# Doubts about my type - INFP? INFJ? Other?



## suicidal_orange (May 6, 2010)

Holunder said:


> I am not conjecturing. I evaluate the available facts and find the best fitting solution. Where do you suppose I was conjecturing?





Holunder said:


> Let's assume this is true.


Not in your typing at all, just this "intro". I'm a wannabe Ti user so it was probably a bad choice of word... I'm not going to debate with you as you clearly have a better understanding of functions than I do.

These are quotes from a PM (posted with permission) 


BlisfulDreams said:


> My mind is all over the place and if I think of something interesting or have a special insight, I feel compelled to share it.


This to me this sounds like Ne.



BlisfulDreams said:


> It's sickening. How much of it is orchestrated and made up? How much is real? What are we never told?


This is what I meant above - you end in questions. This, to me, is suggestive of a dominant perceiving function but Holunder and marked174 may well have a different explanation. (It might be telling that I had already pretty much agreed with BlissfulDreams' view and the questions at the end are rhetorical)



BlisfulDreams said:


> I need people to steer me straight, logically.


Logic is acceptable coming from outside, insecurity about it - Weak Te?



BlisfulDreams said:


> It seems you are saying that sometimes we have to do things to take care of ourselves or we choose to do something not because it's trendy, but because we like it. And if either of those things is interpreted as us being materialistic, trendy, or whatever, then so be it. You're saying that we really can't determine how others are going to perceive us and we might as well enjoy the life we have instead of trying to control what we think people think of us. Am I right?


This was exactly what I meant. It took me about 10x as many words to say it though :laughing: For whatever reason she doubted her interpretation?

There were also three instances I thought showed strong Fi, but these were too personal to post (which could show Fi in itself?)


----------



## penchant (Sep 20, 2010)

BlissfulDreams said:


> Penchant and Holunder: You say that my original post showed use of Ni. Would you say the same is true for my long post?


Short answer: No. (I confess to still not having read it more thoroughly, but it doesn't give me any strong Ni feeling.) Did you spend a lot of time thinking about how to write the OP? That could explain the more compact writing style...



> To clarify, I did mean history in the personal sense. Rather than concrete differences in what is different between the past and present (eg. location and circumstances), I focus on more abstract things. For example, I might look at a prevailing theme throughout my life (eg. feelings of inferiority) and look at the different ways that theme has presented itself during different stages of my life and how it has affected me. From that, I would try to make sense of my current state ("what is"), which would help me decide what to do about it.


I'd call that Si... Especially since you put is "concrete differences" and mentioned feelings as an example, rather than any more theoretical construct.



BlissfulDreams said:


> I decided to retake the cognitive functions test, even though the results change every time I take it. It might help someone try to make sense of my previous posts or look at things from a different perspective. I have listed the answers that I chose as "exactly me" and "not me".
> 
> Exactly Me
> 4. Feel inclined to be responsible for, and take care of, others' feelings. (Fe?)
> ...


I think what you think of as Fe in 4 and 9 can just as well be Fi. And the Fe of 17 seems to relate much to norms and stated values, which I think of as a less developed form Fe, since it is relying on formalized Fe interaction in many cases. (Or did I that wrong?)

16 could probably just as well be Ni. 21, I think, is supposed to be N in some form too. 23 is probably interpreted as S, but I'm not sure.

And for 44, I think that would stereotypically be much more Te than Ti. Ti is an introverted function, so it is not really interested in judging based on external facts per se, but only the internalized system of the facts. If a Ti type did it, it would probably be Ti+Se or something like that...



> Not Me
> 14. Apply leverage to a situation to solve a problem impersonally using minimal effort. (Te?)
> 31. Follow a straight line of reasoning. (?)
> 38. Spur action and pull off results simply by making your presence felt. (Se?)
> 42. Stick to making decisions based on impersonal measures such as points earned. (?)


I'll pass on 14, probably any T. 31 would in my mind be Ti. 38 as general In charge interaction style, and 42 is very obviously Te when they mention "points earned".



> Here were my test results:
> 
> Extraverted Sensing (Se): 15.1 unused
> Introverted Sensing (Si): 33.2 good use
> ...


Adding that up, I think that that it is clear that you are more Ne+Fi than Ni+Fe. You still have good results on Ni and Fe on the test, and that could be either a matter of measuring imperfections or simply you using both attitudes of the N and F functions fairly well. It's probably hard to tell as Ni and Si (and Fe and Te too, I think) can at times look similar.

Given that, besides N, all your functions are stronger in the introverted attitude on the test, I think it would be reasonable to assume that you are an introvert. T also is clearly the weakest in the test, and I think that it is what you have showed least of in this thread, and that too would point to Fi being your dominant.

So my conclusion is that INFP seems more likely.


(btw, did the link I posted help?)


----------



## BlissfulDreams (Dec 25, 2009)

penchant said:


> btw, did the link I posted help?


Yes, thank you for posting that. I'm quite sure that I am actually an INFP. I have related to profiles of the INFJ, but I have always had the sense that I was different, or a "bad INFJ". However, the traits that had trouble fitting into the stereotypical profile of the INFJ fit in quite easily to that of the INFP. But not only that, I've found that I relate more to Ne than Ni.

One idea that I thought were especially helpful was the contrast between an INFJ's directness and an INFP's indirectness. I wasn't aware of this and my preference is definitely for indirectness. It was also helpful to find out that INFPs like to share stories in order to relate to others, while INFJs don't typically communicate in this way. I relate to others through stories and so this is very key to my personality.

The cognitive functions of INFPs also helps to explain me in a way that the INFJ's never did. Ne helps to explain my random tangents and ideas. My tertiary Si helps to explain why I easily dwell on my past (especially under stress or when I'm depressed.) The posters in this thread (including you) have helped me see that my feelings are for the most part, turned within. I still relate to both Fi and Fe, but I can see how Fi is more dominant in my day-to-day life. I think I am going to stick with calling myself an INFP. :happy:

And don't worry... I didn't expect you to read my whole posts. I just tried to answer everything thoroughly.

P.S. I am still confused about the difference between Ni and Ne. Can you offer any clarity? Thank you for all of your help.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

OP sounds Fe + Ni. I hear almost no Fi in it, or most of your other posts in this thread. When you speak of feeling at all, it is almost entirely in relation to other people. That is Fe. INFPs tend to speak more about feelings in conceptual, universal ways or very personal ways, but far less in direct terms of other people. In describing themselves, INFPs almost always discuss an ideal, "Life would be so perfect if XYZ". They describe their self-image - "I'm a tragic loner or a shy, nice guy" or whatever. They mention values - "It's important to me to have a creative job." 

If INFPs mention other people in descriptions of self, those people are described almost like symbols of personal values or illustrative examples. It's not about pleasing people, affecting them, or considering them so much as an extension of a greater concept that requires such treatment. I realize Fe types are meeting principles also, but there still seems more of a real world results aspect, where Fi is more theoretical & so the concept is focused on more than the people themselves. In this sense, acing in a situation where a friend flakes out would be less a consideration of damaging the friendship than of weighing the more important value, that of harmony or respect. It would be a concept considered & acted on, not your literal friendship. I don't mean to make it sound so cold (it is not), but it's just a way of reasoning on what is important.



> For example, I might look at a prevailing theme throughout my life (eg. feelings of inferiority) and look at the different ways that theme has presented itself during different stages of my life and how it has affected me. From that, I would try to make sense of my current state ("what is"), which would help me decide what to do about it.


This sounds like Ni, not Ne-Si.


----------



## BlissfulDreams (Dec 25, 2009)

Thanks OrangeAppled.

I originally thought the same as you, but the others have explained that if someone puts a lot of personal value on harmony and acceptance, what appears like Fe might actually be Fi. From my understanding, Fi is usually strong values about what is right and wrong, which can include ideas like harmony and acceptance.

I think one of the confusing factors is that my functions are so close. Ni, Ne, Fi, and Fe masquerade as each other. There is also my Si that throws things off. To add to the confusion, I lack a lot of understanding about cognitive functions.

But I appreciate you coming here to help. It will be interesting to see what others have to say in comparison to what you and I have said.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

BlissfulDreams said:


> From my understanding, Fi is usually strong values about what is right and wrong, which can include ideas like harmony and acceptance


Fe is about that also; both serve to reason on what is right/wrong & form values. The key point is where these values stem from; an internal compass or external measure. That's why I noted your description of your feelings & how you act on them seem consistently related to other people & how things affect them as opposed to describing an internal concept you're adhering to. 

You also list off values in defined terms; it seems more Fe to easily use existing external concepts to label values. INFPs hem & haw when putting them into words, and often choose less direct ways of describing them, hesitant to confine them too neatly into a category for fear of losing meaning.



> In terms of personal motivators, I am most motivated to act in a way that considers others' feelings and I try to bring people together using common ground.
> 
> ...consider how every possibility will affect other people and my future
> 
> ...


However, I don't think other people can tell you your type, especially over the internet; this is just my impression based on this thread. The main reason I hear you saying you may not be INFJ is you're not as structured as they are described; I see that as pretty common for INFJs. They're often described as the least J of the Js because their structure tends to be more of an abstract kind, mentally organizing people & relationships as opposed to concrete planning. Just something to think about.


----------



## penchant (Sep 20, 2010)

BlissfulDreams said:


> P.S. I am still confused about the difference between Ni and Ne. Can you offer any clarity? Thank you for all of your help.


Sorry, not much. I use Ni so much I don't see it, and don't really have a good relation to Ne yet. I'd recommend checking out the Cognitive Function forum for threads on Ni and Ne.



OrangeAppled said:


> The main reason I hear you saying you may not be INFJ is you're not as structured as they are described; I see that as pretty common for INFJs. They're often described as the least J of the Js because their structure tends to be more of an abstract kind, mentally organizing people & relationships as opposed to concrete planning. Just something to think about.


I agree totally on this point. INFJs are not the typically structured and organized J type. I think for all Introverted Js, the J is more about the inside than the outside. IxxJs are after all not J-dominant, we just primarily use J for extraversion, which might not say much for the more heavily introverted of us...


----------



## Holunder (May 11, 2010)

I finally got round to answering that long post of yours, as promised. Sorry it took so long.
I picked out a few points that seemed significant to me.



> *1. When working on a project where do you place your emphasis? the process of putting it together? or the final product? (Do you experiment with your perspectives to create ideas? )*
> 
> *My emphasis is more on the final product. I don't care that much about how I got to the final product (though I do care about the process), but if the end result isn't up to my standards, I don't feel like the process was worthwhile. I am definitely a perfectionist and have been since I was quite young.
> 
> In terms of perspectives, yes, I do experiment with mine to create ideas. I like to try to look at things from another person's point of view, as if to understand them. This helps me to try to come up with ideas that they might like or to try to communicate in a way that they would feel comfortable with or understand. This applies to things like university papers, where I try to think about what the prof is looking for and what they would want to read. It also applies to trying to come up with subjects in everyday conversations. *


It seems you have a rather marked J preference, as you focus on the result very much. Also, you trying to adapt your work to the understanding of others is indicative of Fe. Te would be oriented at general standards instead of the Professors expectations, and introverted judgment is more about what seems right to yourself, without much reference to others.




> *
> 3. Would you say you make decisions quickly? or do you take a while coming to a conclusion, because you hope you're not missing some vital information that will change your mind?*
> 
> *It takes me quite a long time to come to a conclusion, but that is because I want to make sure it is the best choice for everyone involved. I want to make sure that I understand the whole situation, so I don't end up hurting someone. It's not so much that I am worried about missing information that might change my mind (I am normally very stubborn in my views) as it is that I want to make sure that I make the best decision I can. I will sacrifice my interests (unless it is key to my values) if it means a better outcome for someone else. But I am very unsettled until I make the decision (it's all I will think about), and once I make the decision, I will constantly doubt myself.*


Intuition makes you consider many possibilities, and your primary concern in dealing with the outside world seems to be to find the solution that makes everyone involved the most happy - that's Fe again. You are unsettled before you make a decision – that’s a typical J attribute. I guess your Ni makes you perceive decisions as not completely final, and so you keep worrying about them.
It's also a personal theory of mine that INJs see sacrificing personal comfort for a greater good as an ideal, as it means resisting the urges of the inferior function, which prompts them to enjoy material things.




> *6. When watching a film and critiquing it? Do you critique it based on details in the film, for instance on how you thought a certain portion of it was un-realistic (or something along those lines) or based on the idea or point they were trying to get across/how well they got it across?*
> 
> *I would say that I critique more along the lines of realism. If a film is done in a very idealized way, I get annoyed because things wouldn't happen that way in real life. I also like films to show the complexity of human beings, so if they only narrow in on one or two generic or stereotyped traits, I get very annoyed. I start to pick apart the film and look for reasons why the bias might exist. What are the underlying motives? Why might the producers want to show this character this way? (eg. a female in a very stereotypical role that plays into male chauvinism.) I think about who benefits from this portrayal and what it says about society. I can't really watch a movie without doing this, in some form or another, and it annoys the heck out of friends and family. :crazy:*


Somehow, thats very typical for an intuitive feeler. Count me among the annoyed. :crazy:




> *11. When you are out do you worry about how people will interpret any action you take? (sort of in a seinfeld sort of way, where they over analyze actions people make, trying to find their true motivation) Do you feel a sort of pressure from this?
> *
> *This is me, in a nutshell. I am overly obsessed with how others may perceive me and I feel a ton of pressure from this. Sometimes I feel trapped in a sense that no matter what I do, people may/will interpret it badly. I want to be seen in a positive way and this is my perfectionism displayed in another form. It has gotten a bit better, in a recent years, though it is still a major influence in my life. I have learned to try to focus on the most important bits and not worry so much about the things that don't matter as much.*


I believe worrying about how you are perceived by others is usually considered a Ni attitude, though I'm not sure about that. All I know is that I do this to some extent.




> *Pretty much a repeat of 16.
> 
> 
> I can't stand when I can't count on people to be there for me or do something they promised they would do.
> ...


You apparently focus more on outward behaviour and social rules than other people recognizing the values within them, which would be an Fi thing. So, Fe again.



> *
> 18. How do you evaluate people, in general?*
> 
> *I observe their character to see whether they are trustworthy and whether I'd like to get to know them better. I look at things like how they treat other people and what they talk about (Are they shallow or do they talk about bigger issues?) I also look at physical traits like dress and mannerisms (can indicate a material-oriented person or personal quirks) to see whether they are someone I'd like to get to know. If I know someone better, I judge them on the basis of how they treat others, how they perceive others, what they value, their goals/motivations, work ethic, and perceived intelligence.*


Seems like an Ni approach: Amass facts and weigh them internally.



> *20. What factors are you most likely to pay attention to when deciding on things?*
> 
> *I pay attention to how different approaches may affect other people, how other people may perceive me based on my actions, how my actions may affect my future, how much effort is needed/what is the cost (is it worth over-exerting myself?), and whether my perspective may change in the near future (do I need to look toward the future instead of focusing on what's best for right now?)*


You orientate your decisions after how they affect other people. That’s the very description of Fe.



> *21. Any peculiarities that you have noticed about your personality?*
> 
> *I tend to act like a sense-dominated person when I'm under stress. I'm concerned about the here and now, rather than long-term. I also become kind of petty and concerned with things that are normally unimportant to me. In a sense, I become some of the traits that I dislike in other people.
> 
> ...


This sounds like your Fe and Ti are in conflict sometimes. Anyway, justifying why you feel a certain way is very much alien to Fi. Fi perceives eternal inner values. They don’t have to be justified, or rather, they can’t, as they are justification themselves.




> I absolutely cannot stand it when people fight. I wish they could get along. It's even worse when people ignore tension. I can feel it and I seem to be the only one who cares.


That’s the very thing I wrote about earlier: Fe says “I wish they would get along”, Fi says “I wish they would see the other ones perspective”.


----------



## Holunder (May 11, 2010)

And another one:



BlissfulDreams said:


> This thread has gotten a bit off-topic.


Sorry for that. I tend to get a bit carried away when there's a chance for discussion.



> To everyone: From the posts made so far, it seems like I'm either INFP or INFJ, though there is a pretty big difference between the two. Would you write-off the possibility of me being an extrovert (though I would be quite repressed and unhealthy)?


Nothing is impossible, but I don't think you are extraverted. You are very introspective.




> Penchant and Holunder: You say that my original post showed use of Ni. Would you say the same is true for my long post?


Not in a very obvious way, but yes. It's hard to describe though, it's more a general impression.




> I'm not sure if this will help, but I will give you an example of how I would make a decision. One of my friends has a habit of cancelling plans with me. She calls me up at the last second and lets me know she won't be able to make it. This really frustrates me because I took time out of my day for her, I held up my side of the deal, and I value a person's word. This didn't seem that important to her.
> 
> These strong values/ideals may show Fi. However, my decision was not as much based on my own values as what I thought was best for our relationship (Fe?). I was willing to reconsider my perspective based upon my perceived understanding of my friend. I try to take what I observe and make sense of it through logic(Ti?) I know that she overworks herself and so she may have just been overstressed and wanted time to herself. I try to put myself in people's shoes before I criticize them for being inconsiderate. Even though I was upset, I did not make a big deal about it because she tends to blow things out of proportion and I did not want to cause strife between us. I could envision that happening (Ni?) and I didn't feel like it was worth the risk to our relationship. I place a lot of value on harmony, even if that means not voicing my opinion when I should (Fe?)


You might be over-thinking this a little. Not every single act is caused by one and only one function. And everyone does things that don't seem to fit in with their type descriptions.




> I don't know whether my way of writing is a good representation of how I am in real life.


I've read a lot from INFPs on this forum, and they have a rather distinct style - kind of fuzzy. I compared your writing on this basis. Similar circumstances should produce similar results.




BlissfulDreams said:


> I decided to retake the cognitive functions test, even though the results change every time I take it.


I'm very skeptical of the cognitive functions test. Usually, when you use a introverted function a lot, the test will also tell you that you use the extraverted version a lot, and vice versa. It's useful to find out whether you are S or N, and T or F, but often not very useful to determine your use of individual functions.



Another word about Si vs. Ni: It's often said that Si references past experiences to find solutions, but in a way, Ni does that too - Ni is based on a knowledge system, and that system is based on experience.


----------



## penchant (Sep 20, 2010)

Holunder said:


> Another word about Si vs. Ni: It's often said that Si references past experiences to find solutions, but in a way, Ni does that too - Ni is based on a knowledge system, and that system is based on experience.


On this: I see the difference as Si referencing particular instances of experience and situations (including personal feelings, thoughts and reactions, and Ni as referencing more generalized principles and connections/relations...


----------



## penchant (Sep 20, 2010)

I'm not sure I agree with you fully on the relation between Fi and Fe...



Holunder said:


> It seems you have a rather marked J preference, as you focus on the result very much. Also, you trying to adapt your work to the understanding of others is indicative of Fe. Te would be oriented at general standards instead of the Professors expectations, and introverted judgment is more about what seems right to yourself, without much reference to others.


I think this could be Fe, as you state, but not necessarily. But J yes, though an IxxP can exhibit a fairly strong J tendency, just as an IxxP can do typically P behaviour. The dominant of an IxxP is after all J.



> Intuition makes you consider many possibilities, and your primary concern in dealing with the outside world seems to be to find the solution that makes everyone involved the most happy - that's Fe again. You are unsettled before you make a decision – that’s a typical J attribute. I guess your Ni makes you perceive decisions as not completely final, and so you keep worrying about them.
> It's also a personal theory of mine that INJs see sacrificing personal comfort for a greater good as an ideal, as it means resisting the urges of the inferior function, which prompts them to enjoy material things.





> I believe worrying about how you are perceived by others is usually considered a Ni attitude, though I'm not sure about that. All I know is that I do this to some extent.


I'd thought a Ni dom would be worried about missing information. This sound more like a J dom to me. And in my experience INFPs do generally worry a lot about what others think... Ne makes up a lot of possibilities for Fi to relate to, and their Te and Ti is often very weak, giving them less of impersonal standards to relate to.



> You apparently focus more on outward behaviour and social rules than other people recognizing the values within them, which would be an Fi thing. So, Fe again.


Wouldn't Fi be more comfortable than Fe with a live and let live attitude, as Fi is internal and Fe is external?



> Seems like an Ni approach: Amass facts and weigh them internally.


Would weighing things internally be an introverted judging function?



> You orientate your decisions after how they affect other people. That’s the very description of Fe.


I wouldn't put it that way; "how they affect other people" can still be either a personal internal standard. I think it is more like orientating decisions after what other people think about them.



> This sounds like your Fe and Ti are in conflict sometimes. Anyway, justifying why you feel a certain way is very much alien to Fi. Fi perceives eternal inner values. They don’t have to be justified, or rather, they can’t, as they are justification themselves.


I could see this struggle as Fi wanting to be accepted by others, but since it is inherently internal, it can't and therefore needs Te to "justify" itself. Ti would justify things but by reference to introverted logic. As for justifying things to the self, I think that Fi is certainly enough. Really all J function exist for the purpose of justifying things (=deciding and making judgements). This makes for a struggle when it is felt that other people are not satisfied with the Fi reason, but the Te is not keeping up.



> That’s the very thing I wrote about earlier: Fe says “I wish they would get along”, Fi says “I wish they would see the other ones perspective”.


Isn't this more about the "why" than the "what" or "how". Personally I would think of it more naturally the other way around. Fi: "I wish they would get along, because I don't like people not getting along." Fe: "I wish they would see the other ones perpective, because everyone wants to be understood (or: because that would make us all better off)."



But, I'm still learning... :mellow:


----------



## penchant (Sep 20, 2010)

BlissfulDreams said:


> *21. Any peculiarities that you have noticed about your personality?*
> 
> *I tend to act like a sense-dominated person when I'm under stress. I'm concerned about the here and now, rather than long-term. I also become kind of petty and concerned with things that are normally unimportant to me. In a sense, I become some of the traits that I dislike in other people.
> 
> ...


What you think of as acting like an S-dom might actually be closer to simply acting as an E. You do not have the time to introvert enough, so you do more work in the extraverted mode. (Until you overload and shut down in total I mode...) But yes, stress produces what we dislike most, since we are then not able to hide it as well in ourselves as we normally make an effort to do... And then, the less liked and therefore less used functions are of course not as developed and maybe even dysfunctional.

I understand organisation as separated in internal and external organisation. An internally structured person needs less structure on the outside. I'm not sure how this relates to type though. Possibly J/P but I'm not sure. Then, also, your subjective perception of how organized you are is not a very good measure of whether you are objectively more or less organized that any other person. What tells a lot more, is asking how other people see you.

Being prone to think in tangents reminds me of Ne. Needing time to think before speaking is just Ixxx. Wanting to be consistent could be J-dom, but is on the other hand quite universal.

Going back to the messiness, I think what could be telling here is thinking about the reason that you are outwardly messy.

Being calculated to me sounds like a need to be in control, and going with the flow as a way of totally and intentionally giving up on being in control. If you are strong on perfectionism this sounds like a reasonable coping strategy for when you feel that you might not be 100% sure about succeeding - just giving up instead is a more palatable option, and has the side-effect of letting you focus on things you care more about instead.

My thoughts....


----------



## suicidal_orange (May 6, 2010)

Penchant said:


> I understand organisation as separated in internal and external organisation. An internally structured person needs less structure on the outside. I'm not sure how this relates to type though. Possibly J/P but I'm not sure. Then, also, your subjective perception of how organized you are is not a very good measure of whether you are objectively more or less organized that any other person. What tells a lot more, is asking how other people see you.


IXXJ an EXXP are externally organised and EXXJ and IXXP are externally organised - this is where the choosing based on letters falls down as it's related to two of them. This is due to the nature of the dominant and auxiliary functions, whether the J or P is introverted. That she isn't sure on I/E doesn't make this very helpful in finding BlissfulDreams type...



BlissfulDreams said:


> Yet, I try to be very organized in the way I think (sometimes that's a struggle as I'm prone to thinking in tangents)
> ...
> I also struggle with logic vs. feelings and have a hard time justifying why I feel a certain way. I feel like most things need a reason and it annoys me when I can't find one.


This sounds like a battle of Te vs Fi - Fi being internal decides something without need for external validation while Te is very keen on justifying it's conclusions to the outside world. Have you always been this way, or were you happy to accept your views without needing to justify them in your younger years? Suggesting you try and be organised in your head but outwardly aren't at all suggests Fi dominance (compared to Te), as does your willingness to express personal feelings (we PM, she does) but there are probably alternative explanations, as with everything.


----------



## BlissfulDreams (Dec 25, 2009)

I'll reply to all of you soon. I have some papers due this week and afterwards, I should have time to write proper responses. Once again, thank you.


----------



## Holunder (May 11, 2010)

penchant said:


> I think this could be Fe, as you state, but not necessarily. But J yes, though an IxxP can exhibit a fairly strong J tendency, just as an IxxP can do typically P behaviour. The dominant of an IxxP is after all J.


Seems I confused my answers a bit. :blushed: This answer was more fitting for the next quote, especially this:



> But I am very unsettled until I make the decision


Thats what I get from writing late in the night :frustrating:




> I'd thought a Ni dom would be worried about missing information. This sound more like a J dom to me. And in my experience INFPs do generally worry a lot about what others think... Ne makes up a lot of possibilities for Fi to relate to, and their Te and Ti is often very weak, giving them less of impersonal standards to relate to.


As I said, I'm not very sure in how far that is typical for Ni. The theory is that Ni sees all the possible ways other people could perceive you, including the negative ones, and this can make you very unsure.
INFPs do worry about what other people think, but do they specifically worry about what other people think of _them_? My impression was that they like to wonder about what others think generally, without necessarily drawing from that any necessity to change themselves. I think INPs see all those possibilities, but for them they are not really real, until they have been sorted through by introverted judgment. You could, however, probably find similar insecurities among Ne dominants - they primarily live in possibilities, and perceive them as much more real than INPs.




> Wouldn't Fi be more comfortable than Fe with a live and let live attitude, as Fi is internal and Fe is external?


The thing about Fi is, that for an Fi user, morals come from within everyones self. To tell someone how he should behave is in the eyes of Fi at best useless, and at worst prompting insincerity. (I might be exaggerating a bit here, but you get the picture.) Fe wants other people to keep to the social rules. Fi wants other people to look inside themselves and perceive the eternal morals that lie within every human, and act after them. Fi might expect that others have the same moral rules as themselves, since they are perceived to be eternal and all-encompassing, but might at the same time be very excepting of other peoples views, if they are sincere. Fi tends to value sincerity over politeness.
Both Fe and Fi want others to "live and let live", their approach is just different.




> Would weighing things internally be an introverted judging function?


You are right, it could be introverted judging too, and my view was a little biased. Introverted judging weighs gathered facts logically and linearily. Ni is more like some kind of inner scales: You put single facts on the scale pans, and they stay there. You usually aren't aware of all the facts, but you always know which way the scales are tipped,and you can always add new facts that influence the balance. BlissfulDreams' description sounded more like the latter kind of judgment, but it's subtle, and not a real proof.




> I wouldn't put it that way; "how they affect other people" can still be either a personal internal standard. I think it is more like orientating decisions after what other people think about them.


Fi tends to see things as morally right or wrong, without any reference to consequences. (That's what extraverted judging is for.)




> I could see this struggle as Fi wanting to be accepted by others, but since it is inherently internal, it can't and therefore needs Te to "justify" itself. Ti would justify things but by reference to introverted logic. As for justifying things to the self, I think that Fi is certainly enough. Really all J function exist for the purpose of justifying things (=deciding and making judgements). This makes for a struggle when it is felt that other people are not satisfied with the Fi reason, but the Te is not keeping up.


Honestly, I cannot even really imagine how to justify feelings. They just are. If I perceive something as morally right, then it is. And my Fi is only tertiary.
But maybe BlissfulDreams could elaborate on the justifying of feelings issue?




> Isn't this more about the "why" than the "what" or "how". Personally I would think of it more naturally the other way around. Fi: "I wish they would get along, because I don't like people not getting along." Fe: "I wish they would see the other ones perpective, because everyone wants to be understood (or: because that would make us all better off)."


Actually, both of your statements sound like Fe. I admit the difference can be subtle, and it's not like there are statements that make you definitely a Fi- or Fe-user.
"I wish they would get along, because I don't like people not getting along." again focuses on outward behavior. Fi wants people to really accept each other, because it wants people to adhere to the universal principle of morality. Fe is driven by the result. Fi is driven by the cause.

I reread my former posts and admit they seem a bit inconsistent on this topic. I always mean the same thing, but they come out as contradictory :frustrating:. Sorry if I confused anyone.


----------



## penchant (Sep 20, 2010)

Holunder said:


> Seems I confused my answers a bit. :blushed: This answer was more fitting for the next quote, especially this:
> 
> 
> > But I am very unsettled until I make the decision


Yes, but my interjection still holds. J/P for Introverts gives at best tentative directions.



> As I said, I'm not very sure in how far that is typical for Ni. The theory is that Ni sees all the possible ways other people could perceive you, including the negative ones, and this can make you very unsure.
> INFPs do worry about what other people think, but do they specifically worry about what other people think of _them_? My impression was that they like to wonder about what others think generally, without necessarily drawing from that any necessity to change themselves. I think INPs see all those possibilities, but for them they are not really real, until they have been sorted through by introverted judgment. You could, however, probably find similar insecurities among Ne dominants - they primarily live in possibilities, and perceive them as much more real than INPs.


I guess this depends very much on the degree of use of Ne, and how the Fi interprets the Ne perceptions. If Ne is a what-if function, then that doesn't say much about how it is applied. The self might be the primary concern for one person, but not for another. I don't think this has much to do with type, though there might be a correlation with Fe/Ti vs Te/Fi regarding how different persons worry about being judged.

As for Ni, I think the same goes, that it is not Ni that creates concern for the self, besides the fact that I think all Introverts will be more self-conscious than the extraverts, in general.

Though, incidentally, what I know from INFPs in my surroundings is that they are very concerned with being perceived by others in a positive light. And being high on Fi and low on Te, makes for a good reason why their objective or logical judgment isn't very strong making them prone to rely heavily on subjective feeling for measuring themselves up.



> The thing about Fi is, that for an Fi user, morals come from within everyones self. To tell someone how he should behave is in the eyes of Fi at best useless, and at worst prompting insincerity. (I might be exaggerating a bit here, but you get the picture.) Fe wants other people to keep to the social rules. Fi wants other people to look inside themselves and perceive the eternal morals that lie within every human, and act after them. Fi might expect that others have the same moral rules as themselves, since they are perceived to be eternal and all-encompassing, but might at the same time be very excepting of other peoples views, if they are sincere. Fi tends to value sincerity over politeness.
> Both Fe and Fi want others to "live and let live", their approach is just different.


I don't think that the belief that morals are subjective is a question of type - any type should be able to claim that all morals come from within. That would come down to the line of reasoning for their standpoint, and how to relate to the fact. 

As I understand it, Fi is more often staying away from expressing opinions about other's behaviour, as they prefer that others not have any about their. Fi, then has its own internal moral compass, and expect others to follow their own. The degree to which this is about objective morality or social rules, should however be a question of the content of the individual Fi, not a matter of Fi vs Fe, as I don't see why Fi couldn't be concerned about that. And a Fi that values politeness over sincerity, doesn't go against their Fi in doing so, as far as I can understand.

Fe would judge on outside standards, and could therefore be more open to others expressing their judgment them, as they judge themselves in relation to the outer world. Fe therefore, doesn't judge according to principle at all, but more pragmatically. I think therefore that it is questionable whether Fe would prefer a principle such as "social graces", or any other principle at all, as the base of judgment. I do not accept the proposition that Fe, because it is concerned with external "proof" as the basis for judgment in the same way as Te, is the same things as judgeing by any principle of "unity" or "agreement". When it becomes a principle, it is internalized and formalized, and then it is no longer Fe but Fi.

But, I will say that I didn't fully understand your post, so feel free to post again on this Fi vs Fe, as I find it an interesting and often poorly understood function pair.



> Fi tends to see things as morally right or wrong, without any reference to consequences. (That's what extraverted judging is for.)


Yes and no. Looking directly at the consequences in the specific case is Fe. Fe would judge on the basis of other peoples expected reactions. Fe could with the help of Ti construct a database of previous judgments, to improve their accuracy in judging. However, Fi could have as a principle that it is wrong to do things that affect others negatively, and then use their Te to make that principle work out as effectively as possible, thus using "how the action affects other people" as their guideline for judging.



> Honestly, I cannot even really imagine how to justify feelings. They just are. If I perceive something as morally right, then it is. And my Fi is only tertiary.


I think that having Fi as tertiary makes it harder for you to relate to it, than if it were dominant or auxiliary. What I think of as to justify is to show that your position is valid according to a standard. For Ti this is a logical standard, for Te a pragmatical, for Fe a social, and for Fi a moral. But the problem is when the function is judged by a standard alien to it's nature. To judge Fi by a Te standard for instance, will deny the core of Fi. And so on... But whereas we have a generally accepted system of logic for justifying Ti, even though it is an internal function, there is less agreement on that Fi judgments that are justified. Just from the basis of that fact, I think that it is clear why Fi users have a harder time justifying their judgment.



> But maybe BlissfulDreams could elaborate on the justifying of feelings issue?


Yes, please do.



> Actually, both of your statements sound like Fe. I admit the difference can be subtle, and it's not like there are statements that make you definitely a Fi- or Fe-user. "I wish they would get along, because I don't like people not getting along." again focuses on outward behavior. Fi wants people to really accept each other, because it wants people to adhere to the universal principle of morality. Fe is driven by the result. Fi is driven by the cause.


No surprise, I am Fe after all. But still, my Fi example, though applying to outward behaviour, has as its standard of judgment an internal principle, namely a principal dislike of people not getting along. The basis for judgment, not the object of judgment is the difference. And this also doesn't necessarily translated into claiming a _universal_ moral principle when using Fi; the fact that it is an _internal_ moral principle is enough.


----------

