# Can ESI be MBTI INFP or what is going on?



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

I am ESI Fi subtype, the Te seeking is obvious (even in this thread), also Fi base and since I'm a negativist, democratic etc, I can't imo be EII. The type fits.

 oddly I consistently test INFP and the MBTI, ISFP stuff doesen't fit me, art is like meh imo, not that important, I can't take Si seriously lmao :| and it not just the art part ( Si demonstrative?), I don't know if I prefer to live in the present or not, seriously who doesen't think of their future!? .

Basically Keirsey's stuff is bullshit!?

Also when I read that in the big 5 ISFPs are supposed to be noninquizitive, when inquisitive is my core tendency, plus all the crappy jobs & careers that are "prefered" by this type :\...I don't know, it just seems so limiting & boring from the MBTI perspectie to be ISFP.


----------



## Herp (Nov 25, 2010)

I'm not sure if this helps, but I think it's about the way you're perceiving the sensing functions.

I'm not an expert or anything, but I shared my view of Sensing vs Intuition in this post. Sensing isn't about being unaware of higher implications of actions, or only being drawn into the sensory aspects of life. Si isn't only about caring for the way things are organized or following the instructions the way they have been given to me and bashing my head when they don't work. Neither is Se all about art and following your gut and living in the moment carefree and happily. 

I don't know. There's a reasonable gap between Socionics and MBTI, but I kind of feel a resistance against sensing there.



Herp said:


> I'd say that sensing is a matter of pragmatism.
> 
> (Speaking for myself, now) I feel like that, as a sensor, I'm more willing to act on what's likely to be there than the possible ramifications or interpretations of a thing. One of my friends says that I have a "mind of a scientist" - If I don't know something, I will research the hell out of it before trying to put it in practice (A little sixness there too). But once I'm aware of 'what's expected', you better be sure that I will act according to what is expected and nothing else.
> 
> ...


P.S.: Thank you for your words in the venting thread in the 6 subforums. I was really needing someone tell me things would be okay. :happy:


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

Thx @Herp, that makes a lot more sense then the garbage descriptions most websites throw out there.  also you are welcome.


----------



## Aleksei (Apr 3, 2010)

They can be, but it's not common.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

Aleksei said:


> They can be, but it's not common.


Hmm my main problem is that I can't concentrate on being in the present & I am mostly unaware of my enviroment. If I have to do some in the moment thing, I go on autopilot physically and my thoughts will be somewhere else entirely. I mostly just retreat into my head and think. This often ends in me being so unaware of what I'm actually doing, that I end up going somewhere in the house or at work and not knowing why I went there, putting some files, keys or other stuff down and not noticing that I did, leaving them there and forgetting about it.

Wen I walk in the city I am still in my head and the wold around me is wrapped in grey fog. I remember a few times waking up to a vibrant world as if I am dreaming my life away, the colors were intense and it felt good, but then I lost it again rather quickly.

I have a semi professional camera & I don't use it, I don't really care much for classical art or the outside world, I don't do sports :\ never did & find non fiction, just straight up action movies rather boring.

*I prefer this:*






& ofc I am ESI but my Se is more about a forceful & direct body language, rather direct and forceful communication, plowing through obstacles in my way & asserting my values and needs. If I'm really sick I will drag myself onto the operating table if need be, if my values are threatened I will defend them, if others are threatened I will stand up for them etc.

To me keirsey's descriptions about the artisans and all that hedonistic shit is just annoying. I'm rather self controlled and would never allow myself to slip in such a way.


----------



## RoSoDude (Apr 3, 2012)

My opinion is that at the core, you should be the same type, but unfortunately most MBTI descriptions, even by functions, are terrible. So you may be an "MBTI INFP" by what those descriptions say, but if were to actually examine your motivations and cognitive processes, we would rather see Fi Se Ni Te.

Part of the problem is that Socionics' information elements are about _what_ types of information are processed, while functions in the western system are about _how_ information is processed. This means that descriptions will often be very different (leading to the "they're completely different, no direct correlation, wah!" comments you'll often see) between systems. When the popularity of shallow MBTI description copypasta is factored in, you will essentially arrive at different conclusions from what you read about functions vs. what you read about information elements, simply because some descriptions are taken far in bizarre directions. I still argue, however, that the two are describing the same phenomena but from different perspectives. So an ESI _should_ be an ISFP, cognitively, but the divergence of the descriptors between systems can often pull apart the seams of direct type conversion. I would favor Socionics to better understand your type, because its literature seems less polluted by bad descriptions (in their place are some strange conclusions about facial structure and fatalistic views on intertype dynamics, both of which can more easily be selectively dismissed).


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

RoSoDude said:


> My opinion is that at the core, you should be the same type, but unfortunately most MBTI descriptions, even by functions, are terrible. So you may be an "MBTI INFP" by what those descriptions say, but if were to actually examine your motivations and cognitive processes, we would rather see Fi Se Ni Te.


Agreed. In a way I think socionics is better at actually helping people figure out their cognition than the MBTI does.


> Part of the problem is that Socionics' information elements are about _what_ types of information are processed, while functions in the western system are about _how_ information is processed. This means that descriptions will often be very different (leading to the "they're completely different, no direct correlation, wah!" comments you'll often see) between systems. When the popularity of shallow MBTI description copypasta is factored in, you will essentially arrive at different conclusions from what you read about functions vs. what you read about information elements, simply because some descriptions are taken far in bizarre directions. I still argue, however, that the two are describing the same phenomena but from different perspectives. So an LSI _should_ be an ISFP, cognitively, but the divergence of the descriptors between systems can often pull apart the seams of direct type conversion.


lol wait what, you mean ESI right, not LSI? 

And I also think another factor to consider is what the MBTI ultimately tries to measure which I don't feel is very close to the functions. As I said before, you take an MBTI test and confirm by checking your results if it fits and that's your MBTI type. No more questions asked. Are you structured or an ordered person? Are you energized by things around you or do you prefer being alone? Socionics taps into this at a superficial level but it's also easier to look beyond it, or I think it is.


> I would favor Socionics to better understand your type, because its literature seems less polluted by bad descriptions (in their place are some strange conclusions about facial structure and fatalistic views on intertype dynamics, both of which can more easily be selectively dismissed).


Agreed.

@_FreeBeer_ cognitively, I fail to see you as an MBTI INFP and I always did. ISFP makes a lot sense. It's pretty much the same reason why I don't wear the INFP label on this forum - the description is utterly retarded and pretty far removed from how I am as a person compared to say, the INTP profile. Just the idea of wearing the INFP label makes me kind of repulsed because of the perpetuated stereotypes that float around in MBTI land (everytime I think of the NF stereotype and more s the INFx one I feel like kitting a kitten and slitting my wrists). Not saying they don't exist in socionics but they aren't as prevalent among those who actually understand the system. In contrast, most people only understand the MBTI quite superficially. 

I mean, it's funny socionics got it right when MBTI failed to do that over the course of many years, even after reading about it further. And this is exactly why I recommend people to figure out their type through socionics than the MBTI. Socionics is simply more accurate and once you find your sociotype you can easily translate that into MBTI and it _will_ be correct. I contrast it becomes messy as fuck if you try to do it the other way around because MBTI gets it more wrong than it gets it right, and I think this actually goes for most people.


----------



## RoSoDude (Apr 3, 2012)

LeaT said:


> Agreed. In a way I think socionics is better at actually helping people figure out their cognition than the MBTI does.
> 
> lol wait what, you mean ESI right, not LSI?


Shoot, yeah. Fixed. Thanks.



> And I also think another factor to consider is what the MBTI ultimately tries to measure which I don't feel is very close to the functions. As I said before, you take an MBTI test and confirm by checking your results if it fits and that's your MBTI type. No more questions asked. Are you structured or an ordered person? Are you energized by things around you or do you prefer being alone? Socionics taps into this at a superficial level but it's also easier to look beyond it, or I think it is.


Oh, definitely. I pretty much completely disregard the actual MBTI test. When I speak of MBTI functions, I'm just talking about the western conception of Jungian typology, which generally encompasses ideas from Lenore Thompson, Beebe, Nardi, etc. Not to say they all agree, but that's just generally the system I'm referring to, not actually MBTI, because I think MBTI is largely useless for what we're talking about.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

RoSoDude said:


> Oh, definitely. I pretty much completely disregard the actual MBTI test. When I speak of MBTI functions, I'm just talking about the western conception of Jungian typology, which generally encompasses ideas from Lenore Thompson, Beebe, Nardi, etc. Not to say they all agree, but that's just generally the system I'm referring to, not actually MBTI, because I think MBTI is largely useless for what we're talking about.


Definitely. Excluding Keirsey, right?


----------



## RoSoDude (Apr 3, 2012)

LeaT said:


> Definitely. Excluding Keirsey, right?


Pfft, obviously


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

@LeaT @RoSoDude

Yeah, I have to agree :dry:, descritions like this make me want to facewall:



> ISFPs are the first to hear the different drummer. Many eagerly plunge into new fashions, avant garde experiences, 'hip' trends--some even setting the trends.
> 
> More in touch with the reality of their senses than their INFP counterparts, ISFPs live in the here and now. Their impulses yearn to be free, and are often loosed when others least expect it. The ISFP who continually represses these impulses feels 'dead inside' and may eventually cut and run. (One ISFP friend has become nonambulatory within the past few years. He will still, on impulse, leave home in the middle of the night and go to Las Vegas or wherever, regardless of the difficulties of his physical condition.)
> 
> ...


Seriously...WTF!?

I prefer @Herp description over the crap floating around on the internet and in Keirsey's books. The closest any description comes to how I am is *MBTI INFJ*.



> Beneath the quiet exterior, INFJs hold deep convictions about the weightier matters of life. Those who are activists -- INFJs gravitate toward such a role -- are there for the cause, not for personal glory or political power.
> 
> INFJs are champions of the oppressed and downtrodden. They often are found in the wake of an emergency, rescuing those who are in acute distress. INFJs may fantasize about getting revenge on those who victimize the defenseless. The concept of 'poetic justice' is appealing to the INFJ.
> 
> ...


*Source:* http://www.typelogic.com


----------



## aestrivex (Mar 7, 2011)

My redundant opinion is of course that ESIs might be simultaneously INFPs in MBTI, but you are quite different from a gamma type.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

aestrivex said:


> My redundant opinion is of course that ESIs might be simultaneously INFPs in MBTI, but you are quite different from a gamma type.


 different how? Your vague answer got me curious . I'm quite different from most INFPs here too.

EDIT:...aww damn. You take a long time to answer...and I was getting hyped up about you maybe seeing something I don't see, which means I haven't exhausted all the possibilities yet.

I really enjoy these conversations about type -,- the forums have gotten boring as of late thou.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

I think aestrivex is going to tell you IEI. I could be wrong, but I think the deep discussion we had before shows your type. Don't confuse your 6-ness with your cognition. It happens too easily.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

LeaT said:


> I think aestrivex is going to tell you IEI. I could be wrong, but I think the deep discussion we had before shows your type. Don't confuse your 6-ness with your cognition. It happens too easily.


^^; maybe its cus I'm rather lively. :\ livelyer then this IEI I know thou hehe or at least to the same degree. Less secretive for sure, make more funnies.

The way I see it is that in inclusion and affection I'm supine, despite not initiating contact with others once it is established I tend to act rather extroverted & energetic. It really is like a closet sanguine, especially one to one. Maybe that is what is being observed here.

I feel comfortable enough on the forums to slip into my @home & with good friends persona.


----------



## aestrivex (Mar 7, 2011)

freebeer, i have rather strongly opined that you are an IEI for some time. I have attempted to sporadically offer observations of you that are helpful to understanding the driving themes you are showing, but I don't think you have picked up on very many of them. Principally, what defines you more than other characteristics is your highly inconsistent behavior, your driving need for clarity, and your unrestrained/erratic/inconsistent emotionality. All of which are captured well by this typing in my opinion; you have all of the elements of beta values; a driving (if somewhat vague) need for supra-worldly anagogical clarity and deeper meaning, an ideological orientation that is somewhat subdued, and a highly erratic, constantly changing emotionality that prevents you from self-observing very well because of its breadth. 

I am doubtful that a lengthier discussion will generate any progress, but if you have further _specific_ questions I would nonetheless be happy to explain my typing more fully.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

FreeBeer said:


> ^^; maybe its cus I'm rather lively. :\ livelyer then this IEI I know thou hehe or at least to the same degree. Less secretive for sure, make more funnies.
> 
> The way I see it is that in inclusion and affection I'm supine, despite not initiating contact with others once it is established I tend to act rather extroverted & energetic. It really is like a closet sanguine, especially one to one. Maybe that is what is being observed here.
> 
> I feel comfortable enough on the forums to slip into my @home & with good friends persona.


For the record, he types me as IEI too (and thinks I'm a cookie cutter example even) and suffice to say, I am not even sure what you and I got in common besides being Fi base cognitively... I'm the opposite of lively really.

I'm pretty sure you figured by now that I'm also melancholic-choleric. I don't tend to pretend much on this forum either.


----------



## Scelerat (Oct 21, 2012)

Socionics and MBTI are quite similar, the difference is in the "stacking" of the functions. For instance, I'm an MBTI/Keirsey/Whatever ENTJ, and a socionics LIE because my dominant is Te/Extraverted logic and my auxiliary function is Ni. Move away from type descriptions etc as they tend to be based on observed behavior which will be influenced by a wide range of factors and still to functions.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

LeaT said:


> For the record, he types me as IEI too (and thinks I'm a cookie cutter example even) and suffice to say, I am not even sure what you and I got in common besides being Fi base cognitively... I'm the opposite of lively really.
> 
> I'm pretty sure you figured by now that I'm also melancholic-choleric. I don't tend to pretend much on this forum either.


The difference between me and you may be that I'm only melancholic in one area and that is the area of *control*. Also you are type 5 sx/sp. I'm social variant 6w7. There are plenty of other differences that do not depend on function usage.

For example I may abandon Fi and think in Te terms in some situations, the only thing usually stopping me from fully expressing it is considering the impact of this on other people. For example, my uncle and aunt had a baby and that baby was born very premature, then suffered respiratory arrest and they managed to revive it but the damage was done. I concluded right there after meeting my cousin the first time that he is a vegetable and will never recover. To me it was obvious and made sense, i accepted it quickly. My INTP aunt did the same, my ExFx uncle however did not. He remained hopeful which I found interesting and a bit annoying.

I sometimes have very cold thought patterns compared to other people I know and I'm aware of this. I do feel for others even then..its odd. I did notice this tendency in me to have difficulties being a caretaker. I joined this non governmental organization, which was taking care of the elderly (had no job at the time and nothing better to do). I quickly realized that if I knew someone had no potential to explore and if there was nothing in them to develop aka these ppl were dieing....then I felt no passion or urge to occupy myself with them. The only thing that drove me was guilt....and I got out of there really fast. I wasn't suited to meet their needs and concluded that I don't really like helping people or taking care of them in this sense.

Some things I end up doing, feeling or the lack of any emotion for something I should have emotions for is disturbing and makes me anxious. in the above cases...there was no future positive development to be had, they had nothing to gain from me as i was...inept at showing feelings I didn't have towards them or in comforting them in some way, which made me suffer a ton of guilt, the end result is that I moved on but still feel guilty for my incompetence.

I should have been able to do something other then what the NGO was having me do for them. I also hate having other people relaying on me completely to take care of them.



> *General description of people who are Melancholy in Control:*
> 
> Expresses very little control over the lives and behaviors of others, and will not tolerate control over his/her life and behavior -- highly independent and strong-willed.
> Demands order, truth, reliability and dependability from himself/herself and others -- perfectionistic.
> ...


In the other two areas I'm pure *supine*: affection and inclusion. *What you guys mostly see from me is this:*



> *General description of people who are Supine in Inclusion:*
> 
> Is an extrovert although he/she appears to be an introvert
> Approaches very few people for association and socialization, but wants to be approached by others for association and socialization
> ...


 @aestrivex

hmm all of that is rather true, you have a point and make sense. I need to think.

There is one flaw here which you missed. I'm intellectually skeptical, doubting, rather cynical at times and undoubtedly a negativist ....*IEIs are not like this*.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

@Freebear since I'm a 5 (and melancholic) I think I rely much more on Te as a visible function than Fi. Choleric also relates to Te. This is probably why it's tricky to type me because you need to have a really good grasp of the theory and the functions in order to see beyond a person's persona and mine is really misleading, especially since I also apparently identify with my type's superego (Se and Ti). 

Like you, I've worked as that kind of social worker but it was clearly not my thing. I don't know how to take care of other people at all more than perhaps supporting others emotionally. I've also applied for international NGOs to later realize that those kind of social causes don't really concern me either but I suppose that's part related to soc blind spot also.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

@itsme45 I think @aestrivex is correct about his assessment of me. I display a wide range of very random behavior and it gets difficult to spot solid patterns that would lead to self understanding.

 I can be serious at first and diplomatic, very withdrawn, but as I get more and more comfortable with a person :crazy: I become more and more goofy/random/funny/crazy (If an only IF that person can tolarate that from me...most people can't <.< so fuck them LOL!). Its like I have an ENFP silly switch, but I'm introverted and its more gradual. I'd go as far as saying that I'm the introverted version of an ENFP as far as my goofy/random nature goes. I can make fun of impending doom situations and people laugh lol XD. Good for lightening dark moments.

I tend to flip flop between being serious and capable & random/crazy/funny...kind of fast (dem witty jokes hurr durr ^^. This all DEPENDS on who I'm interacting with and what the situation is. EVERYTHING I DO DEPENDS on the situation and the people. My behaviour is my reaction to those things and its never the same.  I can pull off a commanding ESTJ for a while no problem if I think that is what the situation needs.

...hmm think Zooey Deschanel...with beard <.< and a stash and thaaaat is not a good example LOL.

^^ also this is so me LOL:


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

Lol well make it 5 AM and it will be me hahaha

Ok, I'm at least not sleepy during the day  but I do feel different (better) when I'm used to going to bed early enough and getting up early enough (ideal for me is something like midnight-9AM pattern)

Btw you do sound like it's a lot of fun when you're in the mood


----------

