# INFP vs. ENFP Te use



## Father of Dragons (May 7, 2012)

RentalBlackout said:


> I was once torn between the two as well(I think every xNFP has gone through this plenty of times), and very much alike you, I wondered whether there would be a great disparity between the two's Te. After reading articles a little, I found that for me, I related a lot more to inferior Si rather than inferior Te.
> 
> On a curious note, you say your Fi is pretty strong, but how strong is your Ne, comparatively? For me personally I couldn't easily discern which of them was dominant or auxiliary so I looked towards which would seem to be my inferior. Prior to this, what made you inclined to believe you were INFP rather than ENFP?


It is tricky to figure out, as I notice them both a lot in my daily life. To some degree though I seem less Fi-inclined because it is very rare that I will be morally offended. 90% of the time that someone says an off-colour or mildly racist joke I am more likely to appreciate the humour of it than be offended. For me I'm not really concerned about what anyone says or does if they aren't hurting anyone. 

If that kind of scenario comes up then I will be apt to say something, but it is a lot different than the kind of outburst @_ephemereality_ illustrated with Daenerys. I am more likely to try to reason with the person in question than bite their head off. I find I am quite good at explaining what is wrong with a certain behavior so that the offender can see what they did wrong.

I have thought I am an INFP because I am pretty reserved, and sensitive. Although, working in retail the last year I've realized I am not actually super socially introverted compared to the average person. I can be comfortable talking in front of crowds, being the center of attention. That being said I know that mbti doesn't necessarily revolve around social extroversion/introversion. 

As well, my sister is a classic, bubbly ENFP (the kind you would find in a type description) and I am definitely not as bouncey and outgoing as her. That being said, she is likely an enneagram 7w6 - veeery different than 9w8.



register said:


> How old are you? My INFP friend and I are in our thirties-he spends hours preparing intricate spreadsheets and powerpoint presentations refining every single detail-it is VERY ISTJ in nature.
> 
> I spend time putting together plans and I LOVE to make quick decisions and then make them actionable-I dont mind changing the plan with more information, but I REALLY want to have some sort of plan in place-like you I dont need certainty before taking action.
> 
> ...


I'm 24 right now. Yes, you do sound like you approach tasks very similar to me. And travelling, lol. Yeah, in general I love the thrill of finding my own way. Even if I could make a detailed plan, I feel like that can suffocate the fun of an experience. 

To some degree as well I don't know many INFPs, so it's hard for me to contrast them. But, my one for sure INFP friend from school was definitely a lot more meticulous than I am. I was paired with her for a project and it seemed like I was the one introducing lots of ideas, and she was great at working out the details. I could see that she could follow my ideas with her Ne, but it didn't seem as natural for her to naturally 'extend' these vectors of ideas in different directions.

Perhaps I am ENFP after all, lol.


Also, for all of you cognitive function aficionados, I wanted to ask you one more thing. What I am curious about is: what is the difference in how Si and Te reference external facts and established systems? I have been reading up on the functions the past few days and it seems that Te and Si both have a relationship with them. Te references what is known as a standard to create a new plan, correct? And Si looks to past experiences and historical information as some sort of reference? I know there must be a difference, but I'm not sure what it is. I suppose, would it be that Te is more an action-oriented function and that Si is more of an information processing function?

The reason I ask is that I definitely do reference external sources a ton in my endeavours. I'm finding my way in a design field and I've noticed that a lot of people seem to reinvent the wheel without realizing it all the time! They often don't realize it and are proud of themselves even though their iteration lacks the depth that previous thinkers have developed. I really hate this, and so it is my goal to learn as much as I can about everything that has come before, so that when I make something new it uses the best of what has come before it, and is enriched because of this. Does this kind of thinking sound to be more the result of the influence of Te or Si, in your opinion?


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

@Father of Dragons, can you explain how you understand Ne, Si and Ni please, and how you see them or don't see them in yourself.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

*How I use Te:*

- Taking hardware apart to see how it works and constructing hardware (fun), I built a set of costum softboxes last week for photography. I had to learn how to do that, what lumens are and how these things work for photograpy (was a lot of fun).
- Fixing stuff and learning how to do it...by prying stuff part >D and putting it back together / arguing & debating.
- Learning about and exploring facts that I need / find interestng (example I love reading about anything IT related)

Give me a broken machine or any situation that needs fixing and I'll figure out how it works / will fix it, give me a task like example build an artificial lake and I'll see it done. What I don't know I learn / figure out. It does not matter if I have never seen or done anything like it before, or more exactly it does because new things are always more fun then what I already know/have seen. (provided that I'm supplied enough external motivating factors to actually finish and not move on before that happens).

Stuff like that..objective logic gathering and applying = fun.

*The sign that my Te is valued but weak:*

- *I often need reassurance* and to hear other sources on the same piece of information. I prefer it if info is backed up by facts, testing to make sure its real & accurate / tested. Concrete stuff, not info someone pulled out of their ass with no backup.

I don't categorize, organize and such stuff (isn't this more Ti!?)...and my way of thinking is also highly chaotic, *a lot of the times what I say and do seems disconnected at first or the connections are not apparent to others. Explaining these can be annoying because people just don't see it.* How deep I go also tends to be superficial a lot of the time, because I skim over detail.

^^; also I may have a slightly inflated ego as nothing technical really scares me....


----------



## Hespera (Jun 3, 2011)

For what it's worth, @Father of Dragons, the way you use Te sounds more ENFP. And as a side note, that is a far better indicator of type than how you are socially; I'm introverted but can definitely get bubbly. 

Anyway, my two cents: Te is no fun at all when it's inferior. It's a compulsion, really, a futile attempt to organize the world around you in a last ditch effort to feel better. Instead of finding harmony within yourself, you attempt to force the outside world into said harmony, but you do it in such an infantile way that it's just exhausting and laughable. I always feel like a neurotic little tyrant when I get that way and it feels so desperate. For me, Si is the more convenient choice: follow the rules that have worked before instead of trying to optimize the game. 

Also, this thread has been delightful to read and very insightful. Well done all around


----------



## jnfrr (Nov 30, 2012)

The ENFP is going to be more comfortable with the extroverted functions (Primary Ne and Tertiary Te)
The INFP is somewhat more Fi and Si oriented (when in they're stuck in their heads) 

So ENFP.


----------



## mirrorghost (Sep 18, 2012)

ephemereality said:


> But from what you describe yes, it does sound like good use of Te. I think inferior Te types might often experience a need for an ability to structure and organize their life in such a manner but also feel incapable of doing it themselves more than in very short momentary bursts, kind of like how Se works for me where I have moments of Se but they don't last very long.


this is exactly how i operate. it feels good when i make a list of what i need to do and take charge of doing something and just go do it without procrastinating, but it doesn't last. i can only do it occasionally.


----------



## Father of Dragons (May 7, 2012)

ephemereality said:


> @_Father of Dragons_, can you explain how you understand Ne, Si and Ni please, and how you see them or don't see them in yourself.


 @ephemereality Sorry, I took a short break from posting and it ended up being a long one somehow. Anyways, here ya go.

I understand Ne as being a type of perception which focuses on possibilities. This can be understood as abstract in the sense that there is less of a concern for what is immediately evident, and more of a focus on what could possibly be. In this sense with Ne there is a higher degree of uncertainty than most of the other perceiving functions, but also a higher degree of comfort with this uncertainty. If a problem is encountered, Ne will focus on the possibilities which seem the most promising. The accuracy and legitimacy of these possibilities will depend largely on the aptitude of the problem-solver at perceiving possibilities correctly. This will depend largely on previous possibilities which have been explored. Often with Ne there is a tendency to want to escalate previously explored possibilities into constantly new territory. This is done with the hope that the new explorations that build upon those previously successful explorations might continue to become more and more effective.

I see Ne within me in how I tend to deal with situations in life. I am never very certain of anything, yet I am comfortable with this and with recognizing that whatever choice I make is but one out of many. To a large degree, I live in very much of a trial-and-error fashion.

For Si, I understand it as a sort of fact-checking mode of perception. There is a focus on considering what has worked in the past, and using this as the sort of map to be used to make decisions. The experiences and knowledge which has been accumulated are canon, and take precedent over knowledge gained or projected from any other source. This doesn't necessarily mean personal experiences and knowledge though, it could also mean knowledge from respected sources. In general though there is a focus taking what has worked previously, and doing it again in the same fashion in order to receive the same results. To use a quote I have heard oft-repeated, Si-users seek to "stick with what they know."

I'm not sure how I might see Si within me, as I find I am more likely to run into it in other people when they question my comfort with uncertainty. I do see the value in empirical knowledge, but it isn't a priority for myself. I instead find myself re-inventing the wheel in my personal life as I tackle an old problem in a new way, only to (annoyingly) realize I had gone through the same learning process in the past.

For Ni, I'm not certain of how it works so well, but I'll try to explain it using what I have inferred from stories about it, and my experiences with likely Ni-users. Ni seeks certainty like Si does, but there is a degree of separation from concrete experiences and knowledge. Ni as I understand it focuses on constructing a working model of (the relevant parts of) the world within ones mind, and using this model as the map with which to solve problems or uncertainties. Unlike Ne, there will always be a solution which makes much more sense than the other solutions, even if the same amount of information has been presented to the Ni-user as to the Ne-user. This can make Ni-users seem to jump to conclusions more quickly than Ne-users. It also means that the accuracy of the internal model is really the deciding factor for the success of the solution. If it is mechanically sound, entire mathematical concepts can be generated seemingly from thin air. For the Ne-user to come to such a conclusion, there would have to be a process of trial-and-error, more analogous to endless brain-storming than to finding the perfect piece of the puzzle (as an Ni-user would tend to do.)

I don't see Ni within myself, at least I don't think.

Anyways, that is pretty representative of my understandings of those functions. Hopefully I'm not too far off...


----------



## TaylorS (Jan 24, 2010)

Inferior is not the same as weak, it just means it is the function we have the least conscious usage of, it is normally in the unconscious and can express itself quite strongly without the ego being aware of it. Functions always work together as pairs: Fi is always paired with Te in the psyche structure, same with Ne and Si, and Ti and Fe, and Se and Ni, one in a more overt conscious role and the other in a less conscious supportive role. An INFP's dominant Fi needs Te to "actualize" it's judgements in the outer world. If a INFP's deep, core Fi values are attacked the INFP is compelled to "right the wrong" and Te subconsciously goes into action.

An ENFP is an Ne-Dom with inferior Si. When the dominant Ne gets into a funk and runs out of ideas Si comes out and helps using past experiences as material for Ne.

The Tertiary function is more of a playful, inner child role. It helps to decompress you after a long day of using your Dom and Aux functions.


----------



## TaylorS (Jan 24, 2010)

arkigos said:


> @_Father of Dragons_ - For an INFP or an ENFP, Te is always deprioritized and adolescent. Period. It has been described as something that, with effort, can be shifted into and used - though neurotically and unlikely to be on the level of a 'Te type'.
> 
> I think @_ephemereality_'s example from Game of Thrones was apt. I find that with xNFPs, when they Te I always feel compelled that they should stop if only for their own good - or that they have settled into such a juryrigged routine that they can make it work. It's stressful for them, you can see that, it's not their forte, it feels neurotic, it feels adolescent. Someone else should be doing all this, really. It works, they get through it, but especially with INFP it's like they have to expend a lot or take it at a run. For ENFP it is less that and more actually seeing it through to the end - prioritizing the practical more than just as a means to an end. An idealistic end, no doubt. ...and that is a notable consideration, does xNFP ever engage in a classical Te consideration for its own sake? Or as a necessity made possible by sufficient motivation? A slave to Ne and Fi.
> 
> ...


As an INFP I can relate to this. When a Fi core value of mine is violated my Te engages and I jump into action. Unfortunately my Te, being relatively unconscious, can act in a very childish "YOU WILL RESPECT MY ATHORITAH!!!" way when I am stressed.


----------



## chimeric (Oct 15, 2011)

Father of Dragons said:


> I find that this capacity of mine is developed beyond a lot of people I know, to some degree more so than my father, an xNTP. Even though he is very intelligent, when I see him try to finish a task quickly I can often spot glaring holes in his logic, and key details that he somehow left out. He will often end up doing a whole lot of work without achieving too much, whereas I always make sure I 'work smart' or, don't work at all if there is no viable plan of action.


That isn't necessarily Te. Si is details-focused. While INFPs are less grounded in certain ways than ENFPs (being more idealistic and less pragmatic), they're also less distractible.

Unless someone's already said this. I did skim the thread pretty quickly.


----------

