# Ni Dom vs Fi Dom



## Asura (Apr 2, 2016)

Catwalk said:


> _How do you figure .._ (?) What is warranting your assertion based on .. (?) If I say I utilize my (Ni) objectively; what is your objection ..? That it is a subjective function? This does not necessarily cross out objectivity.
> 
> I see no strong grounds to doubt why (Ni/Fi/Ti) couldn't all be utilized together; with an inferior extroverted function. I am not really interested in "challenging" the theory; only curious in how you arrive at your objections.


Interesting. I could debate this but I feel as if you are attempting to allow a spark to grow to a flame. Or(Maybe?) allowing your mental scalpel to do its work. The debate is secondary to the overarching thought process.

Your Ni never ceases to intrigue me.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Defining the function(s) 


* *






> _Introverted iNtuiting involves synthesizing the seemingly paradoxical or contradictory, which takes understanding to a new level.
> 
> Using this process, we can have moments when completely new, unimagined realizations come to us.
> 
> ...





My point is simply while (X, Y, Z), may be most ("functional") via some for of intro/extro dualism there is nothing that sufficiently warrants it as being an _impossible_ to utilize all these functions together. I do not see why (X-extro) function *must* be answered with an (X-intro)-function, nor how it would be necessarily be problematic together.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Asura said:


> Interesting. I could debate this but I feel as if you are attempting to allow a spark to grow to a flame. Or(Maybe?) allowing your mental scalpel to do its work. The debate is secondary to the overarching thought process.
> 
> Your Ni never ceases to intrigue me.


I may be perhap(s) killing time ... I am rather typology obtuse; anyhow. I am not so much interest in debate; merely thought-bouncing. 

I am _utilizing_ mostly (Ni-Ti) here. See how that work(s) .... :drunk: Too much (Te) would _kill the entire _thread... Who cares about_ factual data_; now. 

What is also interesting is the assertion that (Fe) cannot be utilized _subjectively._ (i.e., without biases / swayed by subjective or personalized inputs).


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

Catwalk said:


> No. Unwarranted assertions aren't _reasons_.
> 
> What are the argument(s) to which (Ne) cannot be interpreted subjectively .. (?) On what grounds would (Ni/Fi) be incompatible in the "dom / aux"; position .. and then again with (Ti) .. (?) And how would these interactions between functions be determined as ("dysfunctional") ..? Why would I not be able to utilize my (Fi) objectively .. (?)
> 
> ...


Okay... so... my post was referencing the cognitive function *theory*, which as far as I'm concerned, we're all just pretending is true, and having fun with, and seeing if it happens to apply to our lives. 

The way I arrive at my conclusion was simply because that's what I've understood to be the theory. Do I think it's true/ real? Most likely, honestly, not... Its never been proven by science. It's just a fun thing to think about, and there might be some element of truth to it. 
You're right-- I have literally no idea why the theory would be like it is. I honestly see it as just another fun theory, kind of like astrology or being a starseed (?), except its one that happens to have more correlation to real life. 



Catwalk said:


> I may be perhap(s) killing time ... I am rather typology obtuse; anyhow. I am not so much interest in debate; merely thought-bouncing.
> 
> I am _utilizing_ mostly (Ni-Ti) here. See how that work(s) .... :drunk: Too much (Te) would _kill the entire _thread... Who cares about_ factual data_; now.
> 
> What is also interesting is the assertion that (Fe) cannot be utilized _subjectively._ (i.e., without biases / swayed by subjective or personalized inputs).


Dude, any amount of Te would likely kill the entire MBTI community!

So the answer to your question is simple: i have no "assertion"... I'm simply repeating what I just assumed we were all taking to be true (even though we have no proof whatsoever). If you start asking for factual data.... obviously, there is none. I thought we all knew that.

I mean, let's be honest, does anyone here, in their heart of hearts, think this stuff is actually *true*? Elements of it are certainly real, but the whole theory, as its put together, has very little chance of ever being proven by science, I think.


----------



## TipsyBlg (Jan 21, 2017)

I think a lot of us tend to get lost in the MBTI and forget it's just a theory (look who's talking, I'm totally obsessed with digging the deep meaning of the human psyché, OMG finally putting the right type on someone is ecstatic, but you're never truly sure, there could have something you missed, so you still think about it, you know ?). We sound like those biggots arguing about the rightful interpretation of the words of Christ, holding our MBTI books high in the air in a fight stance.

Okay now about @darkhippie

You sound like me. I was lost between INFP, INTP, ENTP etc too. I changed type every 3 months because it "didn't fit". At some point I realized my functions didn't fit anything: Ni/Ne - Ti - Fi - Fe - Se/Si/Te.

So here's the thing: it's possible you've been Ni -Ti/Fi looping for years. Like you didn't develop your Aux Function and bypassed it to the Tertiary one instead. At some point, you could have jumped to Se or even bypassed it again to use your shadow functions.

The thing is we all use the 8 functions in our every day life, we just have 4 favourite ones.

INFP Princess: The Dark Side of INFP
https://www.infjs.com/threads/infjs-darker-side-and-anger.23145/

Which one do you identify with more ?



Liminal said:


> *This is cited from the My True Type Rationales from Dr Drenth:
> *
> FPs can also be quite sensitive to instances of perceived discrimination or stereotyping. Even personality typing can be viewed as threatening by certain FP individuals wary of being stripped of their personal uniqueness (e.g., “Don’t try to put me in a box or pigeonhole me!”). In other words, because Fi celebrates and defends the tastes, feelings, and values that make each person special, any attempt at reducing them to a common denominator can feel offensive and dehumanizing. We see the same line of reasoning among Fi anthropologists concerned with preserving the unique attributes of various tribes and cultures, poised to defend them against the homogenizing forces of globalization. Fi vs. Ti As introverted judging functions, Fi and Ti share much in common. Both confer a sense of inner order and structure, both are intensive and intentional, and both involve a more subjective or individualized form of judging. Generally speaking, Fi and Ti work to prevent individual preferences and methods from being swallowed up by collective systems and approaches.
> [...]
> NPs commonly content themselves with rather meager or Bohemian living arrangements. Their living spaces are often adorned with an array of second-hand furniture and decor. Some NPs will join communes, try their luck with van living, or explore other alternative lifestyles. Such offbeat lifestyles appeal to their Si’s propensity for material conservativism, as well as their Ne’s penchant for creatively crafting makeshift solutions and stay within their monetary means.


I'm having flashbacks of an INFP ex-boyfriend, hahahaha oh god. I had my "NP" period too (when I fell into inferior Se), hanging out with hippies at raves etc. I thought about "try my luck with van living", but let's be real, I wouldn't last more than a week. I'd feel stranggled by their naivety.



charlie.elliot said:


> INFJs tend to use their Ni towards more "down to earth" things. Psychology, analyzing people in real life, literature, stuff like that. Doesn't mean INFJs can't be interested in "arcane" things (I read a book about past lives once... recommended to me by an ESFP, though...Fi again.). Just that it doesn't tend to our focus as much. INFJs are more guarded about being unique... we like to fit in more. (But again, you're a type Four and I'm not...)
> Do other people agree?
> Sorry if this is stereotyping /making unfair generalizations.


I* love *astrology, psychology, past lives, universe theories etc. But I know it's not logical at the same time. Plus, I'm very private about it (the only person who knows I like that is my BFF, and I don't talk much about it with her). People think I'm weird enough without me talking about my hobbies, don't need to had fuel to my pyre.


----------



## Liminal (Jul 18, 2016)

To complete the circle of the psychology of individuation for those who plumb the depths of how personality typology works that without an external reference there is no logic and without an internal reference there is no consciousness.

If a person believes that eyes are made of glass, how would you point out that they were wrong. You would show them that there is substance that is made of glass versus organic tissue that makes up the eyeball which would be two different things. If that person still doesn't believe the evidence that you are showing and only believes in their subjective ideas of the world by ignoring the external consistencies that the world presents, then you have someone living in a fairly high subjective state of mind. 

Excluding the basing this system on balanced thought whether people fully practice it or not, the ideas of a 16 type personalities along with the definitions of cognitive functions themselves implodes.

Understanding the Archetypes involving the eight functions of type (Beebe model)

There is plenty of room for improvement, but this if for those who haven't caught up with how it all works together not only in tandem, but at all. There is no point in bringing up definitions of cognitive functions if there is no belief in the basis of the foundations of the system itself.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

charlie.elliot said:


> So the answer to your question is simple: i have no "assertion"... I'm simply repeating what I just assumed we were all taking to be true (even though we have no proof whatsoever). If you start asking for factual data.... obviously, there is none. I thought we all knew that.
> 
> I mean, let's be honest, does anyone here, in their heart of hearts, think this stuff is actually *true*? Elements of it are certainly real, but the whole theory, as its put together, has very little chance of ever being proven by science, I think.


And; my response to this is simply _so what_ ... My intent was not to discredit the theory; rather expand on it by calling the original claims into question. I enjoy the discussion(s) -- whether it be "true/proofs" or not; however, since there is no factual data, I am inclined to deepen it, or perhaps, induce some _thought-experiments_. Rather than rigorously appealing to another man's biases/opinions—I rather introduce my own, for the sake of fun / cognitive expansion. That is what Socionics seem(s) to have done. Dissatisfied with merely (4), they introduced (8)—and indeed, it is an even _better _non-factual 'theory', than it's weak counter.

Further, instead of telling (X)-user; it is _impossible_ that she can acquire an absurd function stack [since it isn't]; let's _examine_ it, or perhaps, entertain the notions that she may just have a screwed up stack. (_How is it_ an impossible?) Since there are simply no "facts" here to call into question—I think it is at best, _moot_, by the actual theory itself. In a sense, I think, instead of dismissing it as "nonsense", we owe the (OP), at least a _good discussion_—to which she can evaluate herself (&) perhaps improve on her own confusion. My post was meant to address that while it is a contradiction of the ("theory")—it isn't necessarily wrong/impossible no more than it is for (X)-type to fluctuate between function usage/acquire loop(s). 

Perhaps she is actually utilizing these function(s) within a loop; now that that's established from simply entertaining her notions—we can examine _why that is_. Perhaps; she is patient 0 of a (3rd); differential type of loop. Sounds silly, but is still rather interesting, I must admit.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

Catwalk said:


> No. Unwarranted assertions aren't _reasons_.
> 
> What are the argument(s) to which (Ne) cannot be interpreted subjectively .. (?) On what grounds would (Ni/Fi) be incompatible in the "dom / aux"; position .. and then again with (Ti) .. (?) And how would these interactions between functions be determined as ("dysfunctional") ..? Why would I not be able to utilize my (Fi) objectively .. (?)
> 
> ...


The regular Type's is based on healthy individuals, MBTI or Myer's and Brigg's did not focus on unhealthy Psyche's like Psychologist usually does. Which is why you only see positive characteristics explained, they didn't dwell on negativity. To do that one has to dwell deeper into CF's and Psychology. 
In that sure someone can have Ni/Fi/Ti/Ne stacking but I wouldn't want to be that person.


I agree Functions either it be Introverted or Extroverted can be Objective in the sense of Objectivity. People with little understanding of CF's use the blatant relay thinking that Subjective Function's cross's out Objectivity. 


btw, sorry but I see a lot of Fi thrown around even though you claim it's Ti...... that's not meant to be a negative argumentative claim.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

darkhippie said:


> I was a tad disappointed because I thought INFJ would be able to relate to my freakish statements but it seems like some of them don't even entertain my dopey way of viewing the world. I view people as spirits guiding bodies and things like that before I view them as actual human beings because that's not what they/we are. We are spirits. So, I tend to live life in an intangible form and take in life like that. Yet, I have extreme Fi values, hence the reason some people here typed me as an INFP.


I can entertain any wacky conversation or theory I enjoy it. But when it come's to those topic's having a tangible relation to the reality of a human being. Then no entertain will not


I have seen you around and every time it is clear Fi .

But if you want to just throw airless words to describe you then go ahead. You can claim to be Superman if you want ( but that doesn't mean you can fly or see through walls)


----------



## Dragheart Luard (May 13, 2013)

The only sure thing is that you're some type with weak logic, and even low Ni types can have mystical ideas. Usually ISXPs start thinking about them when they're a bit older thanks to the influence of tert Ni, so I recommend to give ISFP more thought if INFP and INFJ don't seem to match well.


----------



## Lsninja (Aug 20, 2016)

If you are concerned about misinformation, @darkhippie, I would wonder if you've read some of Jung's writing on type?
http://www.cyjack.com/cognition/(ebook pdf) jung, carl - the psychological types.pdf


----------



## Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar (Apr 9, 2015)

darkhippie said:


> I've had a rough week with the MBTI community because I feel as though I'm Ni dom and Fi dom and according to you smart folks and other smart folks, that can't happen. I don't see the world or process it through a pair of eyeballs but rather my spiritual eye. You aren't human, you're a spirit. I speak in terms of past lives, starseeds, and energies and people in real life just think I'm a freak. (No matter what MBTI type they are.) I was a tad disappointed because I thought INFJ would be able to relate to my freakish statements but it seems like some of them don't even entertain my dopey way of viewing the world. I view people as spirits guiding bodies and things like that before I view them as actual human beings because that's not what they/we are. We are spirits. So, I tend to live life in an intangible form and take in life like that. Yet, I have extreme Fi values, hence the reason some people here typed me as an INFP.
> 
> I don't even know if what I'm saying is Ni but I thought it was. I don't look to be special, I just can't help but feel like I know that our spirits came from other places in the Universe and some people might call me crazy but regardless, there are just certain Universal truths I know. I feel as though I don't fit with any personality type and that I'm mostly too freaky to be put into an MBTI category. Not even the rare INFJs hold a candle to my freakishness. I've been crying and upset about this for awhile because it reminds me of how alone I feel at times. People don't want to live life the way it truly is.. meaning based on the soul and energies surrounding us. They have thresholds to their visions.
> 
> ...


Well, you could record a video and get read by Pod'Lair. They have a great multi-level VI called Five Gears of Mojo Reading (1. Individual Functions and their physiological cues.
2. Combined Functions and their physiological cues.
3. Large sets of cues and distinct signals.
4. "Game" styles within specific types.
5. Mental preparation for reading.). And their Mojos and Powers roughly correlate with MBTI types and functions 1 on 1 (unlike Socionics whose VI is lame and types and functions don't correlate 1 on 1 with MBTI).

There's no point trying to type yourself by a test as tests are severely flawed, especially function tests (normal tests are usually irrelevant to functions and are too distorted by life experiences, mental issues, etc. and function tests simply don't work because functions working together can arrive to the same results as some other functions, which gives people nonsensical function stacks.)
Guessing functions is also pretty difficult.

You can't have these 4 functions because your brain would lock up. There needs to be one introverted judgement, one extroverted judgement one extroverted perception and one introverted perception, one sensing, one intuition, one feeling and one thinking.


----------



## Davidkal (Jul 19, 2017)

TornadicX said:


> So Ni doesn't pick up on or just feels like it 'knows' certain things?
> 
> I've spent a year and some months reading about the functions and that doesn't help matters because a vast majority of people disagree on how they manifest or what they mean. For instance, what you just said, I read something totally different from it from a few different websites. This is making me think MBTI is a load of bullocks but at the same time, I want to give it a chance because I'm not totally sold on it being a load of bullocks.. but rather conflicting info from people and websites confuse the crap out of me.
> 
> ...


As a Ni dom (But Ni-Te (INTJ) instead of Ni-Fe),I can tell you that Ni isn't being like a psychic at all..Pretty much what happens is:
1)Se takes in the very basic info.
2)Ni colllects everything that it considers important and useful from the Se info
3)It analyzes it and finds out reasons,relation to other knowledge that we already have,how it can be used etc. (That all happens semi-subconsciously)
4)Then when something comes up and it's related to any of the stuff that a Ni dom has analyzed,the analysis and the meanings behind it "magically" comes to them. They don't know exactly how it came from,but it doesn't really feel like anything "weird" cause you can tell that it's something that you have created with past analysis/is related to specific info.

In a way Ni is simply a perceiving function that simply values personal analysis and interpretation way more than the real world. (Personally as a Te aux. I like to research about stuff that I know/learn in order to be sure that they are based indirectly on facts.I've heard that INFJs can get more "psychic" and not care really about the objective value of their insights.


----------



## spaceynyc (Feb 18, 2017)

Yeah OP is definitely giving me NFP vibes and not NFJ ones. The rant in the beginning seems very Fi-Ne.

The reason OP is having a hard time differentiating is because she’s confused as to why she relates to Ni so well. 

INFPs have major Ni. However this is unvalued subconsciously and more credence is given to Ne. A lot of the things you’re saying about how you see the worlds sounds like Ne to me. Looking for abstraction in the external. Like others said in this thread, Ni isn’t really out there like that. Ni is more analyzing reality for why things happen. Ni has that Se realism attached to it, so they will be more hesitant to believe in the extremely abstract views you described in the beginning. Your thoughts very much align with my INTP friend who believes in certain gods and dimensions and spirits and aliens and things like that. That’s much more of an Ne thing. Eriykah Badu another Ne user (INFP) is very much the same way. She comes off like a guru so your first thought is Ni but really it’s the strong unvalued Ni mixed with the Fi and Ne. It’s hard to explain


----------



## calicobts (Sep 12, 2017)

You're definitely Ne-Fi/Fi-Ne. You're able to jump to different topics in quick session which is more Ne-inclined rather than Ni. Whereas Ni is more likely to want to stick with a steady stream of thought and feel more satisfaction when they feel they have talked about a topic in -depth. Another indication of Ne, is the decrease of certainty in their insights/gut feeling. For example:

Ne THINKS something will happen.
Ni KNOWS something will happen.

Here is your Ne in action:


> I don't even know if what I'm saying is Ni but I thought it was.





> I don't see the world or process it through a pair of eyeballs but rather my spiritual eye.





> People don't want to live life the way it truly is.. meaning based on the soul and energies surrounding us. They have thresholds to their visions.


Now onto Fi. Although Fi is a judging function, it is quiet subjective and has internal focus. Because of this internal sense of focus Fi is out of touch with the external world emotionally. This is why Fi can get paranoid/skeptical of how others view them or not care at all. Whereas Fe is objective and their energy is focused on the external world. Because Fe puts all of it's emotional energy on the external world this is why it lacks understanding of it's own true feelings and good at reading people accurately. One of the main distinctions I've found is that:

Fi seeks INTERNAL harmony.
Fe seeks EXTERNAL harmony. 

You also don't exhibit Fe in your writing but rather Fi:


> Not even the rare INFJs hold a candle to my freakishness.





> I've been crying and upset about this for awhile because it reminds me of how alone I feel at times.





> I don't see what the conflict would be saying I'm Ni dominant with Fi also in my stack.





> Maybe the bottom line is I'm just an alien and no personality fits me.


Side Note: You can't have Ni and Fi as a first function. It would rather be you're a looping INTJ.

Side Side Note: Obviously, typing on what little you said of yourself isn't enough. However I feel like you're definitely a Fi-user with enneagram 4.


----------



## TornadicX (Jan 7, 2015)

This thread is very old & AFTERWARD, I read Jung's original teachings & got a clearer understanding of my own. I definitely know I don't use Fi now nor am I Ni dominant. I have mental issues and maybe Ni speaks to some of those psychological issues. 

I know Ni isn't a psychic function now. Funny this thread was brought back to life as I'm much further along in my understanding of the functions.

This is def the dangers of trying to type folks over the internet. First of all, I'm hardly introverted until I crash & burn.. In person, I clearly use Fe. I am very expressive of mood, don't care if I'm being impacted by other's feelings but struggle to be accommodating if feeling values make no sense to me. (Ti/Fe).. I read what Jung had to say about Fi & others and it's totally opposite of me. The other thing is, I'm pretty sure I don't use Ne in my ego, either. I don't care about opportunity/possibility and all of that. On a day to day basis, I focus on the here and now...and it's practical things like food, money, I'm big on style, etc.. I'm like a Hedonist. I am a Hedonist with a hidden philosophy. It is evident I don't understand Ni & therefore mine makes me coo-coo during types of craziness . (I'm also Bipolar.)

To my understanding, Se dominants deal with inferior Ni like it was a toddler. So my odd superstitions and visions for my life when I go into a stressed out state of being sometimes go too damn far. It's more of a psychological issue than it is a conviction of feeling & etc. Any conviction of subjective feeling I have MUST be backed by logic or at least good reason or it will completely shatter. 

Also I'm an Enneagram type 749 or 748 .. So, yes 4 is my heart type but I'm a 7w6. 

So yeah.. I was mistyped asf but it's all goodie now. If I'm not ESTP I'm pretty sure I'm ESFP ..Se dom either way! .
But I HIGHLY doubt Fi is even in my stack, now. I'd say my freakishness comment speaks more to my 4 (shame) heart type. It has nothing to do with Feeling. Even an INTP / ENTP 4 could claim the same by that logic.. because what Fi feels, Ti thinks & etc. 

By the way - Ne / Ni doesn't consciously "think" anything. They are impulsive hunches. Ni only feels like it knows and Ne is about making things happen via "hunches" about current possibilities or potential.

Ni does not analyze. That's wrong. Ti analyzes. Ni just "gets" things via unconscious Se & has no clue how it got there because it does not evaluate. It is an irrational function so it generally has no "clue" in such a conscious way. The same way I mistyped myself while I was in an unhealthy state, I'm willing to bet there are many mistyped "INFJs" on here who are actually Ti dom... 

And respectfully, Ni has nothing to do with "steady thought." That is Ti. I have what you call "impulsive logic." First off, I'm an Enneagram 7 & a fast thinker. (I'm an ESTP). Ne is more about potential/possibilities for opportunity not "multiple things" for multiple's sake..nor is Ne about "not knowing anything...or being uncertain about anything" -- A Ti user could come to the conclusion through pure analyzation that it is impossible to know if the 6th dimension exists.. I don't care if you're an XSTP or XNTP, that's just a simple analysis right there. It can't be proven/disproven. Yet, "I don't know anything " seems to be what folks thing Ne is...and so wannabe Ne doms, (particularly ESTPs who really want to be seen as not dumb or shallow, so mistype as ENTPs..) .. constantly repeat "I know nothing and neither do you" because they think it makes them seem more "abstract." Furthermore, Jung states Ne actually has a hint of certainty to it but it is dealing with the potential something has. 

"I'm CERTAIN he will make a great husband!" 

Or 

"I'm CERTAIN this invention will sell in stores this time!" 

Ne has a goal & that is whatever the hunch says it is. (BAM! This lamp can be turned into a sofa! )

*turns lamp into sofa* Okay, I'm bored.. *scans environment to look for more things to change.) 

Ne is certain something will work & has convictions about hunches dealing with potential for transformation or opportunity.

Ni is certain something is the case or is headed into a certain direction but not because they create it as the Ne user does. 

Fi feels convicted something is the case & attaches ethics/feeling judgments to it.

Ti thinks something is the case via analytical conviction, idea or theory..and thereon, logical systems are formed.


----------



## remarkable_remark (Apr 28, 2017)

Clearly an Si-dom


----------



## TornadicX (Jan 7, 2015)

spaceynyc said:


> Yeah OP is definitely giving me NFP vibes and not NFJ ones. The rant in the beginning seems very Fi-Ne.
> 
> The reason OP is having a hard time differentiating is because she’s confused as to why she relates to Ni so well.
> 
> INFPs have major Ni. However this is unvalued subconsciously and more credence is given to Ne. A lot of the things you’re saying about how you see the worlds sounds like Ne to me. Looking for abstraction in the external. Like others said in this thread, Ni isn’t really out there like that. Ni is more analyzing reality for why things happen. Ni has that Se realism attached to it, so they will be more hesitant to believe in the extremely abstract views you described in the beginning. Your thoughts very much align with my INTP friend who believes in certain gods and dimensions and spirits and aliens and things like that. That’s much more of an Ne thing. Eriykah Badu another Ne user (INFP) is very much the same way. She comes off like a guru so your first thought is Ni but really it’s the strong unvalued Ni mixed with the Fi and Ne. It’s hard to explain


Ne is practical. As Jung stated... The ONLY thing that separates Ne from Se is that it thrives on what could be but in the external world. So, I do disagree here. I think VERY UNHEALTHY Ni has superstitions about the world & is more prone to "fruitless fantasies" as Jung calls it. Jung even stated that the unhealthy Se dom will attribute his/her own bad mood to the weather due to some unhealthy psychological process. (Inferior Ni.) A lot of people attribute this dynamic to Fi but it is wrong. 

Ne isn't dreaming up imaginary worlds because it wants to see the possibilities manifested in reality. This is why I'd even say an unhealthy ISFP is more fantasy world prone than INFP. 

To my understanding, all of the external functions favor seeing manifestations in the real world. Fe - Emotional expressions/Harmony , Te - Efficient ideas , Se - pleasures & physical exertion & Ne -- possibilities & opportunities.



As for your INTP Friend, Ti has a type of "magical thinking" that Jung talks about. One could analyze themselves into oblivion if they're unhealthy enough. .. But that is Ti. Ne would make the INTP search for ways to manifest his ideas to the real world, thus making them an inventive type. 

While INFPs will want to manifest their hopes to "improve" the material world as their Fi values see fit. (All the special snowflakes who march for 6 different types of public restrooms to suit their needs ) Fi/Ne/Te hopes to & sees potential (Ne) in the external world to change the universal law (Te), driven by their convictions of not feeling "equal".. (Fi.) *eye roll* 

Knowing humans will be destroyed by aliens in the next 5 years is irrational Ni . There is no feeling or thinking attached to the bizarre hunch, that solely seems to rely on the unconscious without the Ni user's knowledge. Saying things such as "Humans are truly spirits" is as basic as saying "Humans are nothing but skeletons. Viewing the world through a "magical lens" such as "knowing" there are different realms, dimensions, and having a hunch about where humans come from is a type of Ni hunch. It is data not evaluation nor is there anything rational about it. 

The judging functions speak to evaluative beliefs, while the perceptive ones are irrational & non-evaluating. Fi "feels God exists. Ti "thinks God exists. Ni has a hunch something is the case...and about what could happen in the future... but not in such a way where it is purposefully creating the future..or attaching a subjective feeling (emotional ethic) or thought to it.. in it's pure form)..& Ne has hunches about what can be transformed in the real world. That's why ENTPs are messy experimentalists.. Ne is opportunity/possibility in external surroundings.. There's nothing imaginary about it. The imaginary bs comes from Ti.
Even Te has a negative/magical thinking to it no one on MBTI forums speak on..

Another clue as to how Ne is practical intuition is that it has to have capacity to be exhausted via fulfillment. The same goes for Ni needing to be exhausted by reality.

Ne users chase possibilities in the real world until they are captured.. and then they are bored & out of here. How can Ne's opposite be Si or how can they get bored if Ne is about imaginary worlds? That makes no sense.

"Unhealthy" Ni on the other hand has reality & practicality as an opposition which naturally tells me it is more "fantasy prone" .. Makes much more sense. Ni doesn't need hunches proven in the real world unless it's the INTJ who is geared towards Te efficiency. But if you get an INTJ who thrives more on Universal Law such as karma, you will get a nutty prophet who seems to know all about life. (This is one reason I think Jim Jones was ENTJ with unhealthy/dogmatic & self-righteous Te/Fi going on.



With all that said, if there is an unhealthy INJ or ESP type, they will appear coo-coo, speak in weird metaphors and might believe in hokeypokey superstitions , have convictions about what the future will be, and appear schizophrenic. 

What brought me to a conclusion about my type was looking at how I acted through my inferior. I am impulsive, selfishly hedonistic, withdrawn, indulgent & etc. Then, I read how some SP types mistype themselves as NJs & I realized I was basing my type on myself during unhealthy states. During unhealthy states, I go back to the 5th dimension & shit.. Somewhere between Ni/Ti I turn coocoo for coacoa puffs. 

"Oh! I am the prophet Jung spoke of!.. I am such an Infj.. or is it .. ENFJ?.. & I must warn others that we are headed here, here & here..So I must blank blank & blank to blank blank & blank. Once this life is over, I will live on Mars..blah blah)..

But when I return to normal states I'm only focused on Food, shopping, chilling, & other aesthetic pleasantries...etc.. Clearly a crazy Se dominant with a tad bit of magical thinking here and there.. ( inferior Ni doesn't help.) And I am a scatterbrain Bipolar too too.. So, it is very important to know ppl IRL before speedily typing online. It's an unrealistic bubble some are living in on these forumz .

Also i'm high asf right now but don't call the cops coz it ain't illegal...


----------



## TornadicX (Jan 7, 2015)

Lsninja said:


> If you are concerned about misinformation, @darkhippie, I would wonder if you've read some of Jung's writing on type?
> http://www.cyjack.com/cognition/(ebook pdf) jung, carl - the psychological types.pdf


Haha!! And that is EXACTLY what I did ! I've come to the conclusion (obviously) that not only was I wrong but a lot of people are also misinformed.

Like Fi doesn't only speak to individuality. Fi users and especially doms are quiet, emotionally deep & don't express their feelings much unless through Se/Ne. Yet the moment someone shows a hint of individuality, "Oh! That's Fi! Uh -- noooo.. Fi is more than that.

Se doesn't mean springing into action to "get shit done" .. . I'd say that speaks more to Te "efficiency." ..but Se is about chasing experiences that will provide pleasure to the senses & physically pushing oneself & the object to its limit for maximum usage. Se users spring into action if they're sensing some great aesthetic pleasure or if they want to exert themselves ..(I did this playing sports in HS, dancing, playing rough like being hit & hitting others & laughing about it, & all that. Everyone needs to get shit done to live in the world. That's a no brained but folks attribute "action" as a general thing to Se when the "action" is orientated very specific interests.. 

Se users are all about aesthetics, even in their own style. Yet most folks say "oh you have your own style?? That's Fi!! You're an ISFP! -- uhm.. No.. That's pure Se. 

"Look at deez rimz on diss core y'awl. Don't my outfit look d0pe?" 

Se speaks to style. (What is aesthetically pleasing to look at, hear, taste, smell, or touch?" 

"How should I exert myself right now?" 

Fe speaks to fashion meaning the clothing trends that are "in" because the point is not the style of clothing but to get everyone on the same accord with dress. I care more about my style than fashion trends because I don't see enough reason to give a shit...and Fe is tert for me which means it's slow asf.. I'd say EFJs are more dressed appropriately (Fe) while Se doms are dressed to be flashy & show off personal tastes. (You see this with rappers, especially.) I'd say Young Thug is an STP type with a 4 in his Enneagram too. He's very flashy, into drugs, lives life in the fast lane but makes it a point to be & prides himself on unique in his style of dress & aesthetic taste. But being a 4 in such a case has nothing to do with ethics over logic..which speaks more to MBTI. Fi /Fe are not emotions alone but turning those into guidelines! The same goes for Ti/Te.. 

I could run down all the functions if I wanted just to show how very misinformed not only I was but how misinformed others are, too.. But eh.. Whatevsss.. I'm just ramblinggg

But I do think some folks in MBTI are way too narrow minded. We use all the functions & there needs to be a tad more accuracy when describing them. That's partially why I was confused until I was able to analyze Jung.


----------



## spaceynyc (Feb 18, 2017)

TornadicX said:


> Lsninja said:
> 
> 
> > If you are concerned about misinformation, @darkhippie, I would wonder if you've read some of Jung's writing on type?
> ...


Wait hold up you caught my attention on the Young Thug part (he’s one of my favorite artists). I always had him pegged to be an ISFP. He doesn’t seem like someone who cares to analyze things like an Ti dominant. Thug to me just like Future and The Weeknd. These guys are logical types for the most part. They are more driven by what they place their personal values in. 

What makes you think Ti for Young Thug?

Also could you give me a real life example Ni vs Ti in the same scenario?


----------



## The red spirit (Sep 29, 2015)

@TornadicX Do you think that Se Ti fits you?

I wanted to say that I very often talk about values, morality, respect and stuff like that, but I am xSTP. Yeah, thinker and sensor lmao. One person in perC made me open my poor eyes and gave some understanding about functions, types, manifestations and some other typology stuff, based on how Jung defined them. I probably can't help you much, just offering the idea of moral xSTP existence, they do exist. I can suggest you to read how Jung defined abstraction. On net I found his whole book for free, so if you don't have it, you can read it, just that quality is quite poor also it's rather old version: https://monoskop.org/images/8/8d/Jung_Gustav_Carl_Psychological_Types_1946.Pdf

Book page: 520
File page: 549

It may seem insignificant at first, but it's truly a very important thing to know. Basically speaking it defines a very important aspect of introverted functions, to break down stuff for oneself. It applies to thinking, feeling, intuition and sensing. Thinking can broken down into smaller pieces, that's why we have stereotypes of Ti being nerds, mechanics. Fi can be broken down into pieces, that's why they may appear like cold bitches or dicks (sorry for inappropriate language, no offense against Fi). Ni can be broken down into pieces, that's the infamous big picture thinker stereotype. Si can be broken down into pieces, that's why we have past lover stereotype. I'm talking about stereotype here, because I think it may be more relatable for you. Extraverted functions don't do this breaking down (very arguable topic, but I'm just trying to say what Jung wrote, not my interpretation) into pieces, that's why we have shallowness stereotype. Extraverts are objective by definition, no need to break it down, they see things as they are and that's okay, perfectly fine to extraverted function (please don't make a mistake and don't say extraverts are like that, that's not true, they have their introverted side, which shouldn't be ignored). 

Another advice, if you find introverted perception functions hard to understand or just all perception functions, then I think that judging may be easier to understand.

Feel free to ask something, but keep in mind that I'm not a very knowledgeable here, I'm still discovering stuff about Jung's original typology.

BTW if you are truly typology lover I would advice you to buy Jung's book about types. It's like a bible to understanding all this stuff and will be definitely worth it for you.


----------

