# What happens if you try to be another type? (Mistyping)



## Boots (Nov 26, 2010)

*Disclaimers:*
I'm fairly new to the site, so if this topic has been covered elsewhere please send me a link.
I'm writing this with a starting assumption that type is inherent, which seems to be the general consensus in what I've read. 

*My personal reasons for asking:*
I have a particular curiosity because of my own personal development and life stage; 

When I was young I was a certain way. When I became a teenager I modified my behaviour to some degree to try to please my mother (way more there that I won't get into here, but more than just the 'want to be a good girl' situation). Through that time I typed a certain way on school tests and online tests for MBTI (note that I've never had a thorough MBTI one-on-one analysis, though some of these were administered to a class of students by someone with some training). 

In my late 20's I found myself looking around and thinking 'I have a great career, I make good money, I have all the things I wanted out of life.. but I don't feel fulfilled'. My work looked great on paper but I felt like I there was little value in it. I wasn't sleeping, was drinking too much and was horribly stressed (despite many prior stresses in my life being gone), and as I started exploring that more I started reconnecting with things I'd done as a child. And then I started feeling more authentic, sleeping, needing to self-medicate less... and I did some more online MBTI tests and interesting I was consistently typing differently.

Now I know the online tests don't mean much - but so far other tests I take (like the CareerStrength test and others) as well as looking at cognitive functions (which I'm still just learning) seem to support the 'new' typing. It also seems to fit with what I know of the 'young me'.

*Finally on to my actual questions....*
From a more scientific/knowledgeable standpoint - what would or should happen to a person if they spent the better part of their life trying to be something other than their inherent type, for whatever reason? (I'd think someone who is out of touch with their type and living based on external expectations of society, etc would be in the same boat).

~ If this is what happened to me I can vouch for feeling stressed and unfulfilled as an adult, feeling like you 'should be happy' on an intellectual level but not 'feeling' that way inside. To be honest the reason I've ended up here is all the career books that I've been reading discuss trying to work/live in line with your values, authentic self, or MBTI (in the case of 'Do what you are').
~ How might you feel toward your true type (at my 'peak' I think I sort of looked down on the type I most relate to now, at various times I've ignored, vilified, or envied that type)
~ Would this cause or contribute to self-esteem issues?
~ Would this lead to over-development of your lesser functions? Under-development of what should be your primary functions?
~ Are there any studies on this sort of thing - any psychological things tied into it?
~ How much of who we are is inherent vs. who we 'want' to be? Obviously the other explanation in my situation is that I was stressed and unhappy for other reasons and now seek a different type because I've idealized it in my mind. How can one know?

I'm interested in both the global truth of these questions and also specifics on a personal level. If anyone has thoughts, theories, or evidence please post here. If anyone wishes to psychoanalyze me send a PM. I welcome any thoughts on determining my own true type so feel free to comment on that, but this thread is also hopefully something interesting to others - so feel free to post your own experiences!

~ Boots ~


----------



## TheYellow (Oct 28, 2010)

I relate to you significantly, even though our circumstances and positions were different. I was forced by my dad's alcoholism and my mom's disease to become something wholly different than I was as a child. I don't really have any advice or anything as I'm still trying to figure my 'true' type out. I've also reached a point where I feel I can keep developing as my altered type, or try and revert to what I was before everything happened. All I can say is yes, it causes extreme inner confliction and stress.


----------



## DoctorYikes (Nov 22, 2010)

I imagine it's something like this.


----------



## Missie (Oct 11, 2010)

You die inside. Slowly :happy:.


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

Boots said:


> *Disclaimers:*
> I'm fairly new to the site, so if this topic has been covered elsewhere please send me a link.
> I'm writing this with a starting assumption that type is inherent, which seems to be the general consensus in what I've read.
> 
> ...


Your story is quite familiar. I've never had the test done but I wouldn't be surprised if I came out as INTJ in later elementary and high school. People who've only seen me under stress seem to think I'm something I'm actually now and I feel like I've been conforming to those views forever. The only freedom I've ever felt to be myself is before I started grade 3-4 and after high school when I got to leave home. I was forced into the "good girl" role too (as if I wasn't already) so I relate to what you're saying quite strongly. In my early school days certainly INTJ (or whichever types have Se as inferior because of their attitude against any form of pleasure, physical or emotional) would be the ideal type of every student if the school had their way, but a negative form of course since it was a rather authoritarian catholic school. I had quite a few issues with the teachers or should I say the other way around for just being myself. How well would an ESFP do in the military or similar environment? I'm guessing not too well.



Boots said:


> In my late 20's I found myself looking around and thinking 'I have a great career, I make good money, I have all the things I wanted out of life.. but I don't feel fulfilled'. My work looked great on paper but I felt like I there was little value in it. I wasn't sleeping, was drinking too much and was horribly stressed (despite many prior stresses in my life being gone), and as I started exploring that more I started reconnecting with things I'd done as a child. And then I started feeling more authentic, sleeping, needing to self-medicate less... and I did some more online MBTI tests and interesting I was consistently typing differently.


Except the career part, replace that with health issues and then when reconnecting to the real world outside myself and restoring my health to the point where I could mentally and physically function and while fixing some issues I accidentally came across a blurb about Enneagram types and how they deal with suffering. It snowballed from there when I started realizing that what I wanted and my own motivations were quite different from what I was forced into. The hardest part right now is convincing the therapists about who I really am vs what they have seen in the last couple of years before I started exploring myself and trying to figure out my own needs. I started to feel a lot more authentic with reduced stress and trying to get to the me I had lost a long time ago. I at first typed as INTP every single time with a very weak T but now I'm always getting ESFP. If you're familiar with the stereotypes of an ESFP you probably understand why I initially was sceptical and certainly didn't wish to be one, nor do I right now because of all the trash talk and comparisons to the Homer Simpsons and Peter Griffins of the world. So I know it's not a matter of wishing I was a certain type, I've even done the "What type you wish you were vs real type" quiz and I believe I got ENTJ as my desired type (I can't find the thread at the moment), so make of that what you will, because I'm not even sure of that one myself.



Boots said:


> Now I know the online tests don't mean much - but so far other tests I take (like the CareerStrength test and others) as well as looking at cognitive functions (which I'm still just learning) seem to support the 'new' typing. It also seems to fit with what I know of the 'young me'.


Yep, same here as well.



Boots said:


> *Finally on to my actual questions....*
> From a more scientific/knowledgeable standpoint - what would or should happen to a person if they spent the better part of their life trying to be something other than their inherent type, for whatever reason? (I'd think someone who is out of touch with their type and living based on external expectations of society, etc would be in the same boat).
> 
> ~ If this is what happened to me I can vouch for feeling stressed and unfulfilled as an adult, feeling like you 'should be happy' on an intellectual level but not 'feeling' that way inside. To be honest the reason I've ended up here is all the career books that I've been reading discuss trying to work/live in line with your values, authentic self, or MBTI (in the case of 'Do what you are').
> ...


Excellent questions that could certainly be helpful to those of us in the same boat you mentioned.

About how I feel towards true type, I've already covered that one earlier, I think I personally idealize INTxs because they have what I don't and it's not much beyond that really. The stereotypes against xSFPs don't exactly encourage me towards them but it seems to be worse off if you're ESPF (stupid, sluts) more than ISFP (creative, sensitive). 

I imagine they would cause self esteem issues in that you aren't being accepted by and large as you actually are and are being forced into a mould that doesn't fit.

I am positive I am ESFP with underdeveloped Se and way overdeveloped Fi. And yes I've read a bit around supporting that theory. If your primary was suppressed then your auxiliary kicks in and so on.

Unfortunately, I've been struggling to find more about this but there isn't a lot out there, the only thing remotely related is types under stress and seeing if you relate to the unhealthy version of which type you really think you are. Maybe we'll have to be part of that solution by talking about our experiences. I did find that if you are forced into a mould you don't fit in it's very likely to cause depression.

Hopefully at least some of this is useful. I'm glad you brought it up since I've been pondering this for a while too now.


----------



## penchant (Sep 20, 2010)

I assume that it would make you feel like something in life was missing...

I would suggest that childhood personality (e.g. Kids' Personality Portraits) as well as thinking about things that either are part of you but that you disapprove of or things that are not part of you and that you admire could be two good reference points.

And then there's Jung's and Beebe's theories on archetypes that would seem like useful frames of reference for understanding the dynamics within one's personality. But I don't know enough about that to say more than just this.


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

I can say it does feel like something's missing. A sense of purpose, but that's my life situation most of the time more than anything.

When I was contacted about a potential party with all the people I used to hang with I was practically bouncing off the walls :blushed:


----------



## penchant (Sep 20, 2010)

Revy2Hand said:


> I can say it does feel like something's missing. A sense of purpose, but that's my life situation most of the time more than anything.


Ouch... That "lack of purpose" thing resonates a lot with me!

I NEED MORE FE!!!!! :crazy::crazy::crazy:


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

penchant said:


> Ouch... That "lack of purpose" thing resonates a lot with me!
> 
> I NEED MORE FE!!!!! :crazy::crazy::crazy:


Well I got some of that, but I got lots of Fi also to spare apparently lol. I'll trade you for some of your Ni :crazy:


----------



## amnorvend (May 16, 2010)

It sounds like you're talking about Prolonged Adaptation Stress Syndrome, and it's not uncommon. In particular, I've found that I have a tendency to try forcing myself into Te because society tends to encourage that and not Ti. I have to put conscious effort into making sure I'm really valuing subjective thinking and not trying to use objective thinking because it's what I "should" be using.


----------



## Boots (Nov 26, 2010)

Thank you for that link - it was very helpful!



> People who've only seen me under stress seem to think I'm something I'm actually not and I feel like I've been conforming to those views forever.


One of the confusing things for me is 'preferred' vs. 'used'. It seems pretty clear that you can get used to using a non-preferred function, but according to that link it can take a high toll (which I think everyone who feels they've been acting out-of-type knows to be true). 

But when you are very accustomed to using a non-preferred function how do you even begin to sort out that you're doing it, and which function would suit you better. It's the whole examining the brain from inside the brain problem. On the tests you (presumably) would score higher on the more used tests, thus suggesting you are Xx dominant and just confusing you further.

If you are looking at specific instances then you might interpret a decision as being the result of one function when in fact it's another set of functions working together. It seems that someone (ie not yourself) who is very familiar with the functions analyzing the decision might be the best bet. Even then there are discrepancies in interpretation and it seems the risk is run of hyperanalyzing an individual function at the expense of correct interpretation of the whole (I can feel my Ni fluttering as I type this :crazy.

And then there are the shadow functions... one thing I've noticed with all this reading is that my Si confuses the heck out of me. I score in the middle on the tests with it (like 5th or 6th highest function), and in the past I would have said that I have pretty good emotional memory and experience nostalgia. But as I pick apart my current thinking and my past I'm realizing that I tend to generalize my memories, and I might even remember things incorrectly. Within a particular memory some details are very vivid, but some are vague to absent - and I think in some situations I reconstruct a memory, filling in the missing details with what I think should have happened, or what others have told me. The end result though is a nostalgic memory that in the past I would have never questioned being anything other than correct... and now I realize many of these memories may not be objectively true. Interviewing family members and reading my old journals (and actually comparing those to the memory in my head and not brushing off discrepancies) is what is revealing this to me. 

What does it all mean??? I'm sure examples could be found for other functions - but the scary part is that if you aren't pulling it apart and really studying what the function means, and how you actually use it... you'd answer the questions as 'yes, I compare things to past events, therefore I have good Si' and possibly be deluding yourself.

~ Boots ~


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

I'm wondering if that's why when (I think I'm using Fe) that I find it exhausting after a while and intravert.


----------



## Tad Cooper (Apr 10, 2010)

I can relate a bit. I feel like something important is missing and have never been sure of my type. I've found that when you think you are a certain type and deep down you aren't sure you end up acting more like the type to encourage yourself to believe it. 
In my case, I'm kind of sure I have Ne and Ti but not 100%. I went from INTJ to INTP to ENFP to ENTP over months.


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

I think if you really try to be open and honest it's easier to find your true self especially if you've been restricted by things like illness whether physical or mental for a really long time you've forgotten who you are and everything that goes with it. I t feels more rewarding too when you know you're being as honest as possible no matter how it clashes with what you've come to "know".


----------



## dude10000 (Jan 24, 2010)

> What happens if you try to be another type?


Hilarity ensues. I thought I was an INTJ for a good amount of time, like a lion-cub living with a flock of sheep. I added extra chaos points to my life score by inadvertently giving aspiring MBTI enthusiasts the wrong impression of my professed type.


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

But yours are so similar, as is the question of my 2 possibilities. Are INTJ and ENTJ so different there would be an obvious personality change?


----------



## dude10000 (Jan 24, 2010)

> Are INTJ and ENTJ so different there would be an obvious personality change?


The letters are merely pixels on screen, or patches of black ink on paper. They don't change the conditions in our environment, our personal history, or what we enjoy doing. MBTI can't deliver a "Real Me" because there is no such thing as a "Real Me" -- it is a ghost, a metaphysical fiction.

MBTI is also one of those weird circumstances where confirmation bias can help eliminate bias. Instead of over-thinking things, picking the description we like the best can eliminate mistakes. It helps when type descriptions are written by their own type.


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

So my "like" of ESFP over ISFP would be one consideration as to confirm which it is? I don't dislike ISFP I just have a gut feeling it's the one that isn't right because the similarities are too many. The dominant function certainty for me is what I tend to also believe because in my gut I'm "sure" which came first. Other people's opinions seem to be divided so placing a lot of importance in that is the only thing creating doubt.


----------



## penchant (Sep 20, 2010)

Revy2Hand said:


> I'm wondering if that's why when (I think I'm using Fe) that I find it exhausting after a while and intravert.


Shouldn't using out of type functions result in going back to you dominant primarily? (Se) Assuming the stress situation is dissolved of course.


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

penchant said:


> Shouldn't using out of type functions result in going back to you dominant primarily? (Se) Assuming the stress situation is dissolved of course.


I have no clue.  

On Fi: I just know at the moment things that used to excite me and stimulate my brain like when I was forming my beliefs based on watching or reading extreme opposite views can get exhausting if I'm driven over the edge by my perception of their extreme wrongness, which I'm not sure is normal either. Either that or I've exhausted my ability to do so and tolerate the extreme feelings and the racing thoughts, or I'm done and just need to fine tune it. 

On Fe: I'd also imagine thinking too much of pleasing others can be exhausting for anyone?


----------



## Eudaimonia (Sep 24, 2013)

ephemereality said:


> I'm sorry but what? It seems like you just got the order very... wrong. Very.


Case in point. :wink: Thank you for that.


----------



## Potne Theron (Nov 10, 2013)

arkigos said:


> On the point of 'objective conceptualization' I mean intuition. By intuition I mean the perception of the intangible essence or nature of a thing. Ne types do this inductively and objectively
> […].Instead, I'd like to see them focus on the intangible or conceptual half of any given thing more than they focus on the tangible or real half of any given thing - and it mean this moment to moment, not as an overarching statement and then moment to moment they don't. Someone typed as an INFP who converses mainly about STUFF or 'random' stuff or whatever.... it doesn't matter... to me is not showing Ne, clever or not.


and



arkigos said:


> 'Peace' is an N word, but even then there is a tangible rendering that it represents. N cognition perceives peace in concept, S cognition perceives peace in actualities (even potential actualities). When the former is most prevalent, N cognition is being more dominantly used... when the latter, S.


This is quite a restrained definition of Intuition and most importantly its translation, Ti oriented, I should say ;-)
Look at Jung’s definition of intuition:

Jung quote (Psychological Types, p496):



> The primary function of intuition is to transmit mere images, or perceptions of relations and conditions, which could be gained by the other functions, either not at all, or only by roundabout ways. Such images have the value of definite discernments, and have a decisive bearing upon action, whenever intuition is given the chief weight; in which case, psychic adaptation is based almost exclusively upon intuition.


Products of intuition may be intangible but they are not necessarily expressed through conceptual ideas. They may simply be images and they are often explained through sensation and tangible products, as he later writes:



> But since intuition, in the extraverted attitude, has a prevailingly objective orientation, it actually comes very near to sensation; indeed, the expectant attitude towards outer objects may, with almost equal probability, avail itself of sensation.


I know you watered down later you first claim, but I think it is useful to emphasize that point. 



arkigos said:


> I focused on the high level, generalized/abstracted, aspect of it. That is N. Specifically. That I did it with concise logic indicates T preference... but the arena in which that logic operated shows a preference for N.


Actually, you used T to define N, while others may use S or F to define N. There is no specific superiority to use T over F or S to do so and then say: “Look! I can express the “conceptual half” of N, therefore I am more entitled to decide who is showing Ne and who is not.” 

N brings about images that can be translated into different forms, all of them somehow limited, even the “conceptual” ones. In particular, the deeper the image, the more difficult it is (i.e. related or not to archetypal content). I think this your personal bias: believing your conceptual Ti grasp of N is the most relevant way of approaching N in its purest form. Furthermore, you focus on the highest form intuitive products can take (i.e. archetypal content), while intuition can bring about simple contents, not archetypal oriented. Is it not noble enough for you to use our intuition for casual circumstances?



arkigos said:


> There is a lot more involved in typing someone INFP specifically, but this is certainly a prerequisite.


Pardon me, but I have to say it one more time: this looks like the “T feeling superior bias” to me (if I have to name it) I talked above ;-) No bad feeling intended, I just note it


----------



## Potne Theron (Nov 10, 2013)

@spectralsparrow 
I will answer your post tomorrow, I am busy right now and I cannot edit my post for some reason...
Thank you


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

@_Paralax2000_ - I don't think that NFP is so concerned with making abstract conciseness and configuration, sure, and that would certainly be my bias... but while that certain was a big factor in the way I come across, I don't think that affects the point.

Perhaps the problem is with the term 'concept', which I have gotten pushback on before, but haven't found a better term. To some, this implies a thoroughly parsed logical framing, ready for publishing as a 'theory' like the Theory of Relativity.

That isn't what I mean. I mean "an abstract idea; a general notion", which is the definition of concept... but, more than that I mean to make clear that N deals with the essence/nature/intangible of anything. The concept of it. Detached from the reality of it, the actualities of it. 

I mean specifically that Ne deals not with the dove, but the concepts it evokes. An NTP might take this and systemize it or categorize it, where an NFP might take this and make a parable out of it. The NTP focusing on the technical specifics, the NFP focusing on the moral specifics. 

I'll give two examples. Real examples, actually. One from an ENFP and another from an INFP. Both dealing with a dead animal. 

An ENFP is pulled along by her children to their back door to see a dead mouse. It reminded her of how cats kill mice and leave them on doorsteps. Immediately this formed into a moral parable. Of a moral debate between a cat and a mouse. The cat justifying its actions because the mouse was a thief, a freeloader, a stranger. The narrator notes that the cat enjoys the act of killing the mouse, and the mouse rebukes the cat, calling it a hypocrite who gets fat freeloading off humans, who should be disgusted with its place... and that it thinks itself entrusted with the lives of the human children, but holds not their fate, but the fate of the mouse's own children, in its grasp. The cat cuts the mouse off by killing it. Taking it back as a toy and a trophy.. making the mother recoil in disgust but praise the cat for doing its duty. For protecting those in its charge. 

That isn't Ti. That is Ne/Fi/Te. It is also focus on the intangible aspect of the situation, devoid of the actualities. It is oriented to the concepts involved. The symbolism. 

An INFP comes home from college for Christmas and unlocks his basement room, which has been in stasis since he left. He turns on the light and is looking around. He notices a dead cat in the window well - frozen. He'd been asking where the cat was, and no one knew. He ruminates on this for a time, and writes this (actually a song):


* *




Winter fades to warmer days
and it thaws our recollection.
First it tingles, then it aches
from the likes there's no protection.
Oh oooh, no protection.


For the time is drawing nigh
that you will lose those pretty eyes
So, if seeing is believing
what are lies?


There she lay, her feline frame
bids me pause for some reflection.
Is this grave of concrete gray
the extent of her redemption?
Oh oooh, her redemption.


So, will you hitch a ride
on a chariot of fire?
Or will they lay you down
on an ocean swell.
Will they lift you up
high above the spires?
Or will you sleep alone
like the cat in the bottom of my window well.


Well, truth is true and liars lie,
but hope is different altogether.
Dreamers swoon, and lovers sigh,
but it pains you to know better.
Oh ohhh, you know better. 


For the time is drawing nigh
that you will lose those pretty eyes
So, if seeing is believing
what are lies?




This is specifically dealing with concepts involved in, but detached from, the event that inspired them. Actualities are pushed aside as the conceptual aspect comes into view and acts as a sandbox for moral rumination.

Ne/Fi. 

The commonality here is detachment from actualities, from details, from 'ground level' reality and a focus on the symbols/concepts/archetypes involved. Ni does this subjectively and more abstractly... Ne does this objectively and more concretely. In both cases, it is purely conceptual.


----------



## Potne Theron (Nov 10, 2013)

@spectralsparrow

-Wow! It is impressive to read a portrayal of one’s inner life so close to mine. I often use the word layers as well, because it is the way I experience myself relationships. I feel my emotional memories and the emotional subtext play such an important role in my interaction with others. Since my childhood, I have learnt how to read moods, emotional states, ulterior motive, noticing non verbal cues, because I have always put a great deal of attention into my emotional states. Probably because I have always desperately tried to put some order and harmony into my inner life, balancing my emotional states with let’s say, my superego for instance. So, my relationships with people are always very intense and somehow emotional as I connect on different layers. Furthermore, I introject a lot, which means I absorb people, situations and other’s mood to understand them from a subjective perspective or deal with a situation later to sort out a problem for instance. This is a subconscious process most of the time and it is a natural defense mechanism for 4s, and probably Fi dom in general. As I grew older, I started to use this mechanism as a tool and not the other way round, meaning I do not postpone situations anymore and I am quite reactive actually. 

-By “emotional validation”, I mean approval or acceptance by others of my identity conveyed by emotional expression, values display and intellectual evaluations. When I am into this “emotional validation” mode, consciousness is identified to ego and whatever the sophistication of my thoughts and feelings, what I really mean and truly need at that moment is approval and validation of my ego through this cognitive function to which this ego has strong ties. Most of the time, nitpicking (as @arkigos puts it) is just one of the many outer expression of this basic need. When consciousness shifts from ego, the need for validation vanishes for some time and I can see the indigence of the ego requirements. From this perspective, I think my relationship to Fi is quite similar to others with Ti. Identification to values, feelings and moods here and identification to train of thoughts and logic, there. 

@arkigos:

I was just emphasizing the fact that freeing consciousness (at least momentarily) from the object (the “conceptualization process” as you put it) will lead to a (no less important) translation process (through T, F, S or N incarnated) in order for the product to be somehow understandable in its outer expression. And btw, I thought indeed you were restricting yourself to a T translation process. 
Thus, it seemed to me quite artificial to separate (or attempt to do so) the process from its expression: what you called the S-N scale. Of course the process itself will have to repress S to proceed, but once the N-product is here, taking the appearance of an image for instance, there is no reason to repress S to manifest it in this world. T, F or S can therefore give flesh to this intuition. In some way, the translation product is a signpost to “something deeper” (a “concept” for a lack of a better word). 

As what you will ever get from people is the product of this translation process, you will always have - granted more or less abstract- a representation of this image through those cognitive process: poetry, dance, scientific theory, paintings or just body or sensation representations (of a hunch), basic verbal output, or whatever. It all may point out to the same deep -or shallow- reality and the individuals who produced them are no more or less N users than the others. Some may have developed their practice of N, through a conscious and thorough company; they may have improved and deepen both their ability to repress S, differentiate consciousness from N/S and develop their ability to translate it into something which can be conveyed in this world, but they are all N users.


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

From Carl Jung himself:



> The fact that, in spite of the greatest possible similarity of external conditions, one child will assume this type while another that, must, of course, in the last resort he ascribed to individual disposition. Naturally in saying this I only refer to those cases which occur under normal conditions. Under abnormal conditions, i.e. when there is an extreme and, therefore, abnormal attitude in the mother, the children can also be coerced into a relatively similar attitude; but this entails a violation of their individual disposition, which quite possibly would have assumed another type if no abnormal and disturbing external influence had intervened. As a rule, whenever such a falsification of type takes place as a result of external [p. 416] influence, the individual becomes neurotic later, and a cur can successfully be sought only in a development of that attitude which corresponds with the individual's natural way.


 Only the attitude (E/I) is subject to violation until a person develops function-attitude to where it is considered most differentiated (or dominant). Otherwise, even as an INFP you are capable of using your Fi, Ne, Si and Te to adapt to varied circumstances. Type is not rigid, it's very fluid. Many go a life time without determining a particular dominant function, ergo not having a particular type, which causes mistyping no matter how hard you try.


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

Paralax2000 said:


> I was just emphasizing the fact that freeing consciousness (at least momentarily) from the object (the “conceptualization process” as you put it) will lead to a (no less important) translation process (through T, F, S or N incarnated) in order for the product to be somehow understandable in its outer expression. And btw, I thought indeed you were restricting yourself to a T translation process.
> Thus, it seemed to me quite artificial to separate (or attempt to do so) the process from its expression: what you called the S-N scale. Of course the process itself will have to repress S to proceed, but once the N-product is here, taking the appearance of an image for instance, there is no reason to repress S to manifest it in this world. T, F or S can therefore give flesh to this intuition. In some way, the translation product is a signpost to “something deeper” (a “concept” for a lack of a better word).
> 
> As what you will ever get from people is the product of this translation process, you will always have - granted more or less abstract- a representation of this image through those cognitive process: poetry, dance, scientific theory, paintings or just body or sensation representations (of a hunch), basic verbal output, or whatever. It all may point out to the same deep -or shallow- reality and the individuals who produced them are no more or less N users than the others. Some may have developed their practice of N, through a conscious and thorough company; they may have improved and deepen both their ability to repress S, differentiate consciousness from N/S and develop their ability to translate it into something which can be conveyed in this world, but they are all N users.


Ne users xNTP and xNFP are specifically inclined to use Ne consciously and extravertedly. Ne users talk in concepts, seek to share concepts, are caught up in concepts primarily. Period. 

Yes, of course intuition is made manifest in sensory ways, but this not intuition. Ne is pure concept. Everything that exists is both a physical thing, with physical potential and destiny... and a conceptual thing, with conceptual potential and destiny. S perceives the former, N perceives the latter. Ne does this objectively and inductively. It is concerned not just primarily with this, but utterly with this. 

Any change to this must involve other functions.. or other aspects of the mind. Ne, defined purely and correctly, is conceptual and specifically devoid from the physical aspects of any thing.

For what it is worth, I have never seen Ne focus on an image as a manifestation of concept, at least not longer than in passing. I would expect that such an emphasis on a physical rendering would indicate a preference or a reliance on the sensory over intuition. 

Ne being conscious and mature, doesn't require such renderings, itself. When they do appear, they are brought by Sensory cognition. Ne being the more conscious 'go to', the conceptual aspect will show more strongly than the sensory... the ideas involved will be very prevalent, often at the expense of direct application or content.

The middle ground is found in the fantasy genre, because it seems that N (especially Ne) types are able to engage the sensory aspect so long as it is unbound from reality - providing a sensory sandbox to explore the rendering of concepts, and their exploration. 

The story is fundamentally less about the events than the ideas (concepts) those events portray. I think that an Ne type would have as much difficulty writing a story inside a plausible rendering of reality (without plagiarizing history) as an S type would have of not doing this on some level. I wonder if there are exceptions to this and to what extent.


----------



## Eudaimonia (Sep 24, 2013)

arkigos said:


> Ne users xNTP and xNFP are specifically inclined to use Ne consciously and extravertedly. Ne users talk in concepts, seek to share concepts, are caught up in concepts primarily. Period.
> 
> Yes, of course intuition is made manifest in sensory ways, but this not intuition. Ne is pure concept. Everything that exists is both a physical thing, with physical potential and destiny... and a conceptual thing, with conceptual potential and destiny. S perceives the former, N perceives the latter. Ne does this objectively and inductively. It is concerned not just primarily with this, but utterly with this.
> 
> ...


When you mention Ne being inductive, it seems to me that I think of Ti as inductive and this causes me to start to question when am I using Ti or Ni... (if I'm correct that I'm using those functions). But if you are right, then the Ti must be the manic assembler while Ne strews empirical observations? Somehow now it seems obvious, but I think I have to reassess Ti because if Ni alloys other functions whether Te or Fe or Ti to deductive reasoning then where do I get my deconstructive sense to leave questions open to multiple possible conclusions? Ok, well, I suppose Ni is the spontaneous hypothesis generator which seems accurate, but at the same time it seems that Ni lends itself to tying as many loose ends together to reach a tighter conceptual interpretation. So really Ti is deductive? Together Ne and Ti make... frenemies? Ni and Te make an indestructible force of linear thought. Ni and Ti together make... Fe the bedwetter?

Haha... I need to get some sleep.


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

Eudaimonia said:


> When you mention Ne being inductive, it seems to me that I think of Ti as inductive and this causes me to start to question when am I using Ti or Ni... (if I'm correct that I'm using those functions). But if you are right, then the Ti must be the manic assembler while Ne strews empirical observations? Somehow now it seems obvious, but I think I have to reassess Ti because if Ni alloys other functions whether Te or Fe or Ti to deductive reasoning then where do I get my deconstructive sense to leave questions open to multiple possible conclusions? Ok, well, I suppose Ni is the spontaneous hypothesis generator which seems accurate, but at the same time it seems that Ni lends itself to tying as many loose ends together to reach a tighter conceptual interpretation. So really Ti is deductive? Together Ne and Ti make... frenemies? Ni and Te make an indestructible force of linear thought. Ni and Ti together make... Fe the bedwetter?
> 
> Haha... I need to get some sleep.


Interesting point... and let me put it this way.

There is something that I don't usually mention, and should. It tends to be that extraverted functions are the quicker decision-makers / perceivers. That is because they are not antagonistic to face-value and because they need, in a sense, to supply the introverted functions with something to parse down. Te will quickly assess 'the facts', Fe will quickly assess an objective valuation, Se will quickly assess potential in actuals, Ne will quickly assess potential in essentials. 

Introverted functions can perceive and judge in this from-the-hip fashion as well, but are antagonistic to it. 

Uhm, perhaps it is better stated this way: Ni and Ne do the same thing, but Ni ties it to the ego. Ni seeks for an absolute / absolute vision and is okay with it being subjective. However, Ni and Ne can both see all conceptual angles. The only difference is that Ni seeks for an ultimate one, while Ne is not meant to. 

So, seeing all potential conclusions is either Se (potential in actuals) or Ni (seeing all conceptual angles but distilling into a subjective ideal). 

Depends on if those conclusions deal with reality or 'concept'. 

Ni is only perception. It is divested entirely from rational thought. It doesn't do anything except for perceive the nature of things, the intangible aspects, and tends to remain antagonistic until it finds those perceptions reduced to one.


----------



## Potne Theron (Nov 10, 2013)

arkigos said:


> For what it is worth, I have never seen Ne focus on an image as a manifestation of concept, at least not longer than in passing. I would expect that such an emphasis on a physical rendering would indicate a preference or a reliance on the sensory over intuition.


It reminds me of Jung and Philemon, the archetypal character he considered his guru and with whom he walked in the garden of his *conscious*, lucid dreams. Granted, such events are more specifically attached to introverted intuition, but they are, nevertheless, intuition events and images are often attached to their manifestation. Anyway, that was a digression. On the substance itself, who can seriously say one is dealing with “pure concepts”, as you put it? To me, this is complete illusion and infatuation: Ti mistaking thought products, abstract thoughts for archetypes themselves, beyond our human reach. Humans will never be able to truly comprehend them, unless the conscious part of us ascends towards the unthinkable vibrations of those archetypes, far beyond the human condition. As I analyze it, you may well be, as a Ti user, possessed by an inner abstract vision you are eager to prove and you mix up your thought products (about intuition) with this idealized vision of an archetype or I should say, “what lies beneath an object”. In your conceptual framework, abstract thoughts seem to be the ultimate reality. That is an illusion. 

I reiterate that to me, it is artificial to separate the intuition process from its product, which is in my mind, *both the inner expression of it *(the Philemon character for instance, but it does not require to be as specific and image oriented)* and its outer expression* (what you will be able to convey to others). 

Basically, I think intuition is both a process and an (inner and outer) product and that they cannot be dissociated, while you seem to see intuition as the concept of intuition, a disincarnated and idealized process that would deal with a world beyond human scope; in other words, you are mistaking intuition for a (Ti oriented) intellectual product, while I try to stick objectively to what we know of it, from a Te perspective led by Fi evaluations (as far as I am aware of it).

I should add that for me, the actual, incarnated intuition process could be analyzed as an impetus to connect various materials of a thought, feeling and sensory nature –originating from the subconscious (personal unconscious) and the collective unconscious- and make meaning out of them. We talked earlier about “layers”, I think it is the keyword to truly understand intuition. 

Anyway, thanks for this discussion and your contributions, which I find highly stimulating and valuable.


----------



## Eudaimonia (Sep 24, 2013)

arkigos said:


> So, seeing all potential conclusions is either Se (potential in actuals) or *Ni (seeing all conceptual angles but distilling into a subjective ideal).
> *
> Depends on if those conclusions deal with reality or 'concept'.
> 
> Ni is only perception. It is divested entirely from rational thought. It doesn't do anything except for perceive the nature of things, the intangible aspects, and tends to remain antagonistic until it finds those perceptions reduced to one.


Thank you for taking the time. That was very helpful. I particularly like how you describe Ni's additional process as distillation of concepts into a subjective ideal.

Excuse me for parsing, but I find some of your wording a little curious; e.g. Ni usurping 100% from rational thought. It makes sense, but I end up doing a double take. Obviously, I'm not one to judge.

On the subject of "physical rendering" or images used to communicate abstract ideas, the way I see it imo is the purview of philosophical naturalism which predominates how our society favours to explain concepts in terms of physical elements and processes such as physics and common examples observed in nature to establish a clear understanding in order to solidify an abstract thought. Being too abstract can blur distinctions and misconstrue even though the alternative may seem mundane and too simplistic to the more practiced metaphysician.

Which I guess thinking on it, it isn't only the Greek influence on the Western proclivity for this type of communication, but if you look at Eastern explanations to the integral balance of Yin and Yang and other philosophies about how the wheel of life, death and meaning behind the Universe work together and worldwide paralleling of spiritual and religious philosophies to that of the material world even if it speaks of the tangible in terms of being an illusion, one can hardly escape using physical examples from observations in the physical world.

If you are more comfortable on a higher cerebral stratum, then I'm not trying to knock you down by any means, but according to what you are saying if I am to compare myself to your standard of how an Intuitive should communicate and think, then I must be a Sensor because much of my thoughts come to me in the form of images.


----------



## Glenda Gnome Starr (May 12, 2011)

Hi and welcome to the forum, @Babymetal. I'm an esfp and my cat is the boss (extj), lol. Take a look at the SP forums and you'll find more of us... with dogs and cats, too!:crazy:



Babymetal said:


> I'm really new to this forum or any personality type forum but just from looking around it seems like everyone and their dog here is an INxx. What's up with that? :laughing:


----------



## BABYMETAL (Apr 4, 2014)

walking tourist said:


> Hi and welcome to the forum, @Babymetal. I'm an esfp and my cat is the boss (extj), lol. Take a look at the SP forums and you'll find more of us... with dogs and cats, too!:crazy:


Thanks! I have a cat too. Now how do I go about typing him? :laughing:


----------



## Glenda Gnome Starr (May 12, 2011)

I typed the cat, based on observation. She meows incessantly and she pushes me until I get off the seat and let her have it. She climbs up the back of my chair or my mom's chair in the dining room and then meows loudly until she gets the attention that she wants. She is definitely the Boss of the House. roud:



Babymetal said:


> Thanks! I have a cat too. Now how do I go about typing him? :laughing:


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

Eudaimonia said:


> Thank you for taking the time. That was very helpful. I particularly like how you describe Ni's additional process as distillation of concepts into a subjective ideal.
> 
> Excuse me for parsing, but I find some of your wording a little curious; e.g. Ni usurping 100% from rational thought. It makes sense, but I end up doing a double take. Obviously, I'm not one to judge.
> 
> ...


I very recently talked about, though apparently not on this thread, how odd I find it that Ni types (especially Ni-doms) so often describe envisioning things in the form of images... I often hear them associate things with colors, or even with textures. I feel kinda dumb that I didn't trigger that association. I didn't understand the context of what was being said.

An INFJ once said to me that he envisioned something as red and green gas. An ENFP and I did the classic... slowly look at each other 'share a glance' thing. "Okay, wait, WHAT?"

I cannot begin to comprehend this, but I have seen it - mostly from INFJs - but also at least one strong Ni/Fi -esque INTJ. Colors and lights. Strong aesthetic and wildly subjective symbolic associations. 

I always forget that Ni does this. I suppose that Ne can do this as well, but the way that you describe it is something I have only ever encountered from Ni-doms. Importantly, I have specifically never seen this in an Ne and they've all found it peculiar. 

That one actually deserves a thread. So, yeah, I take it back. I so easily forget how much Ni works in images. However, I do think that orienting symbolism to objects would indeed hint me towards a sensory typing... but I think I mean something different... and wasn't clear in that. I meant that if someone used an image or a symbol as a crutch or a shortcut, I'd assume that perhaps S cognition was a bigger thing. 

I mean to say that the person should be able to engage consciously and maturely and dynamically with the actual intangible conceptual aspect of the symbol... anything beyond that was me not speaking correctly.


----------



## Eudaimonia (Sep 24, 2013)

arkigos said:


> I very recently talked about, though apparently not on this thread, how odd I find it that Ni types (especially Ni-doms) so often describe envisioning things in the form of images... I often hear them associate things with colors, or even with textures. I feel kinda dumb that I didn't trigger that association. I didn't understand the context of what was being said.
> 
> An INFJ once said to me that he envisioned something as red and green gas. An ENFP and I did the classic... slowly look at each other 'share a glance' thing. "Okay, wait, WHAT?"
> 
> ...


I can only guess you are talking about @_ephemereality_ when you mentioned a Ni/Fi INTJ with strong subjective symbolic images... yes, highly aesthetic. I've noticed that about him. He probably wants to ring my neck, so I guess I shouldn't bring him up. Haha.

These last couple of days I've learned a lot about Ne and Ni. I appreciate your insights. I hope you don't think you rustled my jimmies because you didn't.

Yes, it is easy for me to let my mind flow into this dreamlike world especially when someone is talking to me and create fantastical images out of what they are saying in order to understand what they are feeling more fully. A bit like building a treehouse from the seed up and watch it grow in time lapse mode where contained within are the important details of the protagonist's life. It's an immediate unforced construction where the branches touch in proximity to their episodic experiences then almost automatically the image creates firmer more vivid interconnections which weren't as obvious before... and then an epiphany can ensue... and often does.

Red and green gas reminds me of Ireland and if you combine the two it turns back into the neutral (unpolitical) gold colour again. Ok, haha, he was talking about foggy gas not liquid petrol of course. Is that a bit like auras like what INFJ stereotypically see I wonder? I've not seen auras personally.

There have been times when I was under a lot of stress or in extreme pain and I can see forests or landscapes inside the building as if I'm surrounded by rainforest-like verdure . But, that is very rare.

Did we just derail this thread royally?

Talk about starting a thread on the subject, you should because I get a little too shy when it comes to creating threads and I think that would be very interesting.

Umm... only if you want to. Not meant to sound pushy.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Eudaimonia said:


> I can only guess you are talking about @_ephemereality_ when you mentioned a Ni/Fi INTJ with strong subjective symbolic images... yes, highly aesthetic. I've noticed that about him. He probably wants to ring my neck, so I guess I shouldn't bring him up. Haha.
> 
> These last couple of days I've learned a lot about Ne and Ni. I appreciate your insights. I hope you don't think you rustled my jimmies because you didn't.
> 
> ...


After reading that passage I thought he was too. I have yet to encounter another intj on this site that does operate like this to the degree that I do it. In fact most of them don't seem to know what I'm talking about. I am not sure what to attribute to that exactly and why I would do it considering my age. I would argue its a natural disposition. I remember I wrote a poem, my first, at the age of 8 about how roses represented love and specifically my own feelings about my life and not a single one in my family understood what I was trying to tell them. One could argue that since I cultivated a sense of aesthetic early that would be the difference but eh. I do notice the difference in the arts though. I am a big fan of this band called swallow the sun and they have lyrics similar to mine in terms of symbolism and how it's expressed. At some point it's difficult to discern between t and f in the sense that I think too much t may result in a somewhat more detached impression. I have read art written by intjs with more te and the art comes across as more mechanical but I digress. 

I also get such impressions of people which i suppose is something more typical for infjs too. Like you remind me of a white lily for example. Arkigos is like a rock but more like a potato being easy to cut. Hedgehog comes to mind, looking coarse on the outside but soft and fluffy on the inside with a tendency to curl up when he doesn't like it anymore but yet longs for that connection. 

Ahem yes derails. I can't do this on everyone though. Depends on how strong an impression they leave behind. Some people are really soulless and empty so you don't get any reading at all concerning their inner character.


----------

