# PersonalityCafe, set me at ease.



## Efthalia (Jul 18, 2010)

Even though in the end, it really doesn’t matter much, I really would like to know, and I’d like to have this dandy to refer back. So, here I go:

- I am horribly indecisive.
- I have imaginary conversations and imaginary “friends”. I don’t remember having imaginary friends when I was little, but I certainly have some now.
- My room is most often times a mess.
- I naturally keep to myself, but I have a strong need for company.
- I’m still a bit timid when it comes to meeting new people.
- Despite the above, sometimes I think I can spend all my time alone and be content.
- I like solving my own problems, especially if it’s emotional.
- I love physics.
- I hate seeing ugly things and ugly designs. Even if something works, I hate seeing things that seem unattractive to me. It doesn’t have to be decorative, but it has to look right.
- I’m admittedly a last minute kind of person.
- When talking about beliefs, it’s really quite hard to offend me.
- Grammar and spelling freak.
- An epiphany or a good idea can make me more hyper than any amount of caffeine and sugar.
- I’m really moody. The subtlest things can sometimes trigger my emotions.
- When it comes to school and work, I actually do want and need structure. 
- Most of the time, I’m a perfectionist.
- I’m religious and very Catholic.
- When I get upset, I get really upset, and I tend to bring back grudges and things in the past that really have little to do with what caused me to be upset in the first place.
- I think that humans tend to be stupid and uncaring, and the world is imperfect. World peace? Not anytime soon. Despite all that, I believe in good in everybody, and that there is good, beauty, and truth in the world.
- I tend to be apathetic to some things.
- I’m awfully pessimistic about the whole falling in love thing. I think most of it is just hormones.
- I stay away from conflicts, but I sometimes enjoy a good debate.
- As much as I can’t help but try to help when people complain about their problems, many times I just wish they’d get over it.
- I like math and science. I’m not the best at them, but I believe I’m better than the average person, and I absolutely love how in both subjects, things are logical and make sense.
- I get a lot of obsessions, but they change really quickly.
- I am a bit obsessed with getting things right, whether it’s facts, grammar, spelling, science, or theology.
- I can convince myself to go through a lot of things by calling myself stupid for being upset.

If you need to ask more, go ahead. I express my gratitude in advance that you even read some or all of this.


----------



## Nasmoe (Nov 11, 2009)

Yeah, you still seem like an INFP to me.


----------



## Edmond Zedo (Jul 22, 2010)

Probably INFJ.


----------



## Efthalia (Jul 18, 2010)

Edmond Zedo said:


> Probably INFJ.


We have dissent!

Anyway, can I have some reasons?


----------



## Edmond Zedo (Jul 22, 2010)

Efthalia said:


> We have dissent!
> 
> Anyway, can I have some reasons?


Behavioral and physical similarity with INFJs.

Compare yourself with these sets...

INFJs: Leslie Feist, Natalie Portman, Imogen Heap, Jennifer Connelly, Katie Holmes

INFPs: Karen O (Yeah Yeah Yeahs), J.K. Rowling, Melissa Auf Der Mar, Uma Thurman, Sarah McLachlan


----------



## Efthalia (Jul 18, 2010)

Uhh, the only people I recognize from there are J.K. Rowling and Uma Thurman. And, I don't know anything about them, except that Rowling wrote the Harry Potter Series.


----------



## Vaka (Feb 26, 2010)

I'd actually say INFJ also. I find that a lot of INFJs have some of those classic P characteristics.

INFJs have Introverted Intuition and Extroverted Feeling whereas INFPs have Introverted Feeling and Extroverted Intuition. You can read about all of those functions here: Understanding the Eight Jungian Cognitive Processes / Eight Functions Attitudes


----------



## Edmond Zedo (Jul 22, 2010)

Efthalia said:


> Uhh, the only people I recognize from there are J.K. Rowling and Uma Thurman. And, I don't know anything about them, except that Rowling wrote the Harry Potter Series.


Google is your best friend! Mine, anyway.


----------



## Efthalia (Jul 18, 2010)

Edmond Zedo said:


> Google is your best friend! Mine, anyway.


XD!

Trying. But sometimes these things are just all grey to me.


----------



## Efthalia (Jul 18, 2010)

Congratulations, guys. You have officially turned my head, and now I can't decide...I guess I brought this to myself. XD


----------



## NeedsNewNameNow (Dec 1, 2009)

Why are you questioning your INFPness?

Your list screams all P and no J. Most people usually post a few J traits to make it a hard decision :tongue:


----------



## Efthalia (Jul 18, 2010)

unleashthehounds said:


> Why are you questioning your INFPness?
> 
> Your list screams all P and no J. Most people usually post a few J traits to make it a hard decision :tongue:



I don't know...Probably because two people have brought it up, and I need to figure out why. 

On one hand, I feel it's sort of silly, because I've never tested INFJ. It's always been INFP, and, once upon a time, INTP. On the other hand, I've never looked into INFJs completely. I've been fascinated by all introverted iNtuitives, but I've never fully looked into INFJs. It feels like the search is not quite yet over, especially since, after looking into the site INFJ vs INFP, I can kind of see myself as INFJ...But then again, I have no idea what INFJs are supposed to be like, how they think, and all that.


----------



## Vaka (Feb 26, 2010)

Many INFJs tend to get P on MBTI tests. You'd be surprised. I can name two people on this site who have thought they were INFPs. Allegorist and Midnight Runner...
The reason why I suggested it is because there was nothing that really screamed Fi-Ne in there. But it seems like you could have some T in you which would be less likely to be found in an INFP since INFPs are feeling-types. Furthermore, it seems like you could use a little bit of Ti, but it doesn't seem like you're an INTP. INFJs are Ni-Fe-Ti-Se.


----------



## Efthalia (Jul 18, 2010)

Oh, and I appreciate the suggestion, Nyx. I've been looking into it. My current problem is telling the functions apart. Both Fi and Ni seem really mysterious when defined. I see the words, and I understand the words, but I can't understand what the words are saying.


----------



## NeedsNewNameNow (Dec 1, 2009)

Efthalia said:


> I don't know...Probably because two people have brought it up, and I need to figure out why.
> 
> On one hand, I feel it's sort of silly, because I've never tested INFJ. It's always been INFP, and, once upon a time, INTP. On the other hand, I've never looked into INFJs completely. I've been fascinated by all introverted iNtuitives, but I've never fully looked into INFJs. It feels like the search is not quite yet over, especially since, after looking into the site INFJ vs INFP, I can kind of see myself as INFJ...But then again, I have no idea what INFJs are supposed to be like, how they think, and all that.


I've found most INFJ descriptions to be very vague. It's hard to read them and get a feel for that type that distinguishes them from INFP. It doesn't help that I don't know any confirmed ones.

All the IN types have alot in common. 



> Oh, and I appreciate the suggestion, Nyx. I've been looking into it. My current problem is telling the functions apart. Both Fi and Ni seem really mysterious when defined. I see the words, and I understand the words, but I can't understand what the words are saying.


This is true.. I've found SimulatedWorld's posts to be very helpful in this regard. He can take a block of what somebody has written and say "this is a Te argument" or "This is Fi" at work, and that has illustrated the functions better for me than the type descriptions.

But just some things from your description that stood out:

_I get a lot of obsessions, but they change really quickly_. (Ne)
_I absolutely love how in both subjects, things are logical and make sense._ I might be overreading here, but loving how things are logical seems like your F over powers your T
_When it comes to school and work, I actually do want and need structure._ But sounds like you don't naturally have it? (P)
_An epiphany or a good idea can make me more hyper than any amount of caffeine and sugar_. - could be Ne
_When talking about beliefs, it’s really quite hard to offend me._ - this is one of the few statements that says not INFP
_I like solving my own problems, especially if it’s emotional_. - I think INTs are really bad at solving their own emotional problems.


----------



## Efthalia (Jul 18, 2010)

unleashthehounds said:


> This is true.. I've found SimulatedWorld's posts to be very helpful in this regard. He can take a block of what somebody has written and say "this is a Te argument" or "This is Fi" at work, and that has illustrated the functions better for me than the type descriptions.
> 
> But just some things from your description that stood out:
> 
> ...


I wish I could do that, but the cognitive functions are still vague to me. 

And yeah, I have no current delusions of thinking that I'm INTx. It's not the thinking that energizes me, but the puzzle pieces fitting in, facts connecting, things suddenly making sense. And for the structure thing, I have to say I get into routines. I like not thinking about routine things. I'm too indecisive, so for anything to get done, I need things decided for me, or I'll get absolutely nowhere. 

As for the beliefs thing. I don't know. I think I'm more offended when somebody else gets offended by my idea. (It's happened once before, and it really annoyed me). I like hearing people's ideas. It makes me feel like I'm getting to know them so being able to see the different perspectives is really interesting for me, even if the back of my mind is saying, "I still think you're wrong, but sure, if that's what you believe." I also like discussing my own ideas so I think it's only fair that I hear people's input about it and their own ideas.


----------



## NeedsNewNameNow (Dec 1, 2009)

Efthalia said:


> And yeah, I have no current delusions of thinking that I'm INTx. It's not the thinking that energizes me, but the puzzle pieces fitting in, facts connecting, things suddenly making sense.


This sounds more like Te to me. Ti is not so linear. It can make due with missing pieces figuring they'll just be found later.

So I still think you're INFP


----------



## Wanderling (Dec 27, 2009)

I don't know... for some things you seem to be an INFJ, for others more of an INFP. How much did you score on the J/P spectrum?

But in any case remember that MBTI is just an approximative framework, it can't enclose (or disclose) who you really are. Just read the descriptions of both types, and you'll see what seems to resemble you the most.


----------



## Efthalia (Jul 18, 2010)

GroovyShamrock said:


> I don't know... for some things you seem to be an INFJ, for others more of an INFP. How much did you score on the J/P spectrum?
> 
> But in any case remember that MBTI is just an approximative framework, it can't enclose (or disclose) who you really are. Just read the descriptions of both types, and you'll see what seems to resemble you the most.


I know it doesn't, but I'd really still like to know. And by now, the type descriptions are so vague that I can't tell.

I took MBTI for college and the clarity for the preferences, on a scale of 0-30, where 30 is the clearest is

Introversion: 25
iNtuition: 26
Feeling: 4
Perceiving: 22


----------



## Wanderling (Dec 27, 2009)

Efthalia said:


> I know it doesn't, but I'd really still like to know. And by now, the type descriptions are so vague that I can't tell.
> 
> I took MBTI for college and the clarity for the preferences, on a scale of 0-30, where 30 is the clearest is
> 
> ...


Well your "messiness" seems to point to P (and so does your score: 22!) but the "structure" you need for studying is classically more of a J thing. But that doesn't mean anything, I guess.
Like unleashthehounds, I _would _see you as an INFP more than an INFJ, after re-reading your description.


----------



## Efthalia (Jul 18, 2010)

Well, instead of setting me at ease, this thread has turned ideas from my head. I guess there's no final decision for now, but since the unknown personality title bothers me, I'll go ahead and masquerade as an INFP. I'm still looking for more information, though. So far, thanks for all the help, and it'd be great if somebody informed me of a good way to tell the cognitive functions apart.


----------



## NeedsNewNameNow (Dec 1, 2009)

Efthalia said:


> Well, instead of setting me at ease, this thread has turned ideas from my head. I guess there's no final decision for now, but since the unknown personality title bothers me, I'll go ahead and masquerade as an INFP. I'm still looking for more information, though. So far, thanks for all the help, and it'd be great if somebody informed me of a good way to tell the cognitive functions apart.


Have you read this thread?
http://personalitycafe.com/myers-br...iled-descriptions-each-function-attitude.html


----------



## Efthalia (Jul 18, 2010)

unleashthehounds said:


> Have you read this thread?
> http://personalitycafe.com/myers-br...iled-descriptions-each-function-attitude.html


Mhmm, more than once, but I really can't see all those functions in myself. Both Fi and Ni elude me. 

I can understand Fe a bit more clearly. I can see and connect with its sense of "appropriateness." It really annoys me when my sister can't tell what's appropriate to the situation. At the same time, I can also see Fi's sense of integrity. I've disconnected myself from groups before because things didn't feel right.

Hmm, let me see how I can articulate the way I direct my feeling. I can sort of tell people's moods and know what's appropriate to say and when to hold back. I hate insincerity. Faking, and even just bad acting, annoys me a lot. I also hate it when people claim the religion their parents raised them in, but they don't believe in it. I always think, "If you don't believe in it, just say it. Don't cover it up."

I'm also a bit obsessed in knowing what I'm supposed to do. I hate going first in anything because I don't have an example to follow. I feel concerned in following correct social conduct because I feel like have to fit in, but at the same time, sometimes I see it as superficial. A funny example is, I open welcome new people in the introduction section because sometimes I feel like I ought to, however. On the other hand, the fact that I keep saying the same thing sometimes does bother me. It feels fake. (But I'm too lazy and have too much of a tendency to overthink things to change it.)

Ne and Ni are just...confusing.


----------



## Everyday Ghoul (Aug 4, 2009)

This is touched up from a letter, that I sent to someone, discussing Fe. Ni/Si is covered some in here, to. Just as a disclaimer, this my subjective interpretation of type theory, more based in Jung's work, than MBTI. Not that all type theory, since Jung, isn't a subjective interpretation, but consider it a bail out, on my part. lol 

It is nice, when you can see the cognitive functions simplified, in terms of definition. However, I think certain factors will account for how much of those behaviors are observable. Not necessarily relevant, though. It's still my personal belief, that it's far more important to understand how the functions work or their nature, than to understand what they are, in terms of a definition. In this vain of logic, I just thought, since you were questioning Fe/Fi, I might share my personal thoughts on Fe.

Alright, so according to Jung, we all use all functions, to some degree. A great way to analyze Fe then, in my opinion, is to view it in the term of the archetypal parent. It helps in several ways, the first being to clear up the misconceptions the term feeler implies. Fe and Fi deal with ethics, not feelings and emotions. If we look at parents, then, we can get a better picture, because, after all, what is the job of a parent? To teach us right from wrong, this is Fe, in its purest sense. It's extroverting our ethics onto another. Still, if we probe the matter more in depth, we can start to observe two more distinct archetypes of parenting styles. I believe this would "mimic" and illustrate for us, the difference in the normal ESFJ and ENFJ approach to extroverting ethics. 

Let's imagine a little boy, named Jimmy, then let's give Jimmy's father the ESFJ archetype model parenting role. If he caught little Jimmy being naughty, he would be the one to say something like "No! That's bad! Behave!" and maybe slap Jimmy on the hand or something. Notice, what's missing, is an explanation of why it's wrong. The ESFJ style, is "on the spot" or "in the moment", because it's backed with a Sensing perspective, in this case, Si. Having that own Si perspective himself, and due to the nature of *how* Si works, Jimmy's father expects this to be all that's required. From an Si perspective, there is no need to know why their behavior is wrong, it's irrelevant, because it's unnecessary to need to know why, to commit it to memory, so they know not to do it again. 

Now, let's say the archetypal ENFJ model parent is the mother. If she caught little Jimmy misbehaving, she'd be apt to be the one to say something like, "Jimmmmy...what are you doing? That's bad. You shouldn't do that, Jimmy." Let's say what she caught him doing was picking on another child. She might offer perceptive explanations of why this is bad. "Imagine how you would feel, if I did that to you. It would hurt your feelings, and you wouldn't like that, would you?" Notice, when Fe is backed with a Ni perspective, there is an attempt to mentally realign his thinking, so that he understands why it was wrong, because this is the nature of Ni, within her. 

In conclusion, the archetypal lecturing parent, fits in an ENFJ model. The scolding, barking parent, fits in an ESFJ model. The ESFJ model is *probably* (more apt to be) the "traditional" spanking parent. The ENFJ model is *probably *(more apt to be) the "new age" time out giving parent.


It's very hard to define some of the cognitive functions, to associate them with certain guaranteed behaviors, or to understand theory from these angles. However, I believe certain functions do come together to create set mindsets. As far as being a J, Jung himself alluded to extraverted thinking working differently in a person, that was more concerned with judging thought, giving the specific example of the philosopher. If Te can work this way in logical terms, then it certainly seems reasonable, that an ethical perspective (Fe) gives us little natural drive towards stereotypical J behaviors. By the way, I do believe, according to type theory, despite what many NF's, in general, insist upon here, INFJ and INFP should actually be a challenging relationship. Fe wants to extrovert their ethics and Fi wants to cherish their own. Hit a contradicting ethic, and things could get "ugly", fairly quickly. Fi does not bend or bow to Fe, and Fe has no drive to naturally accept that. An ethical argument would ensue, with the INFP challenging their perspective, with possibilities and the INFJ attempting to realign the thinking/perceptions of the INFP. NFJ's create ethical systems and NFP's challenge them, becoming catalysts of change. 

I shall now wait for an xxTP, specifically Functianalyst or SimulatedWorld (who both understand this better than I) to do what I believe their types do best anyway, and tear this to shreds. lol


----------

