# The types at their core?



## Raawx (Oct 9, 2013)

I'm curious--could you try to describe the core philosophy of your type? 

As ENFP, I would have to say the following:

*ENFPs are driven by a consistent desire to understand the world.* In hoping to understand the world, they observe. In these observations, they make inferences about the world, oftentimes subconscious. They thrive in the empirical and connecting the understanding that make the most sense; their mind is quite often a bundle of correlations. Since they are so attuned to the normal trends of the world, that which is novel and interesting draws their attention. Outliers, statistically speaking, are the most interesting, as in defying the reality, hope to explain a different understanding of the world. Ultimately, they will objectively detach themselves from the world, finding the core concepts that guide the world and how they exist in their many iterations.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Seems same for infj.


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

Actually everyone wants to understand the world regardless of whether or not they actually say that they do. Functions speak of perceiving and judging information. All types do this by default.


----------



## Deus Absconditus (Feb 27, 2011)

I'll just leave this here:



> Feeling is primarily a process that takes place between the ego (q.v.) and a given content, a process, moreover, *that imparts to the content a definite value in the sense of acceptance or rejection (“like”or “dislike”)*.





> To my mind, a mere stringing together of ideas, such as is described by certain psychologists as associative thinking, 87 is not thinking at all, but mere ideation. *The term “thinking”should, in my view, be confined to the linking up of ideas by means of a concept*, in other words, to an act of judgment, no matter whether this act is intentional or not.


----------



## Raawx (Oct 9, 2013)

Captain Mclain said:


> Seems same for infj.


Helpful.



Grandmaster Yoda said:


> Actually everyone wants to understand the world regardless of whether or not they actually say that they do. Functions speak of perceiving and judging information. All types do this by default.


I'm not saying that other types; just that ENFPs do so in a more dramatic way. Or, maybe I'm wrong. 



Shadow Logic said:


> I'll just leave this here:


What _are_ you trying to say?


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

Raawx said:


> Helpful.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But what about their understanding is more dramatic than my understanding?


----------



## Deus Absconditus (Feb 27, 2011)

Raawx said:


> What _are_ you trying to say?


It matters, are your convictions already set? If so, then it doesn't matter what I'm trying to say, but if by any chance your convictions aren't set in stone then what I am saying is that....



> Ultimately, they will objectively detach themselves from the world, *finding the core concepts that guide the world* and how they exist in their many iterations.


This is more representative of Ne-Ti rather than Ne-Fi, and if you state that you think its solely an Ne thing then whatever is up there for ENFP is equally true for ENTP, if its Ne alone we're discussing. If you have your own definitions of Feeling and Thinking that isn't consistent with the ones that I presented then there really isn't a point in discussing it since we're going to be referencing to multiple different incompatible concepts that will further increase misunderstanding leading us no where but wasted time.


----------



## Raawx (Oct 9, 2013)

Grandmaster Yoda said:


> But what about their understanding is more dramatic than my understanding?


I'll show the cognitive functions in my original post:



> ENFPs are driven by a consistent desire to understand the world. In hoping to understand the world, they observe. (Ne) In these observations, they make inferences about the world, oftentimes subconscious. (Ne-/Si) They thrive in the empirical and connecting the understanding that make the most sense; their mind is quite often a bundle of correlations. (Ne-/Te+) Since they are so attuned to the normal trends of the world, that which is novel and interesting draws their attention. (Ne-) Outliers, statistically speaking, are the most interesting, as in defying the reality, hope to explain a different understanding of the world. (Ne-/Te+) Ultimately, they will objectively detach themselves from the world, finding the core concepts that guide the world and how they exist in their many iterations. (Ne-/Te+)


I suppose the language is very ambiguous and can, without a doubt, be interpreted differently. Perhaps what I wrote is how ENFPs attempt to understand the world? I'm not sure--I just I know I identify much with what I wrote. It explains a lot about me (I think) at my core.


----------



## Bugs (May 13, 2014)

ENTPs are curious , creative and investigative. They are driven by their desire to know everything about the world around them. Their introverted logic allows them to weigh information according to a deductive standard. ENTPs are quick at getting to the 'core' of something and understanding its logical underpinnings. Extraverted feeling gives the ENTP a healthy amount of empathy and they usually judge people objectively. ENTPs are generally easy to talk to and good company to have around. They are also interesting. Inferior Si sometimes makes the ENTP miss out on important details because ENTPs are more big picture orientated. However an ENTP with sufficiently developed Si can be very perceptive of all the little things too


----------



## Deus Absconditus (Feb 27, 2011)

Raawx said:


> Finding the core concepts? Not necessarily. I think you're making assumptions on an ideology that hasn't been articulated properly (which, admittedly, is my fault). What I am trying to say is likely: Ne-Te pulls from objective reality to get the core principles. Through observation and empiricism, Te+ pulls universal categories of differences. For instance, subjective vs. objective; positivist vs. negativist; etc. These are all very general domains of thought that Ne is able to extract from. It just gets there from a "Te" point of view.
> 
> Te and Ti can come to the same conclusions, just through different pathways.


If that's what you want to believe then ok, I have no intentions in arguing with you.


----------



## Raawx (Oct 9, 2013)

Shadow Logic said:


> If that's what you want to believe then ok, I have no intentions in arguing with you.


I'm not trying to produce a disagreement. What is wrong in my explanation?


----------



## Deus Absconditus (Feb 27, 2011)

Raawx said:


> I'm not trying to produce a disagreement. *What is wrong in my explanation?*


Te in the ENFP is their tertiary function, its their third function in strength and second most undifferentiated function. Ne-Fi in the ENFP would be used before Ne-Te, therefore as an ENFP you would be more naturally predisposed to choosing whether if something is agreeable or not based on a feeling tone rather than searching for concepts and the depth of them. Since your Te is second most undifferentiated and opposed to your Fi, its natural that using your Te would drain you more so than using your Fi, whereas Ti a conceptual holder in the ENTP is more likely to be used to see the depth of concepts before Te tertiary would. Te also focuses its concepts on what's generally accepted, its not about getting to a core, its about getting the general public to agree on a specific concept, and it implements concepts externally rather than internally, which leads to the next point. All extravert functions react externally, its more so Ti that would look for the core of a concept, whereas Te would want to implement it on to reality rather than ponder about its core:



> This type of man elevates objective reality, or an objectively oriented intellectual formula, into the ruling principle not only for himself but for his whole environment. *By this formula good and evil are measured, and beauty and ugliness determined. Everything that agrees with this formula is right, everything that contradicts it is wrong, and anything that passes by it indifferently is merely incidental. Because this formula seems to embody the entire meaning of life, it is made into a universal law which must be put into effect everywhere all the time, both individually and collectively.* Just as the extraverted thinking type subordinates himself to his formula, so, for their own good, everybody round him must obey it too, for whoever refuses to obey it is wrong—he is resisting the universal law, and is therefore unreasonable, immoral, and without a conscience. His moral code forbids him to tolerate exceptions; his ideal must under all circumstances be realized, for in his eyes it is the purest conceivable formulation of objective reality, and therefore must also be a universally valid truth, quite indispensable for the salvation of mankind. This is not from any great love for his neighbour, but from the higher standpoint of justice and truth. Anything in his own nature that appears to invalidate this formula is a mere imperfection, an accidental failure, something to be eliminated on the next occasion, or, in the event of further failure, clearly pathological.


^^^ This is how Te works when its efficient, it implements concepts onto the general public and derives its concepts from the generally accepted which is shown again here:



> The rationality of both types is object-oriented and dependent on objective data. It accords with what is collectively considered to be rational. For them, nothing is rational save what is generally considered as such.


^^^ this was in reference to both Te and Fe Dom's ( the extraverted rationals), which as it states derives its judgement from what is generally accepted, and the judgement of thinking is that of concepts.



> *But whenever a function other than thinking predominates in consciousness to any marked degree, thinking, so far as it is conscious at all and not directly dependent on the dominant function, assumes a negative character*. If it is subordinated to the dominant function it may actually wear a positive aspect, *but closer scrutiny will show that it simply mimics the dominant function, supporting it with arguments that clearly contradict the laws of logic proper to thinking*.


^^^ this shows that whenever thinking is undifferentiated, or is not the dominant function it tends to become negative and only mimicking the dominant function. The more undifferentiated the function is, the more negative it becomes. Since thinking is tertiary for ENFPs, their thinking would contradict the laws of logic proper to thinking at a greater rate than Ti would in the ENTP (because its our auxiliary). This is shown again here in Jungians definition of differentiation:



> As a rule, the undifferentiated function is also characterized by ambivalence and ambitendency, 34 i.e., *every position entails its own negation, and this leads to characteristic inhibitions in the use of the undifferentiated function. Another feature is the fusing together of its separate components; thus, undifferentiated sensation is vitiated by the coalescence of different sensory spheres (colour-hearing), and undifferentiated feeling by confounding hate with love. To the extent that a function is largely or wholly unconscious, it is also undifferentiated; it is not only fused together in its parts but also merged with other functions*. Differentiation consists in the separation of the function from other functions, and in the separation of its individual parts from each other.


Your Te, being tertiary, would coelesce its properties more along with the properties that don't belong to it, negating ever position it entails, which is consistent with it being negative, contradictory to its own laws of logic proper to it, and why it mimicks the dominant function.

There's more things I could point out but I hope this gets the most, but I'm expecting to be told again that I'm misreading or assuming to much into it, which is why I call this a waste of time in the first place.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Raawx said:


> Helpful.


This comment was not


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

Raawx said:


> I'm curious--could you try to describe the core philosophy of your type?
> 
> As ENFP, I would have to say the following:
> 
> *ENFPs are driven by a consistent desire to understand the world.* In hoping to understand the world, they observe. In these observations, they make inferences about the world, oftentimes subconscious. They thrive in the empirical and connecting the understanding that make the most sense; their mind is quite often a bundle of correlations. Since they are so attuned to the normal trends of the world, that which is novel and interesting draws their attention. Outliers, statistically speaking, are the most interesting, as in defying the reality, hope to explain a different understanding of the world. Ultimately, they will objectively detach themselves from the world, finding the core concepts that guide the world and how they exist in their many iterations.


Works for me, well said. Agreed.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

Raawx said:


> I'm curious--could you try to describe the core philosophy of your type?
> As ENFP, I would have to say the following:
> 
> ENFPs are driven by a consistent desire to understand the world.


Eh I think a lot of people of various types would want to understand the world; it assists not only in introspection and self-actualization, but also survival. 



> Since they are so attuned to the normal trends of the world, that which is novel and interesting draws their attention. Outliers, statistically speaking, are the most interesting, as in defying the reality, hope to explain a different understanding of the world.



This part is interesting though.

Anyway, personally, I think "core philosophy" is WAY better explained by the Enneagram. Cognitive functions tell us a bunch of stuff about how we process and synthesize information, but they don't explain why millions of people of the same type have vastly varying motivations and ways of approaching problems. Functions... just don't reach the core of an individual. Nowhere close.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

Shadow Logic said:


> Te in the ENFP is their tertiary function, its their third function in strength and second most undifferentiated function. Ne-Fi in the ENFP would be used before Ne-Te, therefore as an ENFP you would be more naturally predisposed to choosing whether if something is agreeable or not based on a feeling tone rather than searching for concepts and the depth of them.


False. Feeling has no place in comprehending how objective factual reality functions. It would be very limiting. Where exactly do I use feeling in comprehending anatomy for example or how a camera, computer functions?  what feeling tone tells me this again?

If I can't logically break down and justify objectively why I chose something based on Fi, then in my opinion said feeling is questionable & I'll start doubting myself / go through large amounts of info till I figure out the truth & then either change my choice or reassert it based on Te factual evidence.

A lot of the time Fi choices can be deconstructed like this & backed up with Te logic...aka there are logical reasons for the feelings. ENFPs aren't in fact interested in logical theory torn from reality...which is the realm of Ti, something we suck at. 

Also Fi feelings are more like gut feelings or nuggets of understanindg. I don't associate emotions or what a layman would call "feeling"with what I refer to as feeling in MBTI terms.



> Since your Te is second most undifferentiated and opposed to your Fi, its natural that using your Te would drain you more so than using your Fi, whereas Ti a conceptual holder in the ENTP is more likely to be used to see the depth of concepts before Te tertiary would.


Its very difficult to drain an ENFP with Te & Si as both functions are valued & weak in us. People who use a lot of Te & Si are in fact a good source of factual information that allows me to refine & sort though ideas, which means they are practical & realistic enough to help me sort out the good ideas from the crappy ones. *This is the reason ENFPs prefer to learn through social interaction rather then lone study. We need the external filters to narrow down options of which we can generate too many.*

Note that a LOT of MBTI ISTJs are not Si-Te users and I'll explain why typing based on the 4 dichotomies is idiotic.



> Te also focuses its concepts on what's generally accepted, its not about getting to a core, its about getting the general public to agree on a specific concept, and it implements concepts externally rather than internally, which leads to the next point. All extravert functions react externally, its more so Ti that would look for the core of a concept, whereas Te would want to implement it on to reality rather than ponder about its core:


Wrong. Te is simply concerned with external concrete reality & objective information that can be used within said reality as opposed to Ti which is concerned for the abstract system building side of this. Its the difference between why you think something is happening (Ti) & what is actually happening as brought forth by the factual evidence (Te)

*Typical Te dom Carl Sagan:*






How this works in ENFPs is that we are concerned for practically feasible ideas & options. Stuff that is not grounded in reality is perceived as fun but useless. For example the idea of the free market is nice in theory (Ti), but falls flat when applied in reality (Te) & this fun to ponder, but I through my Te would not consider it worth while due to Te-Si approach I have: practical experience.

*Here is how I use Fe:* I feel/understand the emotional atmosphere & I read other people's emotions / how they tick emotionally inside through connecting the observed patterns intuitively (Ne). This makes me a very good observer of interpersonal relationship dynamics.
No preference for expression through Fe aka I'm more likely to be avoidant & blunt then dramatic.

*Here is how I use Fi:* I naturally comprehend the relationship between myself & everything aka how I relate. This results in value judgments that are expressed & acted upon quite often. Due to tertiary Te I'm liable to alter value judgments because of my need for them to be realistic & fact based. This results in the ENFP being perceived as more fickle & mercurial when compared to a Fi dom.

*ENFP example (Huxley):*







*ESFP example (Karen):*






*There is a problem in MBTI with people not understanding the functions, because the definitions used for these are basically vague & murky, so most ppl rely on the 4 dichotomies to determine type, which can also be misleading for example, because sociability = / = extroversion or intelligence = / = thinker, emotional = / =feeler, judging = / = organized.*

*Fi* for example is as simple as subject (meaning you) - object (meaning anything that isn't you) relational evaluation aka how you relate. To a Fi dom this is very clear & a core factor in their life. *Fe* on the other hand is object-object relational evaluation, for example the emotional atmosphere of a group & how to influence it.

I'd be very skeptical of the MBTI if I were you . From my perspective, the MBTI as we know from Meyers - Briggs >.> is torn from Jungian function theory & in fact incompatible with it. A lot of MBTI ENFPs may not even be Ne-Fi-Te-Si.


----------



## Deus Absconditus (Feb 27, 2011)

@FreeBeer like I already said I have no intentions in arguing over this point, there is nothing I can do to change how you view functions or type so I would rather not waste my time. You can take out of my posts whatever it is that you will, but I'll just leave it at agreeing to disagree on terminology and the relations of them.


----------



## aendern (Dec 28, 2013)

According to socionics, this is each type's core desire:

ENTp, ESTp => to be loved 
INTj, INFj => to be healthy 
ESFj, ESTj => to be perfect 
ISFp, INFp => to understand 
ENFj, ENTj => to be wealthy 
ISTj, ISFj => to believe 
ESFp, ENFp => to know 
INTp, ISTp => to love 


http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/167-The-Hidden-Agenda-and-Point-of-Least-Resistance


Anyway, I was going to say that my hidden desire is to form connections with people whom I love. I know that's a really boring answer after you have just looked at the table above ^ but whatever.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

@FreeBeer I believe feeling function help figure out what is of value. What is of value in the camera ect. It is not just towards emotion and people.



emberfly said:


> According to socionics, this is each type's core desire:
> 
> ENTp, ESTp => to be loved
> INTj, INFj => to be healthy
> ...


Then this "enfp" description is more a infj description actually.


----------



## aendern (Dec 28, 2013)

Captain Mclain said:


> ect.


The abbreviation is etc.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

emberfly said:


> The abbreviation is etc.


Ye true, to understand for a feeler type can imply understand other human beings. But, me as infj, are damn interested in the universe and the laws in it and everything between pure science to philosophy of it.


----------



## aendern (Dec 28, 2013)

Captain Mclain said:


> Ye true, to understand for a feeler type can imply understand other human beings. But, me as infj, are damn interested in the universe and the laws in it and everything between pure science to philosophy of it.


you mean MBTI infj?

It would surprise me if "to understand" was limited to just relationships. I didn't expect or think that at all. I completely expected them to have the proclivity to understand everything. All the big questions.


----------



## General Lee Awesome (Sep 28, 2014)

To protect others, to alleviate their problem, so they do not suffer.


----------



## Gentleman (Jun 14, 2014)

emberfly said:


> According to socionics, this is each type's core desire:
> 
> ENTp, ESTp => to be loved
> INTj, INFj => to be healthy
> ...


Also note that the last letter is flipped for socionics types. An INTJ in MBTI is the Ni-Te type, while an INTj in socionics is the Ti-Ne type. Just so that people don't look at that and get the types completely mixed up. I don't think socionics should use a four letter code.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

emberfly said:


> you mean MBTI infj?
> 
> It would surprise me if "to understand" was limited to just relationships. I didn't expect or think that at all. I completely expected them to have the proclivity to understand everything. All the big questions.


Yes. Just pointing on the problem when trying to describe a type with just one word, unless the broader interpretation are allowed


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

Shadow Logic said:


> @FreeBeer like I already said I have no intentions in arguing over this point, there is nothing I can do to change how you view functions or type so I would rather not waste my time. You can take out of my posts whatever it is that you will, but I'll just leave it at agreeing to disagree on terminology and the relations of them.


Alright, considering the nature of the subject that is a logically sound thing to do. It would probably be a waste of your & my time.



Captain Mclain said:


> @FreeBeer I believe feeling function help figure out what is of value. What is of value in the camera ect. It is not just towards emotion and people.
> 
> 
> 
> Then this "enfp" description is more a infj description actually.


To me a camera is a tool & it's value depends on how well I know to use it, which implies I understand how it functions, though which I raise it's value to me o.o.

Knowledge is power. Feeling might add or subtract to motivation, so yeah, its my lack or presence of interest, i*f I value something I'm more likely to learn about it.*

The core of ENFP is Ne-Si, not Fi-Te, which is the core of INFP.

Irrational doms tend towards acquisition of new information rather then judging said info. ^^ we dont exactly "dig deep", its more like we search far & wide


----------



## Mammon (Jul 12, 2012)

bump


----------



## pretense (Jan 2, 2013)

This might not be exactly what you were looking for, but felt like writing something like this and this seemed to be the best place to put it.

Se - I look out at the world and I see all physical objects pressing against each other, I see their physical relationship and the forces these objects are exerting on each other. I masterfully exert myself to manipulate these forces to achieve desired ends, effectively using everything at my disposal. I touch objects, I grab them and move them around, hit them against other objects, etc. I'm intensely driven to exert myself in my environment, to know the physical attributes of everything. Stopping to think is frustrating for me, and it is typically seen as a waste of time. Constantly pushing, throwing everything I have at a goal, that is where I feel comfortable. I can feel my own force and the forces of others. I feel when I must stand my ground against others, and although you might think I appear in physical or emotional discomfort when retaliating or escalating conflicts I can assure that that is not the case, now I am REALLY in my comfort zone. I deeply feel when I am in a rut or stagnant, this is very emotionally painful for me. Loosing momentum is frustrating and major cause of depression for me. At times maintaining momentum just to feel "okay," results in physical harm to myself.
Ti - My thinking always trends away from real objects. The perfect thought is one that is impenetrable, one that cannot be undermined by knew evidence. It is an effective determiner of truth in both practical and philosophical matters. But in practical matters it is tethered to the agenda of Se. I am vary capable of formulating false logic designed for specific causes. I may want to convince someone that doing something is good for them when it is really for my benefit, so I cherry pick, even fabricate, evidence and create arguments based on that evidence to make them believe it is good for them. This skill/tactic can be used in numerous other scenarios. 
Fe - My ethics almost always vary from situation to situation and any that are acted upon are determined in a social setting by the expected impact on others. For example, when talking with a group of friends and someone says something stupid I might not call them an idiot because that would hurt their feelings. I value maintaing a positive emotional atmosphere. But then later that person is not there and I have no problem telling everyone how much of an idiot they are because as they are no longer there they won't be negatively effected. It isn't the act itself that I feel is wrong, it is the impact the act will have. 
Ni - When considered the future can look scary. Events seem to be playing out in a way that signals incoming disaster. Giving too much consideration to the future leads to a feeling that everything is teetering on the edge of a cliff. One wrong move is sure to lead to defeat or failure. I'm essentially a conspiracy theorist. I mean that not in the sense that I believe the moon landing was faked or anything like that, but that often I will apply outrageous or silly explanations to occurrences whose cause cannot be logically determined. As a child I was extremely afraid of the dark because every noise was some sort of alien or monster rushing from the darkness to kill me.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

manofgod69 said:


> Ni - When considered the future can look scary. Events seem to be playing out in a way that signals incoming disaster. Giving too much consideration to the future leads to a feeling that everything is teetering on the edge of a cliff. One wrong move is sure to lead to defeat or failure. I'm essentially a conspiracy theorist. I mean that not in the sense that I believe the moon landing was faked or anything like that, but that often I will apply outrageous or silly explanations to occurrences whose cause cannot be logically determined. As a child I was extremely afraid of the dark because every noise was some sort of alien or monster rushing from the darkness to kill me.


Cute haha ;p inferior Ni, that seems so weird for me.

But guess its the opposite for me, inferior Se. I know all stuffs are inter-connected but not sure how in the present moment. I need the time perspective to filter out the fake ones.

edit; the perspective is the same really but Ni-dom would value their past experiences and knowledge more then Se-dom which can act more confidently on what he or she see is true right now.

Se seems awesome for me, like the superpowers Scarlett gains in the movie Lucy.


----------



## pretense (Jan 2, 2013)

Captain Mclain said:


> I think the movie Lucy handle the Se-Ni perspective of the world.


How so?


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

manofgod69 said:


> How so?


She talks about all atoms are connected and by pushing one you can create an effect and change something on the other side of the room. The get powers doing this.  It is a fiction based on these kind of ideas. That everything connects and that matter can be manipulated ect. And its action so Se there!  Also Scarlett (lucy) are istp so she give the movie this Se vibe.


----------

