# INFJ/INFP or T type with a strong F?



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

This is mostly because I don't tend to fit with descriptions (though I don't think anyone will!) And I wanted to know how people would type me.  I tend to come off as a T type quite a lot, in certain circumstances, and then an F type in others.

*1) What aspect of your personality made you unsure of your type?*
INFJS being emotional, organised and moody/easily upset keeps coming up - I tend to distrust my emotions or get annoyed with them for being irrational, unless they're positive emotions and then I really show it! If I have a negative feeling that is really getting to me. I tend to speak about it with people I trust in a very matter of fact, unemotional way, to try and think of a plan of action on practical things I can do to help myself. I tend to take criticism to heart but not in an emotional way. I tend to think I should listen to criticism and better myself, I don't just get emotional over it. I'm also not particularly profound. I don't wax lyrical about things, though I really like art - I just like it for its aesthetic appeal and I like to think about what it's saying about the mood of the era it was created in (what was happening at the time and how that has seeped into the artist) but I don't tend to care about what they were saying and I don't tend to see it as personally special to me. I find everything in the world interesting - not profound. I like the fact that everything I see tells a story of something it is connected to. A feather represents the concept of evolution, the riots in england recently are interesting because of the mob phenomena and because a lot of factors have come together to create one thing. People's actions and opinions are interesting because of what they say about them and the human condition itself. Etc.

*2) What do you yearn for in life? Why?*
I just don't want to be bored! I guess I yearn for stability in my relationships and security in money and a job and to feel that I have a few friends I can definitely rely on. I want to have a big family and the perfect wedding one day (got it all planned out!) but all that's not really enough for me. I want to be constantly challenged intellectually and be constantly achieving - I want deadlines to complete and projects under my belt rather than feeling I'm just maintaining things. The people stuff NEEDS to be there - I need that stability and for everyone to be happy - without that I wouldn't be happy. But I can't deal with just having that. i need my life to be exciting.

*3) Think about a time where you felt like you were at your finest. Tell us what made you feel that way.*
I guess there's a few times I've felt great. I love being on stage and used to be a stand up and a musician (just getting back into this now). But I do them to be on stage, I suppose, rather than the art. It gives me a buzz and makes me feel as if I'm really living. 

On the other side of the coin, I feel really in control and great if I'm discussing politics or critical theory - I was always pretty good at abstract concepts and I'm capable of looking behind things a lot. Touching the almost ungraspable in my mind (the really abstract stuff) is very satisfying. 

But then, as well as this I feel very serene and great when I feel I'm helping others. I like having the answer when someone tells me that so and so is going on in their lives - I like being able to give practical advice and I LOVE making people laugh. I even just feel very satisfied doing things like making my bf's dinner - it feels like I'm looking after him and that makes me feel good. The best thing anyone has ever told me is that I was wise. I like being able to help, especially if I see the person become happier as a result.

One of the most satisfying things is making people laugh. If I tell a joke and I manage to be quick witted and the people around me laugh, I feel really, really good. But I'm not sure if it's because I've cemented a place in the group - I've impressed people so they might like me - of if it's just that I love looking at people laugh. I think it's both because I like watching people laugh even if it isn't me who made them laugh - it just makes me feel really happy to see it - it's very calming.

*4) What makes you feel inferior?*
I have NO practical or common sense. I am very, very bad at things that are in the real world. So i cannot multitask well and I find having to do things in the real world very stressful. I would hate planning my own wedding for example - apart from panning how I want it to be! - I would hate working out how many people would be there and how many tables you would need. I would rather someone did that for me. I can be useless when presented with a practical problem that involves using my hands and I can be so dreamy that I'm extremely forgetful. 

*5) What tends to weigh on your decisions? (Do you think about people, pro-cons, how you feel about it, etc.)*
I generally make decisions quickly. I can't really say how it works exactly because I just try and find the best course of action and that includes all of the stuff above - probably quite a lot less about how I feel about it, though. I can get annoyed at people who won't do things because they don't want to do them even though it's their responsibility - I tend to look at things like that really - responsibility, what the consequences will be, whether there will be repercussions. I get angry at people for wanting life to be all sugar and nice all the time instead of doing their duty and realising that life includes doing things you don't want to do or find boring or stressful, because there are repercussions to others if you don't do it. Everybody should be responsible and independent. So this is how I tend to think when making decisions.

*6) When working on a project what is normally your emphasis? Do you like to have control of the outcome?*
- When does it need to be done by?
- What will it look like when it's finished?
- How many hours per day should I spend on it?
- What will I do with the finished product? (Is there a point in me doing it?)
- What am I going to do after I've finished this one! (I usually have a three year plan - not kidding - that tells me what projects I will do when to stop me getting bored.)

*7) Describe us a time where you had a lot of fun. How is your memory of it?*
Wah, that's difficult! I don't tend to remember this stuff well. Generally the times I'm having fun is when I have a bunch of people I know well around me and they are all paired off talking and everyone is laughing. This happened a lot at school when I was a kid (though we're going back 13 years now!) - a group of maybe six of us would walk to the beach and just play about and make silly faces, making people laugh, singing together. There isn't really one specific time, but that sort of thing, even as an adult.

*8) When you want to learn something new, what feels more natural for you? (Are you more prone to be hands on, to theorize, to memorize, etc)*
A mix of things, but I generally have to do it myself. I don't like people trying to show me the ropes, because it's frustrating for them to show me the way they do it. I want to do it my own way and if I work out how to do it by experimenting or having a bit of time on my own to get to grips with it without outside interference, I will master is much more quickly.

*9) How organized do you to think of yourself as?*
Very poorly organised, but very good at organising "organisations". So really messy and forget to cash cheques etc but very good at walking into an organisation and seeing what's wrong and organising it to operate more smoothly . i do this in a PR role. I will go in and encourage them to keep data and monitor progress and I will see what's going on and be able to condense it quickly and then see what I need to do to make the organisation look good to other people - attract other people's interest, raise awareness etc So I can be organised in my work in that way and can organise other people's actions at work, but I'm terribly at day to day stuff.

*10) How do you judge new ideas? You try to understand the principles behind it to see if they make sense or do you look for information that supports it?*
The principle. If I can see the source of the idea and it seems water tight and I can see how the consequences are likely to play out then I will like the idea. If I see some logical flaw or implausibility or that the idea looks good on paper but is completely missing out the probability of human behaviour (we're not robots, so people aren't going to do what's logical or right a lot of the time) then I tend to dismiss it quickly.

*11) You find harmony by making sure everyone is doing fine and belonging to a given group or by making sure that you follow what you believe and being yourself?*
By making sure everyone is fine and no one is sitting alone - everybody has someone to talk to and nobody is going to feel unsupported.

*12) Are you the kind that thinks before speaking or do you speak before thinking? Do you prefer one-on-one communication or group discussions?*
I prefer 1-1 discussions, find it difficult to get a word in edgeways in group ones, and I think I tend to think before speaking - - - I think. I tend to speak pretty quickly, though. I don't hesitate that much.

*13) Do you jump into action right away or do you like to know where are you jumping before leaping? Does action speaks more than words?*
Actions speak more than words and I like to know what the result of what I'm doing will be before I do it. I don't like there to be any uncertainty or too many possibilities about results and consequences - I like to know what's going to happen.

*14) It's Saturday. You're at home, and your favorite show is about to start. Your friends call you for a night out. What will you do?*
Maybe meet them later after my show but only because I'd feel obliged. I'd rather they called me the day before so I can prepare.

*15) How do you act when you're stressed out?*
I fuss over people, apologise a lot, get very worried about how I'm coming off or if things could go wrong (maybe I'll say something and worry who it'll get back to and if I will lose friends). I tend to lose touch with reality very quickly and become pretty spaced out and useless in the real world. I get extremely panicky and can have irrational thoughts. I become very self absorbed.

*16) What makes you dislike the personalities of some people?*

- Rude
- Out for personal gain
- Bullying others to make themselves feel superior
- Think of the world in "winners" and "losers" - this enrages me!
- And something I find very irritating is people who attach their personalities to things (these clothes describe me, I listen to this kind of music because I'm this kind of person etc) - these people then get upset if people they don't like listen to the same music or if the band they like gets popular. I just find this attitude incredibly childish and very, very annoying. Basically - people who want to be in a clique that is "special" or who are different for different's sake (pretentiousness) - I find all this to be attention seeking, vain behaviour. I come across different or weird myself but can get pretty offended if people are deliberately trying to stand out, perhaps just because it makes me look weirder because I don't stand out in a cool way!

*17) Is there anything you really like talking about with other people?*
Politics.

*18) What kind of things do you pay the least attention to in your life?*
The things that are right in front of me - washing up, what I'm wearing, if I have shaved my armpits this month, if I have brushed my hair, what I look like in general...

*19) How do your friends perceive you? What is wrong about their perception? What would your friends never say about your personality?*
My friends see me as stubborn and logical to the point of occasionally seeming arrogant (though only one friends thinks this, everybody else describes me as overly modest, so that's confusing!) Fussing over people, overly concerned (which could make me seem controlling). But nice, I think, and out to make people laugh - a bit of a clown. Very driven. Some people have accused me of being unemotional, others have accused me of being too emotional - haha! Basically, everybody would say something totally different about me, it depends who they are and how I act around them. If I'm being introduced to someone, they tend to mention my academic achievements first.

*20) You got a whole day to do whatever you like. What kind of activities do you feel like doing?*
Go for a hike through the mountains with one person who's close to me and then sit down to a massive meal in a pub with a coal fire. Talk for hours (probably about politics!)


----------



## suicidal_orange (May 6, 2010)

@ukinfj - I'm sure you have considered it already but what about ISFJ? I wobbled between INTP and INXJ for a long time but turns out my factual focus was an S one rather than T which repressed typical Fness.

You'll need to look beyond the surface stereotypes but other than "I want my life to be exciting" I see nothing to rule it out, but I've only read this once and suspect I've missed something major... I'll have another look later as no-one else is being helpful :happy:


----------



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

asmit127 said:


> @ukinfj - I'm sure you have considered it already but what about ISFJ? I wobbled between INTP and INXJ for a long time but turns out my factual focus was an S one rather than T which repressed typical Fness.
> 
> You'll need to look beyond the surface stereotypes but other than "I want my life to be exciting" I see nothing to rule it out, but I've only read this once and suspect I've missed something major... I'll have another look later as no-one else is being helpful :happy:


Thanks. I have thought about ISFJ. They seem a bit too sensitive when I go on the forum to be like me. I tend to be much more thinky then any of the F types and much more feely than the T types. 

I don't think I really understand what S is though - because, Si doesn't really mean living in the moment does it? Or not caring about why something happens or looking behind things? So how do you differentiate between N and S? Se would be far more in the moment, I understand that and while I think I see Se in me, it would have to be really low down. Cognitive function tests aren't much help, because they just bring up INFJ. I think mu functions were Ni, Ne, Fe, Fi, Ti, Se, Te, Si the last time I took a test.

But tests could be wrong and I might have misunderstood Si. I don't really get what the difference is between the INFJ or ISFJ, I don't think. 

What would you say was the difference between you and an INFJ?

Hang on. This: http://www.mypersonality.info/personality-types/sensing-intuition/ would say I was definitely an N. Oh I don't know. I'd considered S because I want people to be responsible - well, kind of. I don't get annoyed when others aren't, I get annoyed at naivety I suppose, people thinking life should be wonderful at all times. I get annoyed when people are working as a team but will just stop working and overburden everyone else because they don't particularly like this bit. That's what annoys me. And I tend to have to tell everybody about a decision I'm making to make sure it is a responsible one - I am not going to be seen to be irresponsible by doing it. I'll stick to my plan regardless of what they say though. I just feel better if someone reassures me that I'm doing the right thing so I don't have to feel guilty about it. I tend to feel guilty if something I'm doing could have a negative impact of any kind and can find it difficult to decide if I'm in the right or the wrong so that makes me nervous. No difficulty working it out with other people though! It's not quite like feeling "everybody should be responsible" - because in reality I usually think "yeah, they don't mean anything by it, though" or "they'll grow up". So that's confusing.

But then I don't really like total idealism - just living in fantasy world rather than looking at what is actually there. I do tend to live in a fantasy world and am always once removed from reality - which means people have fun with me by putting things into rooms in front of my face "to hide them from me". My incredibly daring boyfriend put my birthday present on the shelf in front of me for three weeks before he gave it to me and I'd never noticed it was there! So I'm massively not in the world and have severe problems noticing change (like if somebody has had their hair done or the room as been rearranged). I tend to be very bad at noticing mess and can sometimes be at a loss as to what to do about mess - it can feel unbelievably overwhelming. I want it to be gone but I need to sit down and think first because I need to make a plan before hand of what I'm going to do. If I have it in my head - I will do this, then that, then that - then I can just get on with it. But I'm not like my mam and best friend who can just walk into a place and start tidying. The chaos is too much for me and just sends me spiralling a bit so I tend to order the external mess in my mind first to calm me down and then I get on with it. 

See these are the differences I can't work out - I tend to be far, far, far more dreamy than anyone else I know and can have extreme difficulty staying with it (but this is anxiety as well) but then I don't like people pulling things from thin air either. I will tend to describe society as a constantly communicating dynamic of millions of imperceptible processes because that works. I couldn't describe society as "people" because it's not people. Society is about what drives the people - why do people flock as they do, how does public opinion work, how to we connect with strangers, what one thing ties these all together? That's how I tend to think.

So, it's abstract, but it's not emotional or spiritual. It's abstract but it's more just forming an abstract understanding of the entire world. Not the world of "things" - which bores me - the world of people, but it's not actually being interested in individuals. See this is confusing! It's an interest in the forces behind society - I'm more interested than anything else in the world in the phenomenon that is society itself - it's almost implausible when you think about it, the way that such things as the crowd effect work. It's so brilliant it's almost magical. 

Right, I'm rambling, but the above paragraph - that's how I get excited. If I think about that, I feel very excited, because it's just - - - brilliant. It's really, really cool when you think about it. Which made me think maybe I am a T? Because I'm more excited by the way things work, I'm excited by seeing the inner processes and realising that the human world is an incredibly complex machine - which, yeah, it's so incredible cool because it's organic and yet absolutely amazing.

Erm....yeah. My excitement comes from many quarters. Overall, I'm a bit anxious and nihilistic but I find many things exciting. I love watching my friends do well because I feel proud and it's guilt-free happiness! (Bear in mind I'm also an E1, I think). I love thinking about the barely graspable because it gives me a rush of excitement when I realise how clever everything is. And I love playing music or being on stage or being out in nature because I feel connected to the world.

So - whatever those things mean, I'm that. I see T, F, N and S in there. I just don't know which way round they are!


----------



## luemb (Dec 21, 2010)

> I just feel better if someone reassures me that I'm doing the right thing so I don't have to feel guilty about it.


Suggests Fe. 



> I need to sit down and think first because I need to make a plan before hand of what I'm going to do.


 suggests that you are a J-type. 



> I do tend to live in a fantasy world and am always once removed from reality - which means people have fun with me by putting things into rooms in front of my face "to hide them from me".


suggests N. 

Total it up: INFJ. 
Funnily enough, the "crowd effect" was brought up in a thread about Ni, which would be an INFJ's first function. Here is the link: http://personalitycafe.com/intj-for...on-ni-your-experience-intj-2.html#post1366438

Also, Ti is their third function, so if you feel very "thinker-y" that is not surprising.


----------



## suicidal_orange (May 6, 2010)

Asking me how I differ from an INFJ is like asking me how I differ from a chipmunk - I've never been either so it's hard to say. I dislike talking about a stereotyped average member of any type as I've tried out enough types to realise that there is always at least one member of the type to disagree about each aspect, although this assumes that everyone is typed correctly which they aren't. When it comes to the ISFJ forum I like to think they are mostly more sensitive than me but when the criticism is from someone I actually care to know (not many people) I am just as sensitive, I just don't talk about it.

Those two lists are questionable, how do you know if you are whatever they mean by "deep"? You have no measure to go by. If the only body of water you've seen is a puddle a pond is deep, until you see a lake or even an ocean... (this is Si style thinking - everything experience compared to previous knowledge without analysis) Similarly "aware of surroundings" is vague. Give me a busy road and I'll cross it using nothing but my ears but if someone hid my present in plain sight there's a good chance I'd not see it either. When asked what we should do in a town I'd never been to I suggested the cinema without consciously noticing I had been walking towards one - which of these is the awareness they speak of? 

I guess that my complete lack of future orientation is one of the indicators I'm an ISJ. While SPs are more about the current moment and Ns tend to be in the future I can see many possibilities for what _is_ but I have no interest when it comes to predicting the future and I've never made a long term plan but I can go back through my past and reinterpret it at will, twisting it to fit whatever type I want.

I'm struggling with this because I doubt my knowledge and I doubt my ability to verbalise anything with the clarity I desire, and worse - I could lead you astray. I can still relate to much of what you say but that doesn't mean much. 

Keep reading and keep observing yourself and hopefully everything will fall in to place :happy:


----------



## Resolution (Feb 8, 2010)

Remember that Fe can be a logical function as well. 

It just concerns itself with creating a system of ethics, and social/ethical observations.


----------



## Obsidian (Aug 10, 2011)

intp, without much doubt


----------



## Paradigm (Feb 16, 2010)

I definitely see Fe/Ti, so I would be surprised if you ended up being xxFP or xxTJ. Are you sure you're an introvert? ENTP seems like a possibility, functionally, since they go Ne-Ti-Fe-Si.

Have you gotten into the Enneagram? It might explain things the MBTI doesn't. I think you're a 6 so/sp, possibly sp/so.


----------



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

This is all really interesting. To be honest, I'm in two minds partly because I have already discredited typology to myself and yet still have the strange desire to just put some closure on which type I am because it bothers me I don't know - even though I think logically the categories don't exist in the same kind of complex way we describe them here.

I took the cognitive function test again and got Ni, Fe, Ti, Te, Ne, Fi, Si, Se - don't know if that helps. The Ni and Fe were "extremely good use" and the others were moderate apart from both Ss which were "poor use". Strange, because I always thought I had a lot of Ti - but then it's just a test.

The reason I would say I am unlikely to be an extrovert is simply for the reason that I feel very irritable when people are around me too much. I can deal with people well and I love being around people and having a chat, but if they're around too long, even just my boyfriend being in the same room as me (we live together) then I want them to go away so that I can just think for a while. I tend to become moody and irritable if I have to spend too much time with other people and not enough time just by myself. I don't particularly like parties because I feel trapped - I'm forced to be in a social situation for a prolonged period of time and I refuse to leave (my boyfriend hates them too and always wants to go!) until we have been there long enough to make it look like we wanted to be there in the first place! Just in case the person throwing the party thinks it means we aren't interested in them. I will also force myself to go to parties for the same reason - so that they know I wanted to be around.

As for the ENTP - someone said that before so I ventured onto the forum just to see if I'd fit in. It seems very competitive and some of them like the idea of winning - but I only had a very quick glance, so I may have got that wrong. I think I went on there, saw that, and then kind of ran away  I'm a bit wary of competition and don't really want to post anything if I feel like there might be a competitive atmosphere. I'm pretty sensitive in that way. I'm not sensitive to constructive criticism, but if it's an argument or I feel like someone has said something that wasn't constructive then I get very nervous and want to leave. I get extremely irritated at people arguing for arguing's sake!

For the person that said INTP - I have thought that before. I need to look into it properly but the only thing that put me off was that the Fe was inferior and I can see a lot of Fe in me.

Thanks for all the help. Whenever I talk about this I think, ah, I'm probably just an INFj, but it's bothersome for this stuff not to fit - which is stupid, like I said, because I know fine well why it doesn't fit! I've already got my own theory about MBTI, but it's just sort of ---- irritating. I don't know why!


----------



## Obsidian (Aug 10, 2011)

INTP

2) Interest in newness, avoidance of boredom
3) Comedian
4) No common sense
9) Very poorly organized
15) Worries about what could go wrong
18) Non-uptight regard for appearance
19) No core personality. Intellectual.

Most of the ones that I'm omitting just describe your N-ness and Fe-ness, so they are not relevant to the discussion.


----------



## suicidal_orange (May 6, 2010)

Obsidian said:


> INTP
> 
> 2) Interest in newness, avoidance of boredom
> 3) Comedian
> ...


All but the first two describe me too and the second is likely a confidence issue as I can make anyone laugh if I think they will appreciate my humour, but it's sarcastic and politically incorrect so usually kept hidden. And the newness thing is a weird one too, I'm not one to rewatch an old movie rather than risk disliking a new one or to always order the same dish - I'll take the new one nearly every time. As the numbers increase so does the applicability until the last three are perfect for me.

I'd love to be an INTP, but I'm not. I also wonder why you've removed the "N-ness" when that's a big part of being an INTP? I trust you have a good grasp on the difference between Si reliance on factual experience vs the Ti version?


----------



## Obsidian (Aug 10, 2011)

Because she is not debating whether she is an S or an N.

And if most of those describe you, then I am not discounting the fact that you may be mistyped.


----------



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

Sorry, I'm not entirely sure all of these are related to MBTI? 



Obsidian said:


> INTP
> 2) Interest in newness, avoidance of boredom


Interest in newness suggests "N" and I'm pretty sure most types don't want to be bored  When it comes to the not wanting to bored with more academic projects like I would take on - surely it depends in what parts I'm interested in? If it helps, I enjoy writing comedy because I love getting the punchline right and getting the pacing and structure right and I am quite good at writing "naturally" - i.e. as people actually speak. However, I am not very good at starting a project as I'm afraid I sometimes realise I don't really have any ideas. Once I have an idea or I am developing someone else's ideas, I really enjoy it, but I hate the start of a project because I have no material. I prefer it once I have material. Saying that, if I have to meet a deadline, then if I just sit down and tell myself I have to have an idea then if I'm alone in silence for a while and I have it in my mind that I must have an idea then I have confidence that I will come up with one - for instance, I used to write cartoons to deadlines and I did not worry when a few minutes before deadline I didn't have a punchline (I usually just got on with the cartoon and left that bit til last) because I knew it would come to me if I thought hard enough about it. I would have an idea about where the punchline should be (abstractly - like it should revert back to turn the idea on its head or something, or I would know that there is a theme in the cartoon that I could try and identify and turn that around). So - yeah. I write in a very particular way. I like people getting involved, though, to a certain extent because having other people throwing ideas at me usually helps. That's not to say I take their ideas - although sometimes I do - it sometimes just gives me the material to develop. So they may say one thing, which reminds me of something else and then CLICK and then it all comes together (And that's really, really satisfying!) 



> 3) Comedian


Surely any type could be a comedian  Plus there are so, so, so many different types of comedy. I would say this just takes a certain amount of wit 



> 4) No common sense


True of the INFP as well, though.



> 9) Very poorly organised


Extremely true of the INFP



> 15) Worries about what could go wrong


Every type does if they happen to suffer from an anxiety disorder - which I do.



> 18) Non-uptight regard for appearance


This is true and this is part of what drew me to the INTP profile.



> 19) No core personality. Intellectual.


No core personality? Oi! The question asked how people see me, not how I see myself.  I have a core personality, it's just that everybody sees a different bit of it because I'm uncomfortable showing parts of myself to people who will not necessarily like those parts or might find them uncomfortable - people see the sides of me they'll like,I think. Although I'm analysing there so I'm not sure, because it's completely automatic and it was only recently I realised everybody saw me a different way - and that's how I noticed that I'm acting a different way. Never would have occurred to me before, though, as I always feel "me" inside.

As for intellectual - all types can be intellectual  My probably ISTP boyfriend is extremely intellectual, though just because he understands something doesn't mean he cares. That's the difference (I think) between S and N types is it? He can grasp extremely abstract stuff very quickly, but his usual answer is "so?" Is that how I would decide between S and N?

I'm sorry, I don't mean to look like I'm shooting you down, as I am quite interested in the INTP type. Perhaps it would be best to look at whether I am an Ni dom or Ti dom (or Si dom).

I'd be very keen to hear what the difference is between these functions in the dominant function if we were to limit ourselves to the INFJ/INTJ or INTP or ISFJ for the moment to make that process easier.

If anyone wants to chip in with how they feel each one works and how I might experience it, that would be cool


----------



## Obsidian (Aug 10, 2011)

ukinfj said:


> Interest in newness suggests "N" and I'm pretty sure most types don't want to be bored  When it comes to the not wanting to bored with more academic projects like I would take on - surely it depends in what parts I'm interested in?


Well, if you think of someone like Dr. House, who only takes cases that he finds challenging, you will see what I am talking about. Personally, I myself am a good bit like that, and I have read that other INTPs are as well. I focus on challenging myself rather than taking easy tasks like I sometimes should.



> Surely any type could be a comedian


Technically any type can be pretty much anything, with the right about of effort. But in general, I don't think J's make good comedians.



> [No common sense could be] True of the INFP as well, though.


I guess it depends what you mean by common sense. I was thinking of stuff like social common sense, which an INFP would be good at.



> [Poor organization is] Extremely true of the INFP


You keep bringing up the idea of an INFP now. But I got the idea pretty clearly that you exhibited Fe, which would preclude INFP.



> Every type does if they happen to suffer from an anxiety disorder - which I do.


Anxiety is common in INTPs. It derives often from Ne, which is good at spotting possibilities but not as good at predicting which possibility will come true.



> No core personality? Oi! The question asked how people see me, not how I see myself.  I have a core personality, it's just that everybody sees a different bit of it because I'm uncomfortable showing parts of myself to people who will not necessarily like those parts or might find them uncomfortable - people see the sides of me they'll like,I think.


Well, call it what you want.



> As for intellectual - all types can be intellectual  My probably ISTP boyfriend is extremely intellectual, though just because he understands something doesn't mean he cares.


All types can be *intelligent*, but by "intellectual" I am referring to people who like to spend time in thought -- NTs.


----------



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

@Obsidian Thank you for your responses. We sound quite different but perhaps all I'm doing here is testing the theory. It seems that I will not fit in either way. Theoretically, from the discussion we've had here and the other things I've read, we haven't quite wiped out INFJ - as the Ti in you seems much stronger than the Ti in me. 

I had a look on the INTP forum and found that the INTPs appear to act like I do when under extreme stress, which is interesting. Under stress I will become interested in one thing, not notice time pass and generally do anything other than the thing I am supposed to be doing. The difference seems to be that INTPs feel free by doing this - that they are simply following their interest. Whereas I tend to do this out of avoidance (to me, following my interests when it comes to theory is akin to living in a fantasy world and is destructive rather than constructive) and it will actually greatly increase my stress. If I feel that I have not accomplished as many things as I would like to - i.e. finished projects which have a tangible result and which have moved me along in life in some way - then I feel that life is pointless. I have a very strong dislike - I guess it's a feeling of overwhelming stress - of the idea of being in the same place I am now next year or to not have mastered something or put a strong direction on my life. I found it, for example, extremely stressful coming out of university into the real world and near collapsed for some time and became extremely anxious and nihilistic. The reason is - I need to know what I'm doing every minute of the day and where I'm going and what the next milestone is. I saw some of my friends do the same thing as me, without a deadline and a predestined project and a timetable, life felt pointless. That's not to say I don't have initiative or need others to tell me what to do, it's just that I was yet to make my own timetable and I found the indecision over what exactly I should do - how exactly I should plan my life and where shall I exactly be in five years time in order to meet an exact goal by the age of 30 and live out the (rather idealised) life I have planned for myself - absolutely crippling.

This to me, seems like a J thing. And as for your comedian stance  I would actually agree that Ps are probably better, though I never said I was a GOOD comedian :-D I was a niche comedian. I did rather well with judges, other comedians and promoters, but maybe 70 per cent of the time the audience didn't get it. I'm not good at observational comedy or improvising. I relied heavily on call backs and minutely structured story lines and turns of phrase. I enjoyed the "tying up" of comedy - this is probably my favourite thing about comedy. Setting something up and structuring - leading the audience astray and then bringing them back unexpectedly. and this is the kind of humour I like, as well, although it is very niche humour. So I would say Js do comedy and maybe Js like J-style comedy, though my P boyfriend and P brother are far, far, far wittier than me. They would not get far if they sat down and tried to structure a sketch, as their ideas tend to be quick-witted and of the moment and they do not particularly like the aspect of comedy that I do - sitting down and meticulously structuring then waiting for the little moment when everything just comes together.

So this was interesting, anyway, I'm sorry for rambling. I was interested to know more about INTPs because if I were to go by personality descriptions alone I recognised the INTP in me - the idea of sitting thinking about absolutely everything is very much like me. I enjoy having time to sit and think, particularly if I'm trying to work something out (thinking about my personal life stresses me out, but thinking of something outside of myself is distracting and satisfying). But the difference seems to be firstly in the unstructured aspect of the INTP - I am poorly organised because I spend too much time in my head but I find the very fact I am poorly organised unbelievably stressful! Meanwhile, the INTPs seem to me to be ok going at their own pace instead of, like me, feeling that they are wasting precious minutes of their existence (yes, really, i think I should leave the forum soon because one day I will die and I will regret this wasted time - I actually think like that!) The other thing was that i notice INTPs - just going off things written on the forum - seem to have a hard time saying the right thing or understanding how others work? I sometimes say the wrong thing but I never have a problem understanding how everybody works and what they want and why they're acting the way they are and what I should do to make them feel good. So that seems to me to be the difference.


----------



## Carola (Apr 26, 2011)

If my opinion has a value , i think that you're not an NT.

I think so because you often talk about yourself , you're very introspective.Not that an NT should not be so , but you think a lot about who you are as a person.You talk about you as a commedian and other stuff that revolve around your competence (T maybe..) , that's true, but you have always strong attention on you as person.You say a lot of things about your temper , your character.You seem to give importance to the sense , the definition of personal identiy.
The thing itself to share personal things , not only things about your intellectual interests ,and not only in special threads and not only superficial things of your personality , make you more of an NF in my opinion.

(i'm not saying that all the NTs are not interested in people and things like that of course... )

Then , a thing that could be useless because is too much personal.
In your writing i have the constant impression that you try to connect with your reader.That could be obvious , but i don't talk about an intellectual connection , or simply the clarity to be understood , or the enthusiasm of your ideas and the will to share( all ''impersonal '' things).You seem to want an ''interpersonal'' connection , i can't describe it clearer.

To be simpler and to summarize all i said, i don't see you as a ''detached intellectual'' : you have often in mind the person and the personal.
(detachment is an Ni thing as well anyway from what i've understood )

I'm not able to distinguish between Fi and Fe but you have Ti i think , so you must be an INFJ.

I could be absolutely wrong about you , i apologize if so.


----------



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

Carola said:


> If my opinion has a value , i think that you're not an NT.
> 
> I think so because you often talk about yourself , you're very introspective.Not that an NT should not be so , but you think a lot about who you are as a person.You talk about you as a commedian and other stuff that revolve around your competence (T maybe..) , that's true, but you have always strong attention on you as person.You say a lot of things about your temper , your character.You seem to give importance to the sense , the definition of personal identiy.
> The thing itself to share personal things , not only things about your intellectual interests ,and not only in special threads and not only superficial things of your personality , make you more of an NF in my opinion.
> ...


No that helps, thanks. I usually just think, ok I'll just stick with INFJ, it makes the most sense. But then I will notice that I use a lot of Ti and think that it could not be my tertiary function and then I think well I 'd like to know what type I *actually* am. But you are right, that I do not seem like a T type. The thing with being an NT that uses Ti is that this would mean Fe was very low down on the scale, and this wouldn't fit either. It feels more to me sometimes that my F and T seem very equal and it is difficult for me to see one above the other. whenever I take tests, F and T are very close to one another (although the last time i took one F was much higher but this does not seem right to me). And then Ni seems a certainty because it is consistently very high on any test I have taken over the last six months or so. 

I think the personal identity thing is something of the moment - it's something that is bothering me right now rather than being something consistent about my personality. in fact, I remember my brother saying he felt he did not know his identity and me struggling to help as I could not grasp that idea. It seemed to me that identity is a very ethereal, imperceptible and illusionary thing - so that we only have a sense we have an identity but that that identity would be impossible to explain to others. I seemed to "lose my identity" when I was no longer in education, which I think is because I connect my identity with external things - I consider myself in adjectives, perhaps, but those adjectives need some external validation. How shall I describe myself as intelligent when intelligence is relative, for example, and does not exist in and of itself? If I am merely a peg on a spectrum, how i can i say much about myself at all? The loss of identity, then, or the search for it or mulling over it, tends to be the result of over analysis and an ever present awareness of the impossibility of things. However, I am aware that if I had peace of mind and did not feel my life to be in freefall - which I often do, regardless of the fact I have the things that afford others security like a job I'm good at, a flat, a boyfriend and friends as well as a dream I follow - then I should feel more secure in my identity and not feel that I sit in a chaotic world that it is impossible to place meaning to as it is constantly relative to everything else and therefore holds no integral meaning.....so you see, analysis, constant analysis, which is interesting but fills me with anxiety as i do not like things not being clear and the feeling that there are too many possibilities - it feels like indecision.

But yes, I apologise for ranting. I think this is my problem with MBTI. As soon as I say I am an INFJ, the way I am, my strong Ti as well as my current mood, seems to make that seem unlikely, but then i do not fit any other type better.

I think perhaps I just prefer trait theory to typology  In trait theory, your personality looks like this:

---------I-----------
-----I---------------
----------------I----
-------I-------------
--------------------I

You are on spectrum of things and everything simply becomes relative to the people around you - with this model it is impossible to "type" - but it seems so much more accurate and less frustrating to me


----------



## suicidal_orange (May 6, 2010)

I feel compelled to point something out to Obsidian - the length of posts. One thing INTPs are known for is being able to express things concisely which I'm not seeing much of in this thread.



> I'm sorry, I don't mean to look like I'm shooting you down, as I am quite interested in the INTP type. Perhaps it would be best to look at whether I am an Ni dom or Ti dom (or Si dom).


Really doesn't sound like an INTP either (although it could be learned behavior, or perhaps even the aforementioned anxiety). There is nothing remotely offensive in the post it's just a friendly discussion, right? NTs enjoy discussing and debating and don't take it personally so I'm pretty sure we're looking at an IXFJ.



Obsidian said:


> Because she is not debating whether she is an S or an N.


I love how Ns get stuck on the details rather than look at the big picture :wink: Questioning Ti Ne or Ni Fe as top two functions shows a lack of understanding of self and/or system so it's surely better to start with a blank slate. 



> And if most of those describe you, then I am not discounting the fact that you may be mistyped.


If you search in this section you'll find a couple of threads discussing my type - every one coming back with me as an N, which I am not. My mistype history is INTP INFP INFJ INTJ ISTP and I could still write an entirely accurate "type me" thread to get typed as any of those types. I am an ISFJ.



ukinfj said:


> My probably ISTP boyfriend is extremely intellectual, though just because he understands something doesn't mean he cares. That's the difference (I think) between S and N types is it? He can grasp extremely abstract stuff very quickly, but his usual answer is "so?" Is that how I would decide between S and N?


I can't speak for all Ss but generally for me this seems accurate. If something's not useful or changeable what's the point of knowing it? Once the mental challenge of understanding has been conquered my interest dies.



> That's not to say I don't have initiative or need others to tell me what to do, it's just that I was yet to make my own timetable and I found the indecision over what exactly I should do - how exactly I should plan my life and where shall I exactly be in five years time in order to meet an exact goal by the age of 30 and live out the (rather idealised) life I have planned for myself - absolutely crippling.


I'm trying to understand this - I think you're saying that you hate future planning yet you have an idealised life planned out? If so this could say lots about you, if you're willing to share it.

As a final thought (for now) what type do you want to be? Why?


----------



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

asmit127 said:


> I'm trying to understand this - I think you're saying that you hate future planning yet you have an idealised life planned out? If so this could say lots about you, if you're willing to share it.


No, sorry I did not explain myself well. I love future planning, it makes me feel calm and directed and it gives purpose to my life. But sometimes I can only see the end goal and having to think of "how I will get there" can be frustrating, as sometimes there isn't a direct way to get there. Let's say with scriptwriting. I'm doing better now at this direction and could feasibly have a career in it one day, but for years I was tring to work out - what shall I do to get to that point? It isn't like in university where you just write the essay, do the research etc in order to reach the goal of good marks. It is a very vague situation. You cannot go on a course to become a scriptwriter (although you can learn more about the craft through a course). You cannot go for an interview or look for jobs in the field. You cannot just write whatever you like as well, because if it is going to be seen by others, you have to write what people are already looking for. As I am stressed over the idea of putting on a play by myself (so much organisation and so many details to keep on top of and then there's the trying to make everybody do as they should be doing!) I can't very well do that unless I find someone who would like to put the play on for me. To become a scriptwriter, there are hundreds of different ways and everybody will give you different advice. The anxiety came for me at trying to work out what *I* would do. how shall I decide which projects will be more useful for me eventually getting paid to do this? Should I network even though I can't stand it? Am I shooting myself in the foot by staying away from parties (I am shooting myself in the foot by the way and one day they will stop inviting me to the broadcast house, but I cannot force myself to go because I am uncomfortable networking and very shy in situations where I don't know anyone). 

It is the fact that there are too many ways to get there and I have to work out which is the best way for me. I have done that now, but it took a couple of years of trying to work out what I should do - I was very keen not to waste any time and I could see my life slipping by (I am now 25 and I feel in a massive hurry to reach my self-set deadline of 27 to have got another foot in the door, but this immense pressure makes it more difficult to do anything). So that is the cause of the anxiety. I love planning ahead but I need to know my plans will work. And if I am not sure over the effectiveness of my plans because the field is alien to me - straight out of uni I did not know much about the industry - then that is extremely stressful and very,very frustrating.



> As a final thought (for now) what type do you want to be? Why?


 Whichever one sounds like me. I don't really mind whether I'm S, N, F or T so long as it seems to fit. None of them fit perfectly but I also don't expect that. I decided about a month ago that MBTI was discreditable, but there's part of me that still wants to make it work slightly better - the only possible solution to me is that there must be boundaries between - there must be a point 0 - a saw someone else on another thread call it the silent number. This is only logical. So unless there is a part of the theory that explains point 0 - the ones that will not fit any type well and can only make an estimation of what type they are more likely to be - then the theory is unworkable. I prefer trait theory, but there's part of me that just wants to make MBTI work and trying to type myself seems to be a way.

I still think MBTI is useful because it gives you tools - it is easier to speak of personality if you have eight cognitive functions, because it splits things up nicely, just so long as you do not start to believe that the functions are separate or polarised or that there are no more functions or that you can only either be one or the other and not possibly an "ambi" version of two functions, which is logically plausible and must be true for a proportion of society. 

So yeah - - - - I first of all want to stop the frustration of not being able to fit myself to the theory and the frustration of the theory being unworkable. I don't know why I find this frustrating, though. I would prefer to just be like "ok, I'm an INFJ, that'll do" - as so far this does fit better than the other types and I don't think it is possible to type based on what I said above. but there is something unbelievably frustrating about not being able to categorise myself! Basically, I just want to have a firm grasp of it.


----------



## Obsidian (Aug 10, 2011)

Clearly N. Clearly I. I still say most likely Fe. That means either INTP or INFJ.

You admit you could be a bad or at least odd comedian, which could better allow for INFJ.

I still think INTP could work. A lack of common-sense, poor organization, and a lack of care for your appearance do not seem very INFJish. And the fact that everyone sees you as a different person seems INTPish. A hatred of networking also seems kind of INTPish, more than simply an aspect of introversion.

But on the other hand, you do seem rather feeley.

If you post a video I bet I can tell which.



asmit127 said:


> I feel compelled to point something out to Obsidian - the length of posts. One thing INTPs are known for is being able to express things concisely which I'm not seeing much of in this thread.


Actually, INTPs are known for rambling, but less so when writing than when speaking. And anyway, she's trying to give us enough details to understand her.


----------



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

@Obsidian

If you don't mind. I will post quotes of things I have written on PerC recently which I believe show my Ti at work and perhaps you will be able to tell from that whether I am an INFJ or INTP - it could be possible that I am INFJ with a highly developed Ti or it could be possible that I am INTP with highly developed empathy. I believe that in my life, brought up by a severely unempathic father and extremely emotional mother, I have had to use empathy A LOT to get by and to keep the peace and understand my parents. So there could be an argument that my Fe has simply been overdeveloped due to this, maybe. And because I'm a woman, maybe, and the culture is different. I don't know.

In the example below, I explain how both me and boyfriend trust our personal logical assumptions to a far greater extent than I see other people doing it. however, my boyfriend (who I assumed was Ti-dom) does it to a far greater extent than I do. i understood Ti has being an assumption making logical function, but please do tell me if I'm wrong. I show my boyfriend's way of thinking and my own way of thinking below, as I see my boyfriend of using an exaggerated form of my own system of thought and I thought it might make it clearer.



> Me and my boyfriend do this very differently - or rather, he does it to a much great extent than I do - but since it is similar and his way is much easier to explain, I will recount for you a conversation we had last night.
> 
> BF: I was just reading that on 9/11 they didn't have time to arm the planes they sent out after the passenger planes that were hijacked so they told the pilots that with their discretion they could just fly into the planes to bring them down.
> ME: Really?! God, wouldn't that be awful if you were the one that was told you had the choice to do that and then it came to a point where that was your only option and you couldn't do it - couldn't kill yourself. So you go back to base and it turns out that plane hit a building and thousands died - if you had sacrificed yourself you could have saved them. imagine the things people would say - you would be blamed for a disaster. What an awful choice to give someone.
> ...


I will also post this on religion, as this is a topic I feel very confident about so I thought it showed how I look at concepts, which tends to be quite different than other people so might be useful. I'm not sure if this shows N or T more, though I guess it must show both!



> Religion has no greater a positive or negative effect as politics. Religion in and of itself does nothing. The people who follow religion can do things, sometimes irrational things and very bad things. But this absolutely no different from politics. People who are political can do things, sometimes irrational things and very bad things.
> 
> It's entirely interpretable so the ideology itself is not worth thinking about. It is not like we should ban politics on the basis that it does bad things. It is a system of beliefs, we're going to have them anyway. It doesn't matter what form the ideology takes, it depends what ideology you follow. the ideology you follow is largely made up in your own head or influenced by the people around you. Those two come together to produce your ideology. What a scripture says bears little influence, because words are interpretable and people will naturally interpret whatever the hell they like. You wouldn't believe the amount of people I've seen cite 1984 to support a whole range of contradicting beliefs.
> 
> If 1984 was a religious text, would it have a positive or negative effect on the world? Neither and both. The people who follow it - who have like I say a wide range of conflicting interpretations - will act according to their interpretations, but their interpretations were based on what they wanted to interpret in the first place - that is why they interpreted it that way. So the shallow end - the scriptures and rituals - are really quite outside of the matter. the ideology exists before the texts and can show itself in many different forms - politics, religion etc.


----------



## Obsidian (Aug 10, 2011)

The conversation about the planes probably just shows that the boyfriend isn't as creative as you. For example, the pilots could have just threatened the enemy and bluffed rather than actually ramming into them.

The other stuff doesn't say much. As you have pointed out, all the types have the capability to think.


----------



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

Obsidian said:


> The conversation about the planes probably just shows that the boyfriend isn't as creative as you. For example, the pilots could have just threatened the enemy and bluffed rather than actually ramming into them.
> 
> The other stuff doesn't say much. As you have pointed out, all the types have the capability to think.


Oh, I don't know then! haha! My boyfriend is an S type. Very clever but totally uninterested in things that are not concrete.

So this means the logical assumptions - how I explained about assuming z and y are true on the basis of x (initial information) without evidence - this is not Ti? Because other people definitely do not always think like this.


----------



## Obsidian (Aug 10, 2011)

As I understand it, Te basically just means simplistic, concrete, and widely understood logic that is easier to articulate. Ti is more expansive and complex logic, less structured, and which with Ne will often tend toward the creative side, understanding connections that many others would miss.


----------



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

Obsidian said:


> As I understand it, Te basically just means simplistic, concrete, and widely understood logic that is easier to articulate. Ti is more expansive and complex logic, less structured, and which with Ne will often tend toward the creative side, understanding connections that many others would miss.


Ah, I'm not sure that's what Te means. Te is something quite alien to me but I think it is literally just not seeing things inside yourself. For instance, if I am explaining the forces that occur on the body during acceleration and how relativity in this sense works, then I play it in my head like a video, and then I am able to see it. I would not understand it if it were a bunch of numbers, but others prefer a bunch of numbers. As far as I am aware Te prefers the numbers and Ti prefers empirical logic - something that is understandable to themselves.

Ti is about deduction - if x is true then so must be a,b, c whatever. But Te is more about induction, or so I have heard - which is like - 98 per cent of people are nice, so it is true to say that people are nice. It's sort of seeing it as a probability and being ok with the inconsistency that may occur - I think.....

Deductive is this: Deductive reasoning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Inductive is this: Inductive reasoning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And generally, Ti is a little less rational than Te. From what I know, Te gets facts and makes theory from there. This is not something I would do. I would make the theory, then get the facts to support the theory. I will disagree with an "Expert" on the basis that "it doesn't sound correct" without being able to give much of a reason - it will take me a while to decide what the reason is but I will know I disagree.

To me, Ti is about "how does it work?" If I cannot see, for myself, how something works, then why should I believe it to be true?

That, I think, is the difference between Te and Ti.

I'm pretty sure that what I described above about if x is true then y and z must also be true is Ti. It also works the other way as I said. If y and z *seem* implausible (again this is personal logic, I'm not testing it) then x is false.

This is deductive reasoning. 

Whereas, Te may be told that x is true. To decipher if x is true, they test x. If 98 per cent of the time x is true, then x may as well be seen as true.

Both have their flaws as logic, but both can also be accurate. I do not tend to test things and will consider it an annoyance if something that "must" be true logically turns out not to be true - which means I will not believe something that someone else has said is fact. For instance, I can see no reason why personality should be genetic. It does not fit with my model of what personality logically is and why it exists, but if most people are going to say that personality is genetic, then I need to entertain the possibility, but this is incredibly annoying as I can not see why it should be so.

So Ti endeavours to understand how everything works in and of itself BY THEMSELVES. I'm not sure about all this "Ti is about research", because I really don't think it is. You don't need to research things if you are going to deduce them. I will have the idea first, then I will back it up by finding "experts" that agree with me. I will have a hard time with experts that don't agree with me unless they are able to back up their points with logic that makes sense to me - but it has to make sense to me personally.


----------



## Obsidian (Aug 10, 2011)

Ti does not mean seeing things in your head. And Ti does not mean deductive reasoning.

Ti does often involve _thinking _things silently in your head, as opposed to thinking out loud. But that is only part of it. Ti just means reliance on less widely-recognized logic. The logic is more peculiar to the individual, like Fi is more peculiar and unique than Fe. Imo, Te logic often sounds good on the surface, but Ti is often good at poking subtle holes in it by looking at everything more deeply and thoroughly. And even when the holes are pointed out, often the Te user will be unable or unwilling to recognize them.

As a practical matter, you can see Te when people are outwardly organized, or very good at outwardly communicating their logical thoughts. INTJs are better speakers on-the-fly than INTPs, who will tend to ramble, unless it's something they have already thought a lot about.


----------



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

Obsidian said:


> Ti does not mean seeing things in your head. And Ti does not mean deductive reasoning.
> 
> Ti does often involve _thinking _things silently in your head, as opposed to thinking out loud. But that is only part of it. Ti just means reliance on less widely-recognized logic. The logic is more peculiar to the individual, like Fi is more peculiar and unique than Fe. Imo, Te logic often sounds good on the surface, but Ti is often good at poking subtle holes in it by looking at everything more deeply and thoroughly. And even when the holes are pointed out, often the Te user will be unable or unwilling to recognize them.
> 
> As a practical matter, you can see Te when people are outwardly organized, or very good at outwardly communicating their logical thoughts. INTJs are better speakers on-the-fly than INTPs, who will tend to ramble, unless it's something they have already thought a lot about.


Part of this is true, and my seeing things in my head might be part of just a learning type of something (although I'm an aural learner not a visual learner) but if what you say above is true, then Ti would normally be correct and Te incorrect. Since this is definitely not the case, I think it must be different. <<<<deductive reasoning 

I think maybe its because people who don't use the extraverted function find it hard to grasp (I certainly find Te hard to grasp) because a lot of people say something similar about Fe - that it's something outward or perhaps less thought through or it's just something that's understandable by everybody - etc. But it's actually just that the value of Fe is to compromise and smooth things over rather than sticking to a deeply held belief that must not be crossed. That doesn't make Fi types more moral or more logical with their morals, it just means they don't necessarily believe the same things as others and are not as happy about compromising on what they think is right.

People who use Ti already have a model that is set in their mind. The model is confused with the truth (so they may believe their own conjecture). They are good at checking for inconsistency and implausibility but this is also based on personal logic - so it is what they believe to be true.

Te does not exist on its own model - it does not just believe it's own deductions (which is Ti) - it tests them externally. A mathematician may be more likely to use Ti as this is very deductive reasoning - if this is true, then this and this is true. But these musts often aren't approximations - Ti likes accuracy much more than Te.

Te could be more likely to be a scientist, as they would test a hypothesis externally, instead of asking whether the hypothesis is logically plausible like I would. They would set up a series of trials or tests and see what happens. If it turns out that x happens most of the time, then it is fair to say that x is true. But if it only happens 70 per cent of the time, x probably isn't true and more tests or hypotheses are needed.

I'll go onto the cognitive function forum and check this


----------



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

Ok, I've stolen this from a user called @NiDBiLD

Ti: I have made a blueprint for a house. It will be totally awesome. It will not need any outside source of water or electricity. I have solved that. Also, it will keep warm the year around. I have solved that problem too. This is the perfect house. I know this.

Te: *looks at the blueprint* ... ... Uhm. Sorry to say this, but um... Based on the carrying power of steel, this structure wouldn't be able to hold it's own weight.

Ti: *looks at the blueprint and scratches head while pondering the problems for a moment*... Well, you seem to be correct, but that is easily fixed. *scribbles a small note in the corner of the blueprint*

Te: That's quick. What did you do?

Ti: I took a holistic approach and changed the gravity constant to -5%. Now the house is flawless. By the way, don't be surprised if lightweight objects start levitating towards the sky. This is normal now.

Te: *sigh*

Ti changes the world to fit with its theory, like Fi changes the world to fit with its values. Fe and Te actually look at the world and fit themselves to it.


----------



## Carola (Apr 26, 2011)

ukinfj said:


> 'Ti changes the world to fit with its theory, like Fi changes the world to fit with its values. Fe and Te actually look at the world and fit themselves to it. '' .


An example of this(I hope it could help).

Me and my father (Te secondary) wondering about a physics law.
He: '' Mmm...Oh! Yes now i understand why ! if i do *this* in the reality then i see*that* , the law is correct!It's logical''
Me: '' Ok i can see that it happens in your example , but why ? '' 
He: ''Because ... Look!It works! When you do *this kind of things* it's logical that follow *this*,It's intuitive!( you can see how he accepts and sees the reality as ''intuitive'', he understands it spontaneously ) ''
Me:'' Ok .It happens.I don't mind that i see it...I can't understand why'' 
He :'' It 's obvious why!*talks about the qualities of something in the world*''
Me:'' Ok but...I'm not sure''

You see that he is linked to reality in logical reasoning , to me it's all abstract. I completely involutarily diregard reality!

His logic is corrispondent to what he sees in reality, his logical mental order correspond to reality.In his mind what happens has values in itself (logical value! then, he is an introvert , i guess an INTJ) .To me , my thinking patterns are more important of what i see.If i can't see the reality and the law in the terms of my logical internal pattern i can't accept the law.
He sees that the law corresponds to what actually happens , and is satisfied.

Te: He thinks in ''what happens?'' , he is *empirical*. 
Ti: I think '' what is coherent (in my mind)?'' , i'm analitycal. 

Then , he is organized and metodical .He looks for efficience.
He is '' technical''.He has a sense of* how to do things*.(it'a all external method and ''rightness'' , while mine is ''internal'' , an internal vision of how a thing should be to be ''right'', as you see in the previous example)

I hope that it is correct and of help. 

EDIT: obviously i don't mean that he is not capable of see formal inconsistance , and i don't mean that i'm incapable of observe what happens in reality.
I was talking about mental focus, of course.


----------



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

Carola said:


> An example of this(I hope it could help).
> 
> Me and my father (Te secondary) wondering about a physics law.
> He: '' Mmm...Oh! Yes now i understand why ! if i do *this* in the reality then i see*that* , the law is correct!It's logical''
> ...


Thanks for that. I totally agree with your explanation of Te/Ti - to me it is as you say, that I need to see it in my mind - I need to understand how it works for myself- before I will accept the reality. If I don't understand why it is happening, then how can I know when to expect it to happen and in which cases it won't happen? If that makes sense. I see observation of a thing happening somewhat useless - I don't that it happens, I want to know why it happens, if I do not see why it happens I will not except it as a universal law. I will say, yes it happened this time, but unless you can tell me why it happened, then we have not understood it, and cannot expect it to happen every time.

I hope that makes sense. I don't except things as law unless I can see why it is law.


----------



## Obsidian (Aug 10, 2011)

ukinfj said:


> but if what you say above is true, then Ti would normally be correct and Te incorrect. Since this is definitely not the case, I think it must be different. <<<<deductive reasoning


Ti _*is*_ better, and more often correct. It's just often less practical, and harder to externalize or articulate.



> Ti changes the world to fit with its theory, like Fi changes the world to fit with its values. Fe and Te actually look at the world and fit themselves to it.


Your whole quotation was a very biased analysis of the two types. But what you are really saying here, is just that Fe and Te are more practical and more readily recognized by society.


----------



## Carola (Apr 26, 2011)

Sorry , but i don't think that Ti is better.Ti is better on an Introverted perspective : in a perspective that searches ''deepness'', the universal in some way , the substance.Introversion is like ''purism'' .That's all.

On a practical plan it is not better.
And that's true for all the functions.

Introversion is a Paganini violin solo , Extraversion is folk music.
The solo is fascinating and perfect , but folk is overwhelming and merges all the people.

I hope it is clear enough what i mean.


----------



## Carola (Apr 26, 2011)

ukinfj said:


> Thanks for that. I totally agree with your explanation of Te/Ti - to me it is as you say, that I need to see it in my mind - I need to understand how it works for myself- before I will accept the reality. If I don't understand why it is happening, then how can I know when to expect it to happen and in which cases it won't happen? If that makes sense. I see observation of a thing happening somewhat useless - I don't that it happens, I want to know why it happens, if I do not see why it happens I will not except it as a universal law. I will say, yes it happened this time, but unless you can tell me why it happened, then we have not understood it, and cannot expect it to happen every time.
> 
> I hope that makes sense. I don't except things as law unless I can see why it is law.


The core i guess , is to understand what is for you the ''why''. 

To me it is simpler to understand because i 've ''tipically T'' interests.And i share them with my father , so i can see the difference between me and him.And i can easly realize that i want the reality to fit the theory .

To me the theory is the ''finish'' not the ''start''.
I'm somewhat platonic : reality is a manifestation of the idea (the theory).

Everything i find in reality then , i want to be a sample of the theory , i 'm sure that it has to be coherent with it .

That's obviously not an idea, a ''philosophy'' , a thought , it is an attitude ,an instinctive attitude.

So my ''why'' is this, is logical consistance with general patterns.I could say that the body has to fit with the skeleton. 

For a Te , you would start from the body and build a skeleton to fit it.The ''why '' of the skeleton is the body itself : the skeleton has to hold , to stand the body.That's why i do the skeleton in that way.

I 'm expressing it in different ways so that you can see it more clearly.I hope that it is not confusing .

EDIT: i hope that i'm interpreting deeply enough each function , i'm sorry if i make something seem more simplistic than it is.
EDIT 2: I'm sorry that i can't express the core now . I sense something missing or not at the point , i hope it is still of help.


----------



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

Carola said:


> The core i guess , is to understand what is for you the ''why''.
> 
> To me it is simpler to understand because i 've ''tipically T'' interests.And i share them with my father , so i can see the difference between me and him.And i can easly realize that i want the reality to fit the theory .
> 
> ...


This is a lot of help, thank you. I had thought of this before - do I fit the world to the theory or the theory to the world? It's quite difficult to tell, really, because I will do one in one situation and the other in another. I am not happy fitting the MBTI theory to the world, apart from as a tool to explain it (it's useful to have a vocabulary as a shorthand - the Ti, Te, Ni stuff could be used to point people towards certain categories) but since I don't believe it is true of the outside world, I would not like to use it there - in this case what I am literally thinking is "if you have to fit the world to the theory then the theory is wrong".

But then in other situations, I am the opposite. I would be bored if I were asked to literally study the world - actually watch what was happening or care too much about external matters. It's very uninspiring to me. You see, it's not that I don't like studies and research, I think they're useful, but I think it's useful because then I have more data to use to make a theory of my own. I would much prefer that all logic is just worked out in my head. I'm not sure I'm making myself clear. I deal in models, I suppose, to a certain extent. I prefer to think of society as model, for instance, that I can see working. That's endlessly interesting, but I don't know whether or not I'm fitting my model to the world or the world to my model. 

The only thing I really can say is that I know for certain that I always use deduction - which seems just like everybody would I guess, since it feels natural to me, but then I notice others will not do so or may even just believe what someone else says instead of checking it in their mind, which I find very frustrating when I see it among my friends! I want everybody to think for themselves. But that's probably a personal thing. I can spend hours in thought in order to go further down and down and down in a kind into the layer below.

Erm...the only instance i can give is that I thought about how the unconscious must work and how CBT says if you change the irrational thought you repeat to yourself unconsciously then you will be able to change the way you feel. But I was sitting on the bus thinking of that and I thought - wait, how can that work? Words in themselves are far too interpretable, even if you used different words, the meaning of them is up to you, you can still impose whatever meaning you want - you could essentially make your inner voice sarcastic! I saw it in my mind and it was a vague shape but I could see the shift of signifiers in front of it and I notice that the "meaning" is static and unchanged by the signifiers "words" - thus the meaning can bend the words as they are shifted in front of it. This means that our unconscious is not repressed memories, it is not learned statements like "I am stupid" as CBT says, it is the very essence of meaning - so how shall that be changed?

And that's all I got up to - but you see there, I don't know, I know other people don't necessarily do that or think that way, but that is an example of what I would say I spend my days doing over and over again on various topics that I come across, I just dig deeper down and down in my mind and then I suddenly see it and it all makes perfect sense - it just suddenly seems navigable. I know this didn't answer your question, but I can't tell whether here I'm fitting the world to my model or my model to the world! What i have said, my conclusion, is untestable - you couldn't find out one way or another, it is simply deduction, you just believe it because it's logical, you can't see it or test for it. So I would have no way of knowing whether I was right, i suppose, except that I believe I am. So in that way, the model cannot be fitted to the world - erm....if that makes sense....because it becomes necessary for me to fit the world to my model, in that it would be impossible to do it the other way around.

I'm sorry this was another ramble. I find these things so difficult to explain and I worry a lot that I am just not grasping the theory. To me, this is all I can really say over and over again to people because I can only say - that is how my mind works on every problem, that and I become aware of the separation of objects or words from inherent meaning and will see the world as a complex system of constantly moving processes that inform each other - everything is always symbiotic......I feel like I can never give people the answers they need here! Sorry!


----------



## Carola (Apr 26, 2011)

ukinfj said:


> You see, it's not that I don't like studies and research, I think they're useful, but I think it's useful because then I have more data to use to make a theory of my own. I would much prefer that all logic is just worked out in my head. I'm not sure I'm making myself clear.


You're clear .I like to study because i like to think : it is all material for a theory of my own.Everything i will study is material , and i'm convergent in that : i constantly work in my head for this ''all encmpassing'' understanding.
I've thought this previously with these exact words. 

Then , the example about the unconscious sounds similar to how i think : i wonder a lot about what i hear or i read and about random questions rised in my own mind.
I 'm interested in social matters as you , but i've not references : i use Freud and Jung , i'm aware that they're not adapt to the scope ! But I'm not in social science , so ... I'm aware that i will do a lot of wrong infernces because i would need years of study and research. 
But you know , i realized yesterday that there is no reason for what i do , i 've not a point of arrival . I simply follow that sense of not understanding , of ''not enough deepness'' , the sense that everythng i think and find is incomplete, not to the point,that something that i can't grasp , i don't know what it is , i have always this sense in everything i study .There is something missing.I have hated school for its superficiality, because it is all like '' that's it !'' . But ... It is all so not to the core of things! It is all so superficial understanding.It is not the quantity , i talk about the quality.
But you know , i realize that i've ''a problem'' here : it is true that school (my school at least) is messed up, but because of my sense of not grasped ... I think the same about me! 
When people say that i'm deep i think '' that's not true , i'm so superficial ! i can't grasp the real point!'' Where the point is...What it is, i don't know.I realized that i have a great sense of ''ungraspable'' even if i dont' realize it.And it is my giudance.

I've done a little of rambling , you see?You have not to worry about that! Everything can be useful.I've written this simply because it is wounderful to know that we are so similar ,and not in superficial ways : i'm sure that we could seem very different persons , but we share so much of our deep processes.

Anyway ...



> I am not happy fitting the MBTI theory to the world, apart from as a tool to explain it (it's useful to have a vocabulary as a shorthand - the Ti, Te, Ni stuff could be used to point people towards certain categories) but since I don't believe it is true of the outside world, I would not like to use it there - in this case what I am literally thinking is "if you have to fit the world to the theory then the theory is wrong".


I understand what you mean . i think that it is not important what you think : it is important how you do this.
I think that Ti is not believing that the world has to fit the theory.It is an attitude to grasp the world in ''logical theory'' and then to want that the world has to fit it.
The key word is''want'', i think.Because it express the sense of '' attitude'' .

Te is more '' i see this phenomen and i systematize it in this way , because it is useful to do so ''.Then , i don't mind the theory itself , in my mind reality is the focus : theory is a tool , a way to order the world.I want the theory to order the world. 

It is the focus , i think , what is actually important. Remember that Ti is associated with ''searching the truth''.Ti wants to understand the world as it is , but the focus is on the theory : the world become the theory in some way( i'm aware that sometimes i use expressions that have a lot of sense for me but that could be obscure to the reader.To me it is a way to condensate what i think, if it is not clear this expression, ignore it ) 
Even if i will know that i can't grasp all the world , i will focus on the theory.

Te will have a focus on the world that i see : the theory will be useful to handle it ( that could be tru for Ti as well ) , and i don't mind if i see that something is not perfectly coherent : theory is not important in itself.

So , what i want to say : it is a matter of focus.It is a matter of spontaneous importance.You want MBTI to be perfectly coherent , you see?
You think that it is a tool , but it is not important what you think : it is important that for the the theory has to have a perfect corispondance with the world : because to you it has to be an explaination of the world , you say that you see it as '' tool '', but you want this tool to be True: an explaination . A Te tool would be : i order this in this way so that i can do this and handle the world more easly.What is True is reality itself.
This is what i think about you .I can't know it surely , anyway. 

I hope that , even if scattered , i've been clear. SOrry for errors : in this long text i'm sure i 've made a lot of errors .

EDIT : i understand the fact that you're worried to not exactly understand the theory. that's the same for me.


----------



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

Carola said:


> But you know , i realized yesterday that there is no reason for what i do , i 've not a point of arrival . I simply follow that sense of not understanding , of ''not enough deepness'' , the sense that everythng i think and find is incomplete, not to the point,that something that i can't grasp , i don't know what it is , i have always this sense in everything i study .There is something missing.I have hated school for its superficiality, because it is all like '' that's it !'' . But ... It is all so not to the core of things! It is all so superficial understanding.It is not the quantity , i talk about the quality.


Yes! Exactly, brilliantly put! This is exactly how I experience things! 



> The key word is''want'', i think.Because it express the sense of '' attitude''.


Absolutely, I get this now. I was getting too wrapped up in details but this is a very good way to put it.

And the rest of the post is very understandable, thank you. I see what you mean about Te and Ti and in what way you mean the word "tool" - like you say it is an attitude. Te is fine using MBTI as a tool and knowing it is not correct but thinking it is useful anyway. I know MBTI is not correct but I find it frustrating and want to make it work more accurately or renew my understanding of it until it becomes accurate in my mind.  Which is exactly why I keep trying to type myself over and over! It is very difficult to fit in anywhere or feel that I fit in properly, which makes me annoyed that I have not got my type right. But that is me just wanting things to be accurate, even when I know it cannot be so. 



> I hope that , even if scattered , i've been clear. SOrry for errors : in this long text i'm sure i 've made a lot of errors


I have always found your posts to be very clear, actually.  I know it must be difficult in a second language, but I've always understood everything you say and I find your choice of words to be very accurate for the English nuance as well (so long as I read it correctly but I think I do!) 

Thanks for all your help. This feels a lot better now, I feel like I've got a grasp on it.


----------



## Obsidian (Aug 10, 2011)

i will say, ukinfj, that you are way too feely to be an INTP. So you must just be an infj like you have been saying.


----------



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

Obsidian said:


> i will say, ukinfj, that you are way too feely to be an INTP. So you must just be an infj like you have been saying.


Yeah, I guess so. Thanks for trying, though. It's a bit annoying. I still don't really feel like I totally "fit" the INFJ thing, I'm not really a "people person" or a confidante. I might just change to "unknown personality" and forget about it really.


----------



## Obsidian (Aug 10, 2011)

A people person would be more ENFJ


----------



## AshtonElaine (Sep 18, 2011)

I am a very strong INFJ, so here are some things about me that I find to be very defining characteristics - to help you either identify with it or find that you differ:

Overall, I am very stubborn, live very much in my head, hate conflict especially with people I am close to, need conflicts to be resolved quickly, have a strong intuition, and am guided by gut feelings, have trouble making quick decisions, and tend to be a perfectionist.

Due to my IN, I live very much in my head. I can spend a lot of time lost in deep thought and simply forget to communicate with others. I would say 25%-50% of my life experiences occur in my head; I tend to neglect the real world entirely by accident. If I'm very involved with reading/studying/doing artwork, it's common for me to forget to eat, sleep, shower, and take care of my usual real world responsibilities. 

F is my weakest letter. I can be very logical when I need to learn something. For example, in school I often employ logic to help me understand concepts. But I find that I resort to logic only when I feel that it's best for myself - to learn, or make intelligent conversation. At the end of the day, I really hate conflict and I do not want to hurt anyone's feelings. I don't want anyone to dislike me, and I get very worried when anyone is mad at me. Conflicts with others will eat me alive if not resolved. This is what ultimately makes me an F - I think I am about 60% F and 40% T.

The NF combination makes me very strongly intuitive. I rely on my personal intuition on a daily basis. I usually don't see things simply or logically (WYSIWYG), but instead I rely on a gut feeling and I believe that nothing is concrete or simple. This makes me terrible at math, history, and memorization; When I must follow strict equations and when things are absolute, I get confused. I am better at writing and psychology, because there is great room for exceptions, creativity, and feelings to be used in these subjects.

The J/P distinction is confusing to me sometimes but I think the easiest distinction is that J's rely on having a concrete resolution, whether about their daily schedule, or in a conflict. P's are not worried about making a concrete resolution - they like to leave things open-ended. Remember, the J/P distinction should be made based not on what you want or intend to do, but on how your other three letters are actually manifested on the real world. There are J's that enjoy spontaneity, and P's that wish they could have a more organized life. But the letter that fits you has to be the one that reflects what you actually end up doing.

Something else, it's common for INFJs to be very creative/artistic, and I am an artist. I get pleasure out of creating art because I can express myself more easily with paint on a canvas than I can through speaking my feelings aloud. Feelings and intuition are a strong part of my art - my art is always based on personal feelings and meaning. I can often spend months on one work of art, obsessing over the details.

If you couldn't tell, INFJs love to talk about themselves... at least I do 

Hope this helps you find your type!


----------

