can be as intrigued by theory as N types can be, except that for N types, the theory itself is an end, while an S type will want to know how they can actually apply it. I think the NJ types share a similar want for practicality in their interests, but above all, I believe an S type (especially an SJ type) would want the most what they learn to be practically applicable. So, again, an S type's interests are only _stereotypically_ always grounded in reality or "rigid". It's a pretty damaging and misleading stereotype, needless to say. I'm honestly just pulling at straws here, though... I think it can be a little unwise to go by personality.


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

fiasco said:


> I think it could be somewhat helpful to compare these, as well:
> 
> INFP Learning Style
> ISFP Learning Style
> ...


AAA and ACA, what do you mean by this?

From the infp list I relate to:

*As learners, INFPs:* 

are quick to grasp ideas 
are motivated to learn in order to further their own and other people’s development
benefit from allowing their creativity and inspiration free reign
may need to think about how they can use what they have learnt
may need to develop judgment, criticism and objectivity - Sometimes
may need to periodically review and summarise what they have learnt - Possibly
*INFPs learn best when:* 

emotionally engaged by a subject, or can relate it to their personal interests and values
working alone or in small groups
required to explore a subject in depth
allowed to absorb ideas at their own pace and to digest them thoroughly before acting on them or making decisions
listening and observing, e.g. watching how other people do things, listening to a lecture or presentation, taking notes
encouraged to read, research and reflect on a subject
encouraged to share their insights and pursue their personal interests
ideas are presented imaginatively or in an inspiring manner, for example using role-play, dramatisation or multi-sensory presentations
given personal attention by their tutor or teacher, in an atmosphere of trust and mutual respect
It almost goes without saying that I need my own space to learn, digest things like theories and ideas, and come to my own conclusions about anything in life.

*INFPs learn least well and may be demotivated when:* 

having to take centre stage or being put 'under the spotlight'
being taught by 'rote' (i.e. repetition), or when given specific instructions or rigid guidelines
involved in situations which require spur-of-the-moment action and decision-making
the focus is on analysis, detail or facts and figures
there is emphasis is on competition and rivalry
I really dislike being set RIGID guidelines. Guidelines yes, though if i'm told how to do them and in what order I will not be happy! I switch off with some facts and any figures don't interest me, even when they may be relevant. I am too win/win to focus on competition, that sucks.

From the ISFP list I relate to:

*As learners, ISFPs:* 

prefer loose, unstructured teaching in which they can make their own discoveries - depends how loose
enjoy personal involvement and participation
prefer ‘hands-on’ training - for hands on tasks, definitely
are stimulated by multi-sensory teaching
benefit from frequent breaks that allow for physical movement
learn by doing - yes, though not always, depends on the task
*ISFPs learn best when:* 

emotionally engaged by a subject, or can relate it to their personal interests and values
ideas are presented imaginatively or in an multi-sensory manner, for example using dramatisation or presentations that include music, video, handling objects and tools, movement etc.
there is an open and lively atmosphere
there is plenty of 'hands-on' training or examples, and that they can put into practice what they have learnt
learning is experienced as fun, e.g. it includes games, role-playing, plenty of stimulation and interaction
there is plenty of 'free time' for reviewing, reflecting upon and assimilating ideas
listening and observing, e.g. watching how other people do things, listening to a lecture or presentation, taking notes, appreciating, describing their reactions to things etc.
encouraged to research, explore, investigate and collect information
allowed to absorb ideas at their own pace and to digest them thoroughly before acting on them or making decisions
*ISFPs learn least well and may be demotivated when:* 

the focus is on theory, analysis, facts and figures - usually just figures
having to collate large amounts of data - ooh yes, this was a pet hate at uni when we had to get data to back up our arguments in essays
leadership, initiative and decision-making are valued above skill, artistry, ingenuity and dedication - not always, I can appreciate skill and artistry in tasks too
having to take centre stage or being put 'under the spotlight' - depends, if i'm doing karaoke I like people watching me.
the focus is on academic competition or achieving set goals or standards - I like going for my own goals rather than a goal dictated to me.
involved in situations which require forward planning, delegation and marshalling resources - what? lol yeah I dislike the managerial tasks.
there is too much theory, generalization or ambiguity - depends on what the ambiguity is about.
there is little or no personal feedback from their tutor or teacher - I would like feedback yeah, though again it depends on what I'm doing because I usually know how well I can do things, and what level I am able to achieve. When I want to advance in a skill, then feedback helps me.


----------



## fiasco (Dec 25, 2009)

cardinalfire said:


> AAA and ACA, what do you mean by this?


The perceiving function is how we take in and process information (before using our judging function to analyze it), as you already know. Perceivers have judging functions oriented towards their inner worlds and perceiving functions towards the outer world. So in a way, the core difference between the INFP and the ISFP is that one perceives/is oriented towards the outer world in a concrete and immediate manner (Se), while the other perceives/is oriented towards the outer world in an abstract and future-oriented manner (Ne). Our extraverted functions tend to be what is immediately apparent to others, so this is probably why the INFP may seem more "dreamy" to outsiders while the ISFP seems more artistic and gifted with his hands.

I think the learning styles are so similar because of the shared dominant Fi and inferior Te, but the differences are also very highlighted due to their differing ways of perceiving. I notice how when you go to the NF temperament and even with the learning styles here, the things which you relate to the most are examples of Fi and the effects of inferior or ignored Te. I think all this implies is that you are clearly Fi dominant and well-acquainted with your dominant function (which you should be). So I think you should focus more on your perception and how you interact with the _outer_ world and external data rather than what goes on inside of you. Again, the INFP uses Ne to perceive abstractly; ISFP uses Se to perceive concretely. Below are all examples of how someone who uses Se best learns, takes in information, and explores the world around him. I only included those that are clearly and uniquely Se:

ISFPs learn best when:
*1)* Ideas are presented imaginatively or in a multi-sensory manner, for example using dramatisation or presentations that include music, video, handling objects and tools, movement etc.
*2)* There is an open and lively atmosphere
*3)* There is plenty of 'hands-on' training or examples, and that they can put into practice what they have learnt
*4)* Learning is experienced as fun, e.g. it includes games, role-playing, plenty of stimulation and interaction

As learners, ISFPs:
*5)* Are less interested in theories than in practical facts
*6)* Enjoy personal involvement and participation
*7)* Prefer ‘hands-on’ training
*8)* Are stimulated by multi-sensory teaching
*9)* Benefit from frequent breaks that allow for physical movement
*10)* Learn by doing

Whereas the following are more uniquely Ne:

As learners, INFPs:
*1) *Are quick to grasp ideas and possibilities
*2)* Enjoy abstraction and seeing patterns emerge by linking disparate ideas together

INFPs learn best when:
*1)* Required to explore a subject in depth

Believe it or not, most of the others are examples of introverted learners, Fi learners, and inferior Te learners. That's why they both have so much in common. But if you could only choose one learning style of the above that I have written, which do you think would allow you to understand a subject in the most depth? How you would naturally self-instruct yourself? The answer will definitely clue you into whether you ultimately prefer Se or Ne.


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

If I had to pick one, it would definitely be the latter.


----------



## fiasco (Dec 25, 2009)

...I hope you're not putting _too_ much weight into the words, by the way. Dominant Fi softens Se quite a bit.
But in any case, if you're absolutely certain then I guess you're INFP.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

> I reckon Ne, could you write 'decreased' descriptions of them?


My belief is that the seeking of stimulation of ISFPs via Se would be decreased in the way that they seek out experiences - they don't actively go out of their way to hit the most exciting thing, though. They may also push themselves deep into things they find stimulating, such as an activity (painting, video games, etc.). Of Ne with INFPs, I imagine they would be more focused in that sense, although very subtly. They would probably go into things with more depth than the ISFP would, who may jump in and out of interests quickly, depending on how stimulating it is. It's very hard to describe it; my apologies. Essentially, the ISFP would dabble more, and the INFP would likely find a few things to go really into depth with.


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

fiasco said:


> ...I hope you're not putting _too_ much weight into the words, by the way. Dominant Fi softens Se quite a bit.
> But in any case, if you're absolutely certain then I guess you're INFP.





Grey said:


> My belief is that the seeking of stimulation of ISFPs via Se would be decreased in the way that they seek out experiences - they don't actively go out of their way to hit the most exciting thing, though. They may also push themselves deep into things they find stimulating, such as an activity (painting, video games, etc.). Of Ne with INFPs, I imagine they would be more focused in that sense, although very subtly. They would probably go into things with more depth than the ISFP would, who may jump in and out of interests quickly, depending on how stimulating it is. It's very hard to describe it; my apologies. Essentially, the ISFP would dabble more, and the INFP would likely find a few things to go really into depth with.


Well I tend not to dabble, and yeah my hobbies and interests do revolve around three things (art, music and books - mainly). So I guess I'm INFP. Or at least that's what I'll be for now.

Thanks for your help guys.


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

I just wanted to post my results of the function test I just took, it may provide further insight at some point in the future, this isn't to bump the thread, rather to have the results in this thread for future reference/discussions/decisions. etc. 

http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/cgi-bin/develop.pl

here they are:

*Perceiving—how we focus our attention and gather information*
*Cognitive Process**Basic (Passive) Use**Developed (Active) Use*extraverted Sensing (Se)Notice sensory data in the environment.Trust your instincts and take action relevant to the moment and current context.introverted Sensing (Si)Recall tangible data and experiences.Stabilize a situation by comparing it to what is expected, known and reliable.extraverted Intuiting (Ne)Notice abstract patterns as they emerge.Shift a situation's dynamics and explore imaginative potential possibilities.introverted Intuiting (Ni)Receive "ah-ha" insights and realizations.Persue a greater level of awareness to transform who you are and how you think.​*Judging—how we organize our experiences and make decisions*
*Cognitive Process**Basic (Passive) Use**Developed (Active) Use*extraverted Thinking (Te)Follow steps, points and time tables.Create structure, reason by measures and evidence, and implement complex plans.introverted Thinking (Ti)Adhere to definitions and impersonal principles.Analyze a problem using a framework, and find an angle or leverage by which to solve it.extraverted Feeling (Fe)Honor others' needs and preferences.Connect with people by sharing values and taking on their needs as yours.introverted Feeling (Fi)Adhere to personal beliefs about what's important.Evalute situations and choose what you believe is congruent with your personal identity.​Development is more than basic or developed use of processes in isolation. Excellent use of a cognitive process involves both basic and advanced use as appropriate, and ability to deploy other processes in its service. Average to good use usually means we can use the process in limited situations or use it well but only with the aid of other processes. Poor use means basic use at most. Finally, we may get ourselves into trouble when we don't use a process at all.

Based on your ranked responses to the 120 phrases...
- Fi

- Fe

- Ne

- Se

- Si

- Ti

- Ni

- Te

*Your Possible Type Code*
According to the traditional sorting method of finding the most-used functional pairs (such as Fi-Ne), your type might be:
Possible result: INFP


We are also trying a new sorting method to try to indicate best-fit type. This method is experimental and may not match your type. 
Possible result: ISFJ

*Your Developmental Curve*
This model attempts to graph a 'developmental curve'. Theoretically, people should choose simpler, less sophisticated aspects of the cognitive processes more often than they choose complex, more sophisticated aspects. The simpler aspects of each process are necessary to perform the more sophisticated aspects! However, because the phrases are in development, this measure has questionable validity. 

Your self-assessment curve = -0.1

-- A curve less than 0 indicates you checked simpler phrases more often than sophisticated ones. This is expected, although a particularly low number (more than -10) might happen if the phrases were particularly unclear to you, or if you under-estimated your abilities.

-- A curve greater than 0 indicates you checked sophisticed phrases more often than simpler ones. This would be counter to a developmental model and might happen if many phrases are badly written or if you have over-estimated your capabilities.

*Your Most-Used Processes*
Based on your response, these are your top three cognitive processes in use:


*Fi* : Evaluating; considering importance and worth; reviewing for incongruity; evaluating something based on the truths on which it is based; clarifying values to achieve accord; deciding if something is of significance and worth standing up for.​*Fe* : Connecting; considering others and the group—organizing to meet their needs and honor their values and feelings; maintaining societal, organizational, or group values; adjusting and accommodating others; deciding if something is appropriate or acceptable to others.
*Ne* : Interpreting situations and relationships; picking up meanings and interconnections; being drawn to change 'what is' for 'what could possibly be'; noticing what is not said and threads of meaning emerging across multiple contexts.​These definitions are the copy protected material of Linda V. Berens and Telos Publications, Huntington Beach, CA and may not be used without the authors express written consent. All other material is the exclusive property of Dario Nardi, 2004 and may not be used without express written consent. Please contact us for permissions.


*Your Developmental Report*
Your pattern of responses indicates a developmental level in each cognitive processes. Since this is experimental, this report may be in error.


*Ni,Te*
You are generally not aware of engaing in this process. You find it bothersome and unhelpful from others and question its value. You may mistake its use for something else. You may avoid or try to shut down situations that involve this process.
*Ti*
You notice this process and enjoy when others use it but only occassionally find yourself engaging in it. You may marvel at others who do it very well. It doesn't appear useful to you personally and can annoy you if others use it too much.
*Si,Se*
You value this process as a helpful aid, even if you do not engage it that often. You trust it contributes to life, particularly when done by others who do the process well. You might recruit others to help you do this process for you.
*Ne,Fe*
You actively use this process in your daily life as a useful tool or helpful aid. You could live without it but use definitely contributes to the what you do and who you are. You can work with others using this process, usually in a support role.
*Fi*
You sustain and grow yourself and those around you long-term through this process. You are at your best, your peak creative and leadership moments when engaged in this process. This is a lead role; it is who you are and what you truly do.


----------

