# Am I an INTP or INFJ ?



## Dezir (Nov 25, 2013)

*1) What aspect of your personality made you unsure of your type?*

I have both natural INTP and natural INFJ traits. One of them must be something I developed over time or something I assume to be true I guess.

*2) What do you yearn for in life? Why?*

This may sound incredibly F but that doesn't change the fact I could be a T:
To make a better word, I don't want to see people suffer.

But I'm also very curious about sciencifical fields like physics, biology, chemestry; at least the more in depth parts; which I doubt could be a tertiary Ti trait.

*3) Think about a time where you felt like you were at your finest. Tell us what made you feel that way.*

When I'm proven to be right, when I help somebody _(without being used, in that case, a part of me wants to help them, another part feels hostile towards them for this; I usually do or don't depending on the situation)_, when I use my rationality to solve a situation. 

*4) What makes you feel inferior?*

Bad people skills, bad awareness of the physical world.

I'm naturally shy, I'm trying to be extroverted sometimes and I always succed except it's not natural for me, no matter how long I try, I'll always feel some level of awkwardness around people. Sometimes I know what the problem is with a person but I don't know how to tell it, like literally I can't find the words.

*5) What tends to weigh on your decisions? (Do you think about people, pro-cons, how you feel about it, etc.)*

Logic, I've noticed I'm better at fiding what's good or bad rather than what's true or false, I'm good with the latter too but I'm usually more confidnend I can find what's good or bad for people than finding what's true or false.

I find it hard to doubt the former, but I can and will doubt my logic from time to time. But isn't this how it is for everybody ?

*6) When working on a project what is normally your emphasis? Do you like to have control of the outcome?*

Depends what you mean by outcome, but yes I think I will to have control of the outcome.

*7) Describe us a time where you had a lot of fun. How is your memory of it? *

Not solving math problems for sure, although I might be Ti dominant. I usually feel happy when I'm in a group of people which has a good atmosphere, I find it pleasant, although that happens once in a blue moon for me. And I don't _"actively try to maintain a good group atmosphere"_ as some people said dom/aux Fe users are doing.

*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)*

I hate to memorize, I'm good with theorizing but not with remembering what I'm theorizing, so I prefer to be hands on, feels more confortable, more practical and practica experience is stuck in your brain forever.

*9) How organized do you to think of yourself as?*

50% / 50% yes and no.

*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?*

*I look if they make sense to me first.*

*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?*

I like to then that I follow what I believe and being myself but this isn't true in al the cases. Isn't "making sure that everyone is doing fine and belonging to a given group" something that has to do with ethics rather than Fe ? I have a friend who tested as an ENFJ _(Fe dom)_ and doesn't really do that.

*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?*

Thinks before speaking, most of the time. I'd rather take one-on-one communication.

*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?*

Both at the same time I guess. I like to have an idea, to know where I'm going, but on the next step sometimes I like to collect more information and sometimes I just go for it, more of the latter I guess.

*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?*

Stay home.

*15) How do you act when you're stressed out?*

Focus, focus, I need to control my emotions.

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

Fake people, I can't stand them, even if I want and they're being nice to me something inside me won't allow me to stand them very well.

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

Hobbies, philosophy. I have some friends who like to discuss computers and stuff, I find them cool subjects but I'm not really that interested in them, this should be an NT trait right ?

*18) What kind of things do pay the least attention to in your life*

Other people's emotions I guess, I might be insensitive towards them at times. Which is quite funny, because I'm able to tell without many problems what the good or bad from an ethical point of view, and I keep track of that _(whether I want / like it or not as far as I can tell)_ but when you get deep, like into people's emotions I don't keep track of that, I could master that I guess but I don't keep track of it.

*Here are two things:*
_"Won't notice other people's emotions, might be insensitive at times" - INTP Trait.
When someone around me is sad I feel sad on some level, and I don't like "I feel sad for you" I literaly feel sad myself because of this, which as far as I know sounds like an - INFJ Trait._

*19) How do your friends perceive you? What is wrong about their perception? ? What would your friends never say about your personality ?*

They perceive me as cold, awkward _(Not socially awkward like being nervous around people but different)_, and very economic with words.

What's wrong about their perception is that I'm not as cold as I look, the reason I look like that is because I'm shy and introverted and I can be quite talkative on one-on-one conversation _(depending on the subject)_.

_"You're such a tough guy"_

*20) You got a whole day to do whatever you like. What kind of activities do you feel like doing?*

Writing maybe, looking at information of how the brain works _(psyicologically, like the thinking process)_ and playing video games _(I usually play them when I don't feel like doing anything else but despite of the fact that I play a lot I'm not mad about them)_.


----------



## BK201 (Dec 14, 2013)

I personally can't see you being an INFJ, I think inferior Fe would cause the sporadic empathy skills. Ti can analyse people quite well imo Ti dominants are usually quite good at figuring out how someone works or could improve, it just doesn't have much emotion behind it like an INFJ would, this is just what i have seen from the ISTP's I know.


----------



## R45tx (Jul 19, 2014)

I am leaning towards INTP as well. Your main argument for _not_ being an NT seems to be that you care about other people and are more emotional than you look. However, although stereotypical NTs are cold and uncaring, these traits are not mutually exclusive with being an INTP. In other words, not wanting to see other people suffer is entirely logical and therefore not only limited to Fs. Also, INTPs are not emotionless, but rather just not as in-touch with their emotions — which would explain why your friends say you tend to look colder than you actually are. You also mentioned that you feel like you need to control your emotions (at least when stressed), which I think is a thought that many inferior Fe users share.

I think the thing that really made the decision for me was when you said you looked to see if an idea made sense to you first upon seeing it. INTPs are Ti-dominant and therefore judgers at heart (despite being Ps); an INFJ would first focus on making sure they understood the definition of the idea itself (Ni), and then judge it by considering how it applied to other people (Fe).


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

What other types did you consider?
I can't see neither INTP or INFJ,INFJ is more likely though.I don't think I saw Ne in your answers.


----------



## StoneMoon (Dec 23, 2013)

I think you're neither, you should probably check out xNFP. And also focus on the functions and not "traits" you mentioned. Your answers seem to indicate Fi and Te, not Fe and Ti.


----------



## Gurpy (Aug 8, 2014)

These types aren't similar. Ask yourself if you have Ne or Ni. Also figure out if you are a thinker or feeler


----------



## ruskiix (Sep 28, 2013)

Gurpy said:


> These types aren't similar. Ask yourself if you have Ne or Ni. Also figure out if you are a thinker or feeler


More specific: do you want to explore an idea until you've squeezed every last ounce of meaning out of it? Or are you more or a quantity over quality kind of person?

INFJs with strong Ti can seem very intellectual. But we look more like an INTJ than INTP. You sound like you could very possibly be an INFJ enneagram 1.


----------



## Gurpy (Aug 8, 2014)

ruskiix said:


> More specific: do you want to explore an idea until you've squeezed every last ounce of meaning out of it? Or are you more or a quantity over quality kind of person?
> 
> INFJs with strong Ti can seem very intellectual. But we look more like an INTJ than INTP. You sound like you could very possibly be an INFJ enneagram 1.


I have never scored a J on any test ever and I am almost certain I am a perceiver and an INTP

I know I have high levels of Ti

I don't know how you can guess my type based on what I wrote here but I'll look into what you have to say just to see where you are coming from (who knows, maybe you are right)


----------



## ruskiix (Sep 28, 2013)

Gurpy said:


> I have never scored a J on any test ever and I am almost certain I am a perceiver and an INTP
> 
> I know I have high levels of Ti
> 
> I don't know how you can guess my type based on what I wrote here but I'll look into what you have to say just to see where you are coming from (who knows, maybe you are right)


Sorry, those questions were meant for the OP, I just replied to you because I was building on what you said.

I have trouble picturing an INTP that thinks they could be INFJ, really. Ni+Ti can look like Ni+Te, but not like Ne+Ti, I don't think.


----------



## Gurpy (Aug 8, 2014)

ruskiix said:


> Sorry, those questions were meant for the OP, I just replied to you because I was building on what you said.
> 
> I have trouble picturing an INTP that thinks they could be INFJ, really. Ni+Ti can look like Ni+Te, but not like Ne+Ti, I don't think.


Now I am confused, are you saying I appear to be an INFJ enneagram 1 or are you saying @Dezir does


----------



## TyranAmiros (Jul 7, 2014)

Have you considered ISTP? Getting beyond the stereotypical depiction of ISTP as "like to use their hands," I think it might be a good fit.

I do think you're a Ti-dominant--lots of evidence for this (question 5, 7, 10, 17). I think you have inferior Fe as well. There's a big misconception that IxTPs are anti-social, when we're really attracted to social situations, but we just tend to bad at it.

However, I don't see Ne or Si in your answers. I do see hints of Se and Ni--the way you learn (Q8), the way you work on projects (13). 

What would you think of ISTP?


----------



## ruskiix (Sep 28, 2013)

Gurpy said:


> Now I am confused, are you saying I appear to be an INFJ enneagram 1 or are you saying @_Dezir_ does


Dezir. You'd said it was a question of Ne vs Ni, I was asking the OP a more specific question for distinguishing between the two and the rest was directed at them.


----------



## Gurpy (Aug 8, 2014)

ruskiix said:


> Dezir. You'd said it was a question of Ne vs Ni, I was asking the OP a more specific question for distinguishing between the two and the rest was directed at them.


That makes sense
@Dezir you should listen to her


----------



## Dezir (Nov 25, 2013)

Living dead said:


> What other types did you consider?
> I can't see neither INTP or INFJ,INFJ is more likely though.I don't think I saw Ne in your answers.


Well, I considered all INs I think.

I doubt I'm an INTJ because I'm not that hard-working, it's hard for me to stick with projects.

INTP seems quite likely, the only thing that wouldn't fit INTP would be my natural sensitivity and tendency to get emotionally involved, I strive to judge things 100% objective but sometimes I do hold emotional attachment to my ideas which doesn't make things objective, what I mean by this is that sometimes I tend to put my preferences _(basically emotions)_ in my judgement, INTPs have emotions too, but I tested over 80% on a HSP teste where you had to test over 50% to be classified as a highly sensititve person, I'm also quite idealistic in life, and especially in romance which as far as I've heard could be an NF trait but I think it has more to do with N than NF combined.

INFJ I dunno, I've red they are less J than other J types due to their function's order. I've heard that INFJ are the most extroverted introverts, I'm not. I can be talkative but it's not my tendency, I think I might as well be one of the most introverted introverts.

*Based on this:*








1) Middle, I'm quite logical, and quite influenced by feeling sometimes, I'd say logical stand outs more but that doesn't make the former less valid.
2) I can do/be both depending on what the situation requires, and my view of the world is both compassionate and detached at the same time, I don't see them as opposites.
3) I seem aloof but I'm quite approachable actually.
4) Drawn to both living and impersonal sistem, I make systems both about people, their natural traits, what motivates them, and about imperson sistems, why is confidence so importnat ? how to deal with fear ? how can we be logically objective all the time ?
5) I prefer solitude but also need to have a few intimates, but really now, who doesn't ?
5) Kind of crushed but I think this is inaccurate, I mean who can't really be matter of fact about breakups, unless you don't care.
6) I like animals
7) I can be both, I have no problems being independent but I also need some emitonal support at the same time, not for any logical reason like solivng a problem or something, just for the sake of it.
8) I prefer procrastinating. But if this is improvsation vs planning, I say I'm 60% improvisation - 40% planning.

INFP is something I could be an at the same time I doubt I could be. They have Fi-Te, and I have a general idea of the judging functions and I don't relate to Fi-Te.
- Fi are naturally in touch with their values, I'm not.
- Te want to control their enviroment, I'm not actively look for structure.
- Ti basically analizes everything into small pieces, bascially what I'm doing now, I took Te, Ti, Fe, Fi, look at the pieces in order to find out what fits me.
- Fe is an objective general value system unlike Fi whose values are based only on self, I can relate to this.



StoneMoon said:


> I think you're neither, you should probably check out xNFP. And also focus on the functions and not "traits" you mentioned. Your answers seem to indicate Fi and Te, not Fe and Ti.


I can't be an extrovert, and I doubt I'm an INFP because I'm quite logical, most of the time. They are more likely to be led by their feelings. Where do I indicate Fi and Te ?



Gurpy said:


> These types aren't similar. Ask yourself if you have Ne or Ni. Also figure out if you are a thinker or feeler


The problem is I'm both thinker and feeler. One most be natural and the other one developed, logic without taking in conisderation other people's feelings or your feelings is just laking data, feelings without taking in consideration logic is a dumb thing to do.

All Ne or Ni definitions I found are very vauge. I'm not a stoic individual so I can relate to both at different times. The judging functions are very specific but I have a solid idea of the pereciving ones.



ruskiix said:


> More specific: do you want to explore an idea until you've squeezed every last ounce of meaning out of it? Or are you more or a quantity over quality kind of person?
> 
> I want to explore an idea until I master it, I prefer quality over quanity in ideas but at the same time no idea is worth being left out, everything could explain something new and exciting or useful.
> 
> INFJs with strong Ti can seem very intellectual. But we look more like an INTJ than INTP. You sound like you could very possibly be an INFJ enneagram 1.


I've the enneagram test more than once and I tend to score as either 4 or 5, and I realte to both descriptions.

Enneagram chart

I hardly feel envy on other people and I'm not that greedy. I would say Sloth fits me more but that's 9.

I am unique - I am knowing. I like both ideas but I am unique > I am knowing. Although this wasn't always the case, when I was younger I... hate would be too much said but I used to dislike I'm being different _(given the fact that in real world most people are ES)_ but now I've come to see the advantages but I kind of like it.

4: *"Seeking Happiness through Pain"* nope.. but I can see how that makes sense.

5: *"Seeking Wholeness through Isolation"* ok... wholeness ?... how ?

Equanimity =?= Nonattachment, I don't know about this one.

Definetly Melancholy > Stinginess

*Basic fear:*

"Of Being without Identity, Personal Significance" , like being nothing or living for nothing ?
Saying fear is too high but I wouldn't like that. "I don't know what to do with my life" - "I'll find something to do with it"

"Of Being Useless, Incompetent, Incapable" , I wouldn't like this either.
"What if I can't do it ?" - "But what if I can ?"

*Basic Desires:* This would be 2: To Feel Loved for One’s Self with for One's Self underlined.

Anyway, I see I tend to have more 4, but that could have different explainations, I don't seem to be unable to do anything a type 5 would be able to do.



Gurpy said:


> I have never scored a J on any test ever and I am almost certain I am a perceiver and an INTP
> 
> I know I have high levels of Ti
> 
> I don't know how you can guess my type based on what I wrote here but I'll look into what you have to say just to see where you are coming from (who knows, maybe you are right)


J or P depends on the day. I tend to score T - F around 50% like all the time. If I were to simply pick one, I would say T traits are more important but F traits are important too, it's just an objective analisis because knowing what is true is more important than knowing what is good, if you know what is good but you don't know what is true you're just idealistic without realism.



TyranAmiros said:


> Have you considered ISTP? Getting beyond the stereotypical depiction of ISTP as "like to use their hands," I think it might be a good fit.
> 
> I do think you're a Ti-dominant--lots of evidence for this (question 5, 7, 10, 17). I think you have inferior Fe as well. There's a big misconception that IxTPs are anti-social, when we're really attracted to social situations, but we just tend to bad at it.
> 
> ...


I actually like to use my hands, like practical work but not hard repetitive work.

The problem with Se and being an ISTP is that I have a bad awareness in my enviroment, I seem to be with my head in the clouds a lot of times, an it's not just my opinion, people actually told me this, I doubt would be the case if I was an aux Se.


----------



## Gurpy (Aug 8, 2014)

Dezir said:


> The problem with Se and being an ISTP is that I have a bad awareness in my enviroment, I seem to be with my head in the clouds a lot of times, an it's not just my opinion, people actually told me this, I doubt would be the case if I was an aux Se.


This sounds like INTP


----------



## Waif (Jan 3, 2015)

INFP.

Hates fakes: Fi dom

Can get things done in a pinch: Si tert

Congratulazzi! You are an INFP, meaning you're aalllmost perfect!


----------



## Dezir (Nov 25, 2013)

Waif said:


> INFP.
> 
> Hates fakes: Fi dom
> 
> ...


)) so ENFP is the perfect type I guess.

How is getting things done in a pinch Si tert ? I thought all P types had this trait ?


----------



## StoneMoon (Dec 23, 2013)

Dezir said:


> I can't be an extrovert, and I doubt I'm an INFP because I'm quite logical, most of the time. They are more likely to be led by their feelings. Where do I indicate Fi and Te ?


I still see your reasoning based on vague stereotypes all over your post. Feelers can be logical and Thinkers can be emphatetic, it all depends on how well developed you are. A well balanced individual knows how to count all factors in decision making.

Also, note that emotions aren't the same as values and apathy isn't the same using logic.

Here's something to help you get a better idea of the functions btw:

http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive-functions/256866-functions-illustrated-paint.html

It's true that your answers all describe things that could at least separately appear in any type, and it's hard to type someone based a questionaire like this, because the questions themselves are too vague to actually point why someone answers the way they do. But I thought you are an Fi-Te Ne-Si user because of some themes that repetitively occur in your answers:



> To make a better word, I don't want to see people suffer.


This is so vague of course that any type could say it, but maybe together with all other answers it indicates Fi. However it's more likely that someone who uses Ne and Fi would say this because it indicates a value based idea to be expanded, not a cohesion. Ni and Fe user would be more likely to state which way of helping people they've found to be their calling.



> when I help somebody (without being used, in that case, a part of me wants to help them, another part feels hostile towards them for this; I usually do or don't depending on the situation), when I use my rationality to solve a situation.


Fe is more likely to pay attention to the external harmony, so this is more likely Fi. This shows that you help someone because it's your internal ethic to do so and when the person doesn't appreciate your good intention, it clashes with your values.



> I've noticed I'm better at fiding what's good or bad rather than what's true or false


This indicates Te (inductive), not Ti (deductive) logic. 



> I like to then that I follow what I believe and being myself


the question was compared to external harmony, so your answer shows most likely Fi, since you choose internal out of the two, as you've done before.



> Fake people, I can't stand them, even if I want and they're being nice to me something inside me won't allow me to stand them very well.


This is very likely answer from Fi dom or aux. Fe user would be less likely to react emotionally to the fact that they're being fake, because they'd care more about the fact that the person made the efford to be nice.



> But I'm also very curious about sciencifical fields like physics, biology, chemestry;


Te is more interested in empirical facts and Ti is more interested in theorising. I don't know how old you are but at least at high school level these subjects appeal to Te's more, because they're more factual. In general Te's are better at learning existing systems and effectively using them to come to conclusions and Ti's are better at coming up with systems to determine what's logical.



> I look if they make sense to me first.


This indicates your first function is a judging funtion.



> Thinks before speaking, most of the time. I'd rather take one-on-one communication.


This is true of Ti's but it's also true of many who have internal judging function and a percieving function before their Te.



> playing video games


In general people who use Ne, Te and Si tend to like video games more.


Ok, so here's some points. Feel free to elaborate if you think I've misunderstood your answers, it's true that the questions can be somewhat suggestive.

Also, in general, your way of approacing the MBTI systems seems Te, not Ti. You pay most attention to the tests, charts, descriptions and the like. All the tangible knowledge you can get, also you post here to discuss it and use other people's input. a Ti user would learn the theory of the functions and from those principles figure out how the functions manifest. So, you do it from facts --> theory like a Te does, Ti does it theory --> facts.

Also you use all the different tests and theories to expand your knowledge and see what possibilities open, like an Ne would. In your answers to other people's guesses you're not really narrowing down the open ends but exploring them.


----------



## Dezir (Nov 25, 2013)

StoneMoon said:


> I still see your reasoning based on vague stereotypes all over your post. Feelers can be logical and Thinkers can be emphatetic, it all depends on how well developed you are. A well balanced individual knows how to count all factors in decision making.
> 
> Also, note that emotions aren't the same as values and apathy isn't the same using logic.
> 
> ...


Being a higlhly sensitive person is irrelevant from your type.
And values have nothing to do with the feeling functions.

I initially thought Fi were your personal values..

Based on these 2 I can draw many conclusions.

Some of your values tend to happen due your type, but they aren't based on your type.
If you're a Fi user you will see that people aren't their authenitc self and since you are quite proud of being your authentic self you'll dislike that. But you might as well see that they aren't their authentic selves and use that as an opportunity to take advantage of that.

Your type dictates the first things you perceive and judge, from there you draw your beliefs and your values might be based on that, but there are also many other factors, including other aready established values.

Hating fakes may have more to do with your values than Fi, although Fi could influence that.
But at the same time because of this a Fe user could also hate fakes.

I'm fairly sure I'm a Ne - Si user, based on melancholy, seeing possibilities of things to do, rather than Ni sticking to one or a few projects and Se being active in the enviroment.

About Te or Ti. I don't relate to Te. Facts are important, I appreciate this as a value, I pay attention to facts, but that doesn't mean facts are natrurally the first thing I look for, they could be the first thing I look for if I want to, but I only do so when the situation needs it, but I don't do that as often as looking for what makes sense, theory. I'm more o a theoretical person than factual person, even though I value facts for what they really are. Makes Sense > Evidence.

I like those subjectis but in depth, the first simple part of them seems just boring.

Fe is attention to the external harmony, but don't your values dictate what you do with that attention ?

I don't know about Fi or Fe, I seem to have Fi... but at the same time I do think I have a lot of Ti rather than Te so I think I'm an INTP. But the problem is, I can't be an INTP with Fi, nor an INFP with Ti. Do you have any useful links where I could learn more about the cognitive functions ? I feel I don't understand them very well.


----------



## Grain of Sugar (Sep 17, 2013)

Lol, the table is mostly bs..


----------



## StoneMoon (Dec 23, 2013)

Dezir said:


> Being a higlhly sensitive person is irrelevant from your type.
> And values have nothing to do with the feeling functions.
> 
> I initially thought Fi were your personal values..
> ...


Here's some links:


















The Difference Between the Extroverted and Introverted Functions | CelebrityTypes

Introverted Feeling (Fi) vs. Introverted Thinking (Ti)

http://personalitycafe.com/articles/63173-fi-vs-fe-101-a.html

http://personalitycafe.com/articles/20086-summary-cognitive-functions.html

http://personalitycafe.com/articles/84275-cognitive-function-ne-vs-ni.html


Also the link in my last post I find a very good way of learning what the functions are all about, it illustrates the basic idea of them.

Ne generates multiple possibilities from one idea, and in that sense it's explosive. It seeks more and more connections between more and more ideas.

Ni draws multiple ideas together to one core idea, it's cohesive. It seeks the idea that connects everything together.

Fe seeks to harmonize inner values by external standards. It uses the internal in favour of the external.

Fi seeks to harmonize external standards by inner values. It uses the external in favour of the internal.

Te uses theory in the terms of facts, it validates the theory by the facts.

Ti uses facts in the terms of theory, it validates the facts by the theory.

Se focuses on sensory data that is present, what the five senses can tell about an object.

Si focuses on previosly experinced sensory data, how the object relates to past experince that is recalled by it.


----------



## ruskiix (Sep 28, 2013)

@StoneMoon's summary is great, but I will note that Fe can look extremely different with enneagram. E1 is about following your own standards no matter what. So if external standards are against one of your's, you'll look and act more like an Fi user but only superficially. I will very intensely go against what the group I'm with expects if it would hurt another group I feel an obligation to defend or protect. This still isn't Fi because all of those internal standards are initially informed by Fe, but I make myself speak up against others often, even family, in favor of other groups. I'm constantly trying to get my sheltered SF family to realize drug users aren't lesser people and that things like drug testing welfare recipients is both useless (doesn't save money, doesn't find more than a dozen drug users in the whole state) and insulting. I'll go against everything my Fe wants in that moment because my Fe is more strongly concerned about the fact that they all have jobs where they're in positions for their lack of empathy to hurt already vulnerable people.

I also got really smug and coercive and just extremely annoyed when my EMT relative insisted flu vaccines give people the flu. All I could think of was, what if he's telling old people that? Who could have serious risks from the flu? And I couldn't remember Te facts in the moment and he wasn't much of a Ti user.

If you find that you have to speak up because you're overwhelmingly concerned about other people, it can still be Fe from an e1 or maybe even e2 user. If you don't have a similar reaction when others go against your standards and opinions in ways that affect no one, it still indicates Fe, especially if you find concern for others constantly overwhelming any other concerns you might have in a situation. You will still feel what other people around you are feeling, you'll just make yourself go against it while remembering feeling what other people felt that you deem more important.


I think Se also lends more information on how to change your environment for a certain purpose, while Si lends more for recognizing really subtle details in your environment. My Si cousin is the one we called when my mom lost her glasses while hiking during fall. And he found them. He also used to be able to see animals that were perfectly still against very camouflaging backgrounds while hunting. Incredibly sharp eyes. His Si sister defers to me and my mom for party decorating, though. The three of us combined can be an awesome team. We're better at editing details in decorations, she's better at seeing what should be there without necessarily knowing how to make it happen.


----------



## Dezir (Nov 25, 2013)

Tridentus said:


> People who use Fe, when making a moral judgement, ask themselves how they feel things _should be
> _People who use Fi, when making a moral judgement, ask themselves how they _feel_


I make moral judgments based on how I think things should be.



Tridentus said:


> People who use Fe often use the moral judgements of other people to justify an act or decision
> People who use Fi often use their own previous moral judgements to justify an act or decision


I use my own moral judgment which I think is more accurate than other people's _(most people I know)_ to justify an act or decision. What is right is right because it's good for people, not because most people say it's good, I find it wrong to use other people's moral judgement because ethics doesn't mean their interpretation of ethics.



Tridentus said:


> People who use Fe are hyper aware of others' feelings
> People who use Fi are hyper aware of how others make them feel
> (this is the most confusing distinction, as they often lead to the same result)


If I'm an INTP I would have inferior Fe so I don't know whether this is valid in that case.
I'm not hyper aware of any of them, but if I were to pick I would say I'm more aware _(not hyper aware)_ of my feelings, I usually use intuition (possibilities) and logic (interpreation of possibilities) to read other people's emotions.



Tridentus said:


> Most Common Positives:
> People who use Fe are accomodating of others' feelings, and making others feel good tends to be their goal
> People who use Fi are always aware of how they would feel when treated a certain way. self actualisation tends to be their goal


I think its



Tridentus said:


> Most Common Negatives:
> People who use Fe tend to side with the majority, leading them to be the types more likely to act like sheep.
> Fe users are sometimes bullies because they believe the moral code of the majority is the more important. It's harder for them to be subjective.


I hardly ever side with the majority, if I disagree with something I won't do it no matter who asks me, but I think this could be the use of Ti which is unconventional rather than Fi.

I believe the moral code of the majority is stupid, the ethic code isn't something dictated by majority. And I find this Fi vs Fe 101 full of stereotypes.



Tridentus said:


> People who use Fi tend to side with the individual, or themselves, meaning they tend to resist efforts to conform in any way.
> Fi users are sometimes selfish because they believe what they feel is the more important. It's harder for them to be objective.


I can't relate to this.



Tridentus said:


> note: the two functions are mutually exclusive (although the end conclusion is _sometimes_ the same) and every F type faces a decision to go one way or the other in every moral decision/conclusion. 1st function types are more likely to go with one or the other from a young age and show a strong preference, 2nd function types are more likely to mix it up or remain neutral at a young age, but increasingly choose the route most natural to them as they get older.
> 
> 2nd note: even when Fe types DO side against a majority- it will be because a greater majority (e.g. society at large) or a different majority (e.g. the feelings of friends from childhood, over those of people at a new job) is more important to them.


or because I DO think the majority is wrong. I think I'm a Fe and I find this insulting. It's like Fe users can't have values of their own, they have to be sheeps and do what everybody does. I know a dom Fe friend like this, but I doubt he doesn't have values of his own. Also, I think I'm a Fe user too and I don't relate to those things I mentioned.



> _"Fe seeks to harmonize inner values by external standards. It uses the internal in favour of the external.
> 
> Fi seeks to harmonize external standards by inner values. It uses the external in favour of the internal."_


I don't think I quite understand what you mean, I seek harmony in the outer world.

Also, thanks for the link I'll look at them later.


----------



## ruskiix (Sep 28, 2013)

e5 Fe is going to look different than what those Fe descriptions mention. A 5 will be very concerned with what is most accurate, enough to override people they feel are wrong, even with Fe. The difference is Fe 5 will probably be highly concerned with refining their idea of ethics to make sure they're not letting Fe mislead them. They'll do this because Fe CAN mislead them, which will bother them deeply, because Fe is often not "right" no matter how strongly you feel it.


----------



## ruskiix (Sep 28, 2013)

Fe dom and aux viscerally experiences the feelings of the people they're around. It doesn't mean we always think they're right or can never stand up against people we think are wrong in a way that hurts others (who we will also "feel"). Fe is cognition, not necessarily behavior choices. A lot of other factors go into behavior. Fe can lead to rejecting external standards.


----------



## StoneMoon (Dec 23, 2013)

Dezir said:


> I make moral judgments based on how I think things should be.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well the comparisons may seem stereotypical, because they try to point out the differences in a black and white manner to help understanding where the functions are coming from. They're not meant to be taken all the way literally in all cases, they're trying to point out the foundation of the value judgements.

My explanation on the other hand is to explain the difference in the most theoretical way that can be applied to everything:

"Fe seeks to harmonize inner values by external standards. It uses the internal in favour of the external.

Fi seeks to harmonize external standards by inner values. It uses the external in favour of the internal."



> I don't think I quite understand what you mean, I seek harmony in the outer world.


Both functions seek harmony in the outer world, but Fi does it according to their own internal values and Fe does it according to all external values.

Fi user relies on internal, subjective judgement to determine how to apply ethics in the outer world, how to act in a way that is in harmony with their own values. Like Ti, it looks to the internal model over the objective factors.

Fe user relies on external, objective factors to determine if an ethical code, or value is relevant. It seeks to act in a way that is in harmony with everyone's values. Like Te, it looks to the objective factors over the internal model.

Like Ti is interested in the theory itself, not neccessarily it's application, Fi is interested in values, ethics, morals, for their own sake. It cares whether something is right or wrong, like Ti cares whether something is logical or illogical.

Like Te is interested in the application of a theory, not neccessarily the theory itself, Fe is interested in the application of values, ethics, morals, not for their own sake, not because they're absolutely right or wrong, but to the extend that they can be used to support unity.

Of course it's never in real life as black and white as this, so no human being functions purely like this. Fi user is doomed to count other people's opinions and Fe user is doomed to exclude some people's opinions. Usually the less developed the Fi user is, the more likely they are to go against the majority even when it's farmful. And the less developed the Fe user is, the more likely they are to go along with the majority even when it's farmful.

The same applies for Ti and Te users. A poorly developed Ti user could trust their own theory even when it would be better to rely on the empirical evidence or existing models and a poorly developed Te user could trust the empirical evidence or existing models even when their own theory would be better.

Even if you prefer the internal, you need the external to back up for it and vice versa. That's why both Fi users and Fe users can have a strong set of their own values and also respect other people's values. It really depends on how well you've developed your other functions. That's why there really is no stereotypes to rely on when typing. You have to go deep into your own process of functioning, it doesn't help to point at common behaviours to determine your type if you haven't yet grasped the principles behind them.


----------



## Cmart (Oct 17, 2013)

I would say you seem like Fi much more than Ti, and I can see the Te that everyone else seems to see also.

"I make moral judgments based on how I think things should be."

"I use my own moral judgment which I think is more accurate than other people's (most people I know) to justify an act or decision. What is right is right because it's good for people, not because most people say it's good, I find it wrong to use other people's moral judgement because ethics doesn't mean their interpretation of ethics."

If that's not what Fi is, then I'm not to sure if Fi is a real thing. It might not be, all the cognitive functions might not be real. But this seems like quite a lot of Fi, and I would say you are either dominant or auxiliary Fi.

Stereotypes come from somewhere after all, don't they? If no stereotypes were truthful than why would they be stereotypes? There is always exceptions to stereotypes, but for the most part they are truthful in many ways.


----------



## ruskiix (Sep 28, 2013)

Cmart said:


> I would say you seem like Fi much more than Ti, and I can see the Te that everyone else seems to see also.
> 
> "I make moral judgments based on how I think things should be."
> 
> ...


It depends on how he thinks things should be and why, and when he thinks other people are wrong. Saying he thinks something is right if it's good for people sounds like me and I'm an Fe user. If he makes judgments based on thinking things should be better so that other people would be better off, and that's the primary source of his values, I'd say Fe. It seems unlikely that an Fi user's internal standards would entirely revolve around improving the experiences of others. Possible, but unlikely. That would be an Fe user who just happens to disagree with the people around them. Drop an Fe user in with people who are self-destructive or cruel and you're going to get actions and responses that look like Fi. So, it depends on when and why he refuses the standards and ethics of others.


----------



## Cmart (Oct 17, 2013)

ruskiix said:


> It depends on how he thinks things should be and why, and when he thinks other people are wrong. Saying he thinks something is right if it's good for people sounds like me and I'm an Fe user. If he makes judgments based on thinking things should be better so that other people would be better off, and that's the primary source of his values, I'd say Fe. It seems unlikely that an Fi user's internal standards would entirely revolve around improving the experiences of others. Possible, but unlikely. That would be an Fe user who just happens to disagree with the people around them. Drop an Fe user in with people who are self-destructive or cruel and you're going to get actions and responses that look like Fi. So, it depends on when and why he refuses the standards and ethics of others.


Yes but Fe is supposed to be going along the lines of what people as a whole think, so you can definitely disagree with different individuals at times, but you would agree with the general thoughts of certain ways to behave. I think most Fi users do like the idea of helping other people and such, and that it could be a primary focus for them, as long as it aligns with their internal morals. Both sides could be good or bad, could like helping people or not like it, or maybe they are directed only towards one group of people and dislike the other groups.

Maybe this question will help the OP (if you have a better one then ask that as well) 

If a friend of yours does something that you disagree with slightly, from a moral standpoint, are you more willing to stop them and make sure they know your viewpoint on the matter, or are you going to let them continue doing this slight offense to keep the peace with them, even if you don't agree with it entirely?


----------



## Tridentus (Dec 14, 2009)

StoneMoon said:


> Well the comparisons may seem stereotypical, because they try to point out the differences in a black and white manner to help understanding where the functions are coming from. They're not meant to be taken all the way literally in all cases, they're trying to point out the foundation of the value judgements.


Thanks, you absolutely get it.

There are quite a few posts criticizing the stereotyping, but I put them in there in full realization that they were exactly that. It's just an unavoidable part of trying to explain functions in a way that tailors to people who are still trying to conceptualize them in their head. Particularly as I had "beginners" in mind when writing it.

The article is nowhere near perfect because a perfect article would be indigestible for someone who hadn't gone through the process of learning and figuring these out for themselves in relation to their own world and their own experiences. You have to strike some sort of a balance between exact accuracy and explaining in a way that people may be able to understand quickly and relate to.


I like the way you've explained the function differences btw. People always want to know the behavioral differences, but in reality the differences in _process_ of functions that you've laid out are the only _*real*_difference that anyone needs to know. The behavioral tendencies are just an accumulation of knowledge based on experiences that people need to go out and figure for themselves.


----------



## Waif (Jan 3, 2015)

Dezir said:


> )) so ENFP is the perfect type I guess.
> 
> How is getting things done in a pinch Si tert ? I thought all P types had this trait ?


I'm pretty darn sure that EPs are more distractible with their primary extroverted functions. It's like how INTPs are often confused as to whether they're judgers or perceivers. They can pull it together better, even if they're prone to procrastinate. IJ types, however, know they're Js.


----------



## Waif (Jan 3, 2015)

Cmart said:


> Yes but Fe is supposed to be going along the lines of what people as a whole think, so you can definitely disagree with different individuals at times, but you would agree with the general thoughts of certain ways to behave. I think most Fi users do like the idea of helping other people and such, and that it could be a primary focus for them, as long as it aligns with their internal morals. Both sides could be good or bad, could like helping people or not like it, or maybe they are directed only towards one group of people and dislike the other groups.
> 
> Maybe this question will help the OP (if you have a better one then ask that as well)
> 
> If a friend of yours does something that you disagree with slightly, from a moral standpoint, are you more willing to stop them and make sure they know your viewpoint on the matter, or are you going to let them continue doing this slight offense to keep the peace with them, even if you don't agree with it entirely?


As an Fi-user, I'm very burdened by my own self-evaluations: am I 100% moral 100% of the time? Did I say the right thing? Was I being honest? To take on the facilitator task, like an Fe-user would be a lot. I'd be questioning, "Did I help out to my fullest capacity? Did anyone care? Is there a point to my help? Is that my job?" Likewise, Fe-users aren't as interested in morality, but are more interested in pragmatic solutions: feeding the orphans and widows. I care more that the rules are fair.


----------



## ruskiix (Sep 28, 2013)

Waif said:


> As an Fi-user, I'm very burdened by my own self-evaluations: am I 100% moral 100% of the time? Did I say the right thing? Was I being honest? To take on the facilitator task, like an Fe-user would be a lot. I'd be questioning, "Did I help out to my fullest capacity? Did anyone care? Is there a point to my help? Is that my job?" Likewise, Fe-users aren't as interested in morality, but are more interested in pragmatic solutions: feeding the orphans and widows. I care more that the rules are fair.


The problem with Fe descriptions saying we care about what's expected is that it just doesn't even halfway sound accurate to us. Your description is better. We care about how what we do will impact what others are going through. Is that outside standards? Sort of. If by morality you mean doing good, we kind of care. But that's rarely what morals are about to us--most people use morals to force others to do what they think is right with no concern for context. Some things considered immoral hurt people, so we dislike them. But while we dislike, say, drug addiction, we'd like to see drugs legalized so people who aren't ready for help wouldn't harass or harm other people trying to get ahold of drugs. Definitely NOT moralizing. We also often respond to things with "Who cares?" when something drives my Fi aunt crazy because to her its inappropriate but to us it isn't actually harming anyone or anything. Everything goes back to how it affects other people. Plenty of people don't know what's good for them or others, so we often go against what's expected or what others want.


----------



## ruskiix (Sep 28, 2013)

To me:

Fe asks how something will affect others.
Fi asks whether or not you agree with it.

If you have trouble understanding how those are different, you're probably an Fe user.


----------



## Dezir (Nov 25, 2013)

ruskiix said:


> e5 Fe is going to look different than what those Fe descriptions mention. A 5 will be very concerned with what is most accurate, enough to override people they feel are wrong, even with Fe. The difference is Fe 5 will probably be highly concerned with refining their idea of ethics to make sure they're not letting Fe mislead them. They'll do this because Fe CAN mislead them, which will bother them deeply, because Fe is often not "right" no matter how strongly you feel it.


Well, I could be an e5 Fe, but what are the implcation of this ? any practical examples ?



StoneMoon said:


> Well the comparisons may seem stereotypical, because they try to point out the differences in a black and white manner to help understanding where the functions are coming from. They're not meant to be taken all the way literally in all cases, they're trying to point out the foundation of the value judgements.
> 
> My explanation on the other hand is to explain the difference in the most theoretical way that can be applied to everything:
> 
> ...





Cmart said:


> I would say you seem like Fi much more than Ti, and I can see the Te that everyone else seems to see also.
> 
> "I make moral judgments based on how I think things should be."
> 
> ...


I have a friend that has the negative Fe _(or at least I see then negative)_ but I doubt half the world population is like this, but on the other hand, that would make sense, people are like sheeps.



Cmart said:


> Yes but Fe is supposed to be going along the lines of what people as a whole think, so you can definitely disagree with different individuals at times, but you would agree with the general thoughts of certain ways to behave. I think most Fi users do like the idea of helping other people and such, and that it could be a primary focus for them, as long as it aligns with their internal morals. Both sides could be good or bad, could like helping people or not like it, or maybe they are directed only towards one group of people and dislike the other groups.
> 
> Maybe this question will help the OP (if you have a better one then ask that as well)
> 
> If a friend of yours does something that you disagree with slightly, from a moral standpoint, are you more willing to stop them and make sure they know your viewpoint on the matter, or are you going to let them continue doing this slight offense to keep the peace with them, even if you don't agree with it entirely?


Happened to me, I tried to tell them it's not good what they are doing, I actually told him but I did it more subtile _(and at the same time it was obvious, an obivious subtility)_ I told him how the people he would do that would feel without pointing him out in the equation, or what he is trying to do, but he didn't really cared, and I couldn't stop him.



Waif said:


> As an Fi-user, I'm very burdened by my own self-evaluations: am I 100% moral 100% of the time? Did I say the right thing? Was I being honest? To take on the facilitator task, like an Fe-user would be a lot. I'd be questioning, "Did I help out to my fullest capacity? Did anyone care? Is there a point to my help? Is that my job?" Likewise, Fe-users aren't as interested in morality, but are more interested in pragmatic solutions: feeding the orphans and widows. I care more that the rules are fair.


Based on this, I relate 100% to Fi. I also agree with you _"Fe-users aren't as interested in morality, but are more interested in pragmatic solutions"_ based on my experience with some people I consider to be Fe. But I know a Fi user who did something I disagree with because he thought it's the right thing to do, in my opinion, that wasn't the right thing to do, so Fi people's values can also be different.

It was about screaming at someone when getting mad, he said he's honest with both himself and others to show his true emotions even when he's angry, I say you should control your emotion if those emotions make other people feel bad. Shouldn't unleash you're anger on someone else just because you're mad.



ruskiix said:


> The problem with Fe descriptions saying we care about what's expected is that it just doesn't even halfway sound accurate to us. Your description is better. We care about how what we do will impact what others are going through. Is that outside standards? Sort of. If by morality you mean doing good, we kind of care. But that's rarely what morals are about to us--most people use morals to force others to do what they think is right with no concern for context. Some things considered immoral hurt people, so we dislike them. But while we dislike, say, drug addiction, we'd like to see drugs legalized so people who aren't ready for help wouldn't harass or harm other people trying to get ahold of drugs. Definitely NOT moralizing. We also often respond to things with "Who cares?" when something drives my Fi aunt crazy because to her its inappropriate but to us it isn't actually harming anyone or anything. Everything goes back to how it affects other people. Plenty of people don't know what's good for them or others, so we often go against what's expected or what others want.


Most people use "morals" not morals. Their interpreation of right and wrong isn't always what is right and wrong, if other people listen, that's their problem. 

Well, define what you mean by 'inappropiate'. I care what's inapproapiate like wrong, hurting other people but I don't care what is inappropiate by a society's standards, although I care a little about other people's opinion I would usually do my own thing, except for when it's something extreme, like listening to Marlyn Mason near a church _(but I think this also has to do with my ethics)_, I'm a christian by the way but MM has some good points about people and religion, is this Fi or Fe ?



ruskiix said:


> To me:
> 
> Fe asks how something will affect others.
> Fi asks whether or not you agree with it.
> ...


I get it, and I think I often ask the latter, it's whether I like something in my personal interpreation of morals. But that would also lead to how something affects others, but not constantly asking or looking for it.

Thank you all for your answers.

So I seem more like Fi if I'm right, but how does Fi work with Ti, I also seem more like Ti ?

Saying I'm a Fi user, would kinda make sense, saying I'm a Fe user would kinda be a limitation, I care how other people feel and I can mirror people sometimes but I have my own opinions _(moral opinion)_, my own values that are different from other people's, don't follow majority I follow what is right, I'm not pragmatic in my moral values, I kinda have a struggle between what is right and what is effiecint, because I want to do what is effienct but that's not always right, I doubt a Fe user would have this problem. Fe is like one with the enviroment, I'm not. But I do feel good when talking to someone about how I feel, except I don't do that very often, and this as far as I've heard is a Fe trait, Fi are confortable with not saying.

And I do have a lot of Ti too, like everything has to make sense, everything has a logica explaination.


----------



## ruskiix (Sep 28, 2013)

Dezir said:


> Well, I could be an e5 Fe, but what are the implcation of this ? any practical examples ?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Trying to think of examples. I mentioned to my ENFJ mom that some people were describing Fe as moralizing and based on what other people expect from us, and got a big eyed raised brow "wat??" response. Struggle between what is right and what is efficient could be inferior Fe, I don't know what it looks like. I've described Fe to her enough to her that she knows what it is. My Fi aunt had just annoyed the shit out of today with Fi--insisting on telling Mom about something that bothered my aunt after I told her Mom didn't need to hear it and it didn't make a difference. Mom snapped at her pretty bad but then later did kind of use the information to explain herself to someone else.

The Fe users I know rant a lot about what they've seen as wrong, even if they know it will bother others, because we think being wrong is harming others. ESFJ cousin shared Obama stuff with an Fi mom that hates Obama (drove her crazy). We'll share things and do things against others if we think it will help them. I've posted a billion "YOU ARENT AN EXTROVERT AND INTROVERT" rants because I think knowing their types will help people, for example.


Tell me some of your political opinions that you can't sort as Fe or Fi and I can give you examples of how they might look coming from Fe stay Fi. I don't want to argue them, just need examples to use. (< Also Fe example. Haha.)

I do see dom Ti in you, I think. I use Ti to translate Ni to others. If I can't make sense of something, it doesn't necessarily bother me if I know I'm right, and I seek out facts that illustrate what I "know." I do make an effort to check conflicting information and facts to make sure I'm not biased but I do it because I don't want others to see me make a mistake--e1. I test as INFj in socionics, which is Fi, because my behavior looks like an Fi user.






This may help since it's inferior Fe vs aux Fe distinctions. Although it doesn't cover the inferior Fe use I don't think and I know my inferior function shows in me a ton.

Also, inferior Fe description of an INTj:

"LIIs are usually lacking in outward emotional energy. LIIs may typically seem stiff, cold, rational, unresponsive to emotional concerns, and overly formal in social settings. LIIs may feel uneasy and insecure about their adaptability to social situations. They appreciate the interactive efforts of others to make them feel comfortable, at ease, and a part of the group. They tend to liven up in situations of amusement and conviviality. In situations where they feel comfortable and unconditionally accepted, they may drop their tendency towards aloofness and engage in uncharacteristic silliness.

LIIs may be highly sensitive to the signs of emotional approval that they receive from others. They may be highly appreciative of displays of emotional warmth and friendliness. They may find normative emotional expectations placed on them to be stifling, and tend to prefer nonjudgmental environments without character scrutiny. Additionally, for fear of emotional reprisal, LIIs often tend to be rather noncritical of others' actions.


LIIs may be quite susceptible to acting in accordance to the mood of others, and may undervalue the importance of avoiding argumentation on their mental well-being.


- See more at: http://www.sociotype.com/socionics/types/LII-INTj/#.dpuf"

Fe from a 5 user might focus on objective facts that influence others. "This has as been proven to work so it should be done because it will help you." Or, for me, "drug testing welfare recipients doesn't save money or help anyone so it's useless."


What Fi types are you most considering?


----------



## ruskiix (Sep 28, 2013)

Sorry for so many posts but I thought of something else that might help:

Fe decides to go against others because they think they should. Fi decides to go along with others because they think they should. Those decisions are made to do something that isn't their natural impulse by whatever criteria happens to be important to them. But an Fe user is resisting an inherent drive to do what feels best for others because they think it won't actually help others. An Fi user is resisting an inherent urge to follow their beliefs/values/whatever because it won't give them results they want.

These differences do affect body language. An Fe user going against others will still use sympathetic body language, and will usually try to make sure others still feel heard. The Fi users I know who go along with others when they don't agree always visibly bristle. A raised eyebrow, avoiding eye contact, getting very quiet. They might just say "hmmm." And an Fe user going against others is going to be trying to make the people involved feel their good intentions, and try to address the source of conflict between what the person expects and what the Fe user is saying or doing.


----------



## Dezir (Nov 25, 2013)

ruskiix said:


> Trying to think of examples. I mentioned to my ENFJ mom that some people were describing Fe as moralizing and based on what other people expect from us, and got a big eyed raised brow "wat??" response. Struggle between what is right and what is efficient could be inferior Fe, I don't know what it looks like. I've described Fe to her enough to her that she knows what it is. My Fi aunt had just annoyed the shit out of today with Fi--insisting on telling Mom about something that bothered my aunt after I told her Mom didn't need to hear it and it didn't make a difference. Mom snapped at her pretty bad but then later did kind of use the information to explain herself to someone else.
> 
> The Fe users I know rant a lot about what they've seen as wrong, even if they know it will bother others, because we think being wrong is harming others. ESFJ cousin shared Obama stuff with an Fi mom that hates Obama (drove her crazy). We'll share things and do things against others if we think it will help them. I've posted a billion "YOU ARENT AN EXTROVERT AND INTROVERT" rants because I think knowing their types will help people, for example.
> 
> ...


I'm considering either INTJ or INFJ.

- What supports INTJ: I'm very sciencifical, therefore could be T before F. and value my own values about other people's values, therefore Fi I think.

- What doesn't support INTJ: Procrastinator.

- What supports INFJ: I've heard this is a very INFJ specifict thing and I don't know if this is because I know MBTI or N alone or not but I can read people, on some level, I don't actually look for it and in order to read someone I have to consciously look at them or try to figure them out mentally _(it's not something on auto-pilot)_ but when I do it I have no problem doing to. This would be normal if I was older I guess but I'm only 17 years old. Someone told me I can read souls. And I used to think I'm quite logical in this but I'm not, they're only my assumtions, I'm not even consciously aware of them untill I actively try to discribe them. Now if you ask me how is someone I know, I won't be able answer you imediately because I don't know how to describe it, like I have the general idea but I don't have the words, not sure if words for what I'm trying to describe or words in general but words, I don't think there are enough words for that either but I also doubt I would be able to find one imediatly if we had enough words. But if you ask me about values and not traits, I'll be able to underline a few imediatly, but I think everybody can do that, beliefs too but on a little bit lower level than values, usually those that stand out, to me.

- What doesn't support INFJ: I doubt I'm a J, procrastinator, I'm more of a thinker than a feeler.

- What doesn't support Ni dom: I don't look in the future, like in the short-range future, I don't look at what's going to happen after 5 minutes. But I do look in the long-range future a lot.



ruskiix said:


> Sorry for so many posts but I thought of something else that might help:
> 
> Fe decides to go against others because they think they should.
> Fi decides to go along with others because they think they should.
> ...


Thank you for these posts, they're very specific.

About the video:

Define childern who come off as children and children who come off as adults.
- I'm childish but I know what I want, from people and from life.

Relaxing vs Directly Working
- It depends. If I feel the need to relax I relax, if I feel the need to get things done I start getting things done.
- Yes, the harder something is the more rewarding it feels at the end, that's definetly true for me.

Define "Thrill of the hunt"
- But if you mean it by it's general definition, yeah I do enjoy it, to some extent.

- I don't sparate time.

- I'm nostalgic.

Where is the point of being aware or unaware of your bodily needs ?

- I love people with a colorful personality, even if mine isn't that shiny, but isn't that Fe rather than Se ?

- I'm very aware of the power games and I have a moral conflict with this, I'm saying myself it's not right but on the other hand I kind of keep track of them, I tell myself _(because I have reasons and an ideal to back it up)_ I shouldn't care but I care, it's like natural impluse vs values ?

- Seriously ? who isn't witholding their feelings ? I don't see people screaming "I love you" on the streets to one another. And it's not really "earned it" but rather "I have to make sure of something", yep I like being chased, and I'm a guy, and I do like a partener that (...) but I don't find that as a defining factor in a relationship.

- I'm quite relaxed, easy-going and laid-back. I do use my hands when I talk, quite a lot, but INTP don't ?
I'm not sure "emotional energy" is the right word.

- I also have hyper-emotionalism but define what you mean by "dealing with feelings", but I've never had any situation like "Oh, I feel like this, what to do ?" usually when I have strong feelings I try to control them, but how can your feelings change your direction ? I doubt anybody would leave the room to check their feelings in order to know what to do, what kind of feeligns should they have ? By hyper-emotionalism I understand your heard beating up too fast but that won't make me leave the room, not to check out what to do for sure. In my case at least "What to do" comes from the head, emotions are just feedback, so if my head says "Bro, it's cool to do that" my hyper-emotions won't change my direction.

- Define sentimental.

- I'm not like "I can use that" but "I can keep that", I don't look at an ancient dagger and think "Oh! I can use that" , well how ?

- I'm not like "what can we do in the future" but rather "What can I do in the future", yep, things I want to do.

- Crude sense of humor, I don't do that very often, because I can and will offend people, but yeah, generally I have no problem being an asshole from this perspective if I try to. And I don't do intellectual humor except for once in a blue moon. I could say I have a sillly sense of humor.

*Also:* I like many types of music, but along the regular ones I also like music like this which are one of my favourite kinds of music, I guess could be kind of unusual for some types and usual for others:


----------



## Kuzami (Feb 20, 2014)

Something to keep in mind while trying to figure all of this out - and honestly, only you can find the answer (others can certainly help you along the way, though) - don't rely too heavily on the stereotypes. This is cognitive psychology, not behavioral psychology. By that, I mean that it focuses on the way people think and the why's behind their actions, not their actions and behaviors themselves. There is often a correlation, which is why the stereotypes are mentioned, but it's not a stone-hard rule.

Keep in mind that two different types can do the exact same thing. What separates them is that they do that exact same thing for very different reasons. On a similar note, thinkers and feelers can both be equally logical and emotional. What separates a thinker from a feeler (or any type, really) is the 'why's' behind the actions and what they do first. It is not at all out of the question that a 'T' can be more 'compassionate' than an 'F', so try not to let those stereotypes mislead you. They're there to give you an idea, not define a rule.

For example, an INFJ might be interested in Chemistry because they see the way the smaller details fit into the bigger picture and say something about the way the world works. Meanwhile, an INTP might be interested in Chemistry because they see how useful it can be and want to understand it in depth. INFJ's are often more broad and sweeping in their understanding of things (as you can probably see of me by now...) while INTP's are often more precise and detailed in their understanding of things.

So when you're going through all of this information and all of these suggestions, try to keep in mind the 'why' behind your actions. That, I believe, will help you get a much greater insight into your own type.

If you're torn between INFJ and INTP, a good question to ask yourself is what your 'scope' is. By that, I mean, do you look at the big picture, understanding principles and their meaning in the world, or are you more inclined to delve deep into the details of a subject to understand the usefulness and/or purpose of it. And if you do both (which I do), which comes first and which is the priority?

P.S. - That thing about INFJ's being psychic or something? It's total crap. INFJ's have a tendency to understand global principals (Ni) and apply their meaning to the world or people in general (Fe), which can understandably look like some psychic ability, but it's not, it's just their unique way of looking at the world.


----------



## ruskiix (Sep 28, 2013)

Manson is generally ESTP stage persona, but INFJ lyrics (and high Ti INFJ in interviews). His unhealthier songs are ESTP shadow, and he has a lot. He also has a lot of Ni+Ti songs that border on gibberish, just heaps of endless references without quite explaining the meaning they have for him personally. "Ka Boom Ka Boom" is terrible for it:

"I'm the leader of the club, and I've shrugged off my mouse earsWe fly no-class Dumbo jets, and drive hardcore-vettes
We fight war with drugs, and our sex always formal
We wear lawsuits when we get high, high, high"

This is the nonsense Ni with Ti creates. A ton of references all trying to elaborate on a very specific complex idea, but detached from anything external anyone can cling to.



The childish comment is actually the main thing I disagree with in that video. I wasn't a kid even when I was one. I'm incapable of silliness, although I love absurdity in an intellectual sense. But I have an outlook that can seem innocent and naive to an ESTP which that guy is. 

I'm thinking you're a high Ti INFJ with your last post. Don't take the J to mean you can't procrastinate. I get so lost in Ni Ti gibberish that I don't get anything done. Ti is as much "your values" as Fi in the way it feels, I think the difference is how much sway Fe has. I didn't start focusing on it until I was older than you are, so my Fe was stronger, but nurture can skew the order you develop your functions in quite a bit. Effy from Skins is, IMO, an INFJ who experienced Fe as unsafe early on, and is seen as an INTJ because she's so logical, even though she has basically no Fi whatsoever. None. She shows unhealthy and poorly controlled Fe, though. And Ni dom is long term future implications and trends, isn't it? I can sense the end results but not the details of the process, and no matter how clearly I know what to expect, I can't see when I'm experiencing things I'm expecting until after (poor Si). In the moment, I can recognize what factors are influencing people really well, though (Fe with Se, I guess), and know where it's leading.


----------



## Dezir (Nov 25, 2013)

Kuzami said:


> Something to keep in mind while trying to figure all of this out - and honestly, only you can find the answer (others can certainly help you along the way, though) - don't rely too heavily on the stereotypes. This is cognitive psychology, not behavioral psychology. By that, I mean that it focuses on the way people think and the why's behind their actions, not their actions and behaviors themselves. There is often a correlation, which is why the stereotypes are mentioned, but it's not a stone-hard rule.
> 
> Keep in mind that two different types can do the exact same thing. What separates them is that they do that exact same thing for very different reasons. On a similar note, thinkers and feelers can both be equally logical and emotional. What separates a thinker from a feeler (or any type, really) is the 'why's' behind the actions and what they do first. It is not at all out of the question that a 'T' can be more 'compassionate' than an 'F', so try not to let those stereotypes mislead you. They're there to give you an idea, not define a rule.
> 
> ...


Thank you for this post, you gave me a good insight on MBTI.

_"to understand the usefulness and/or purpose of it"_ this doesn't ring well to me. Understaning a subject and understand the usefulness and/or purpose of it are two different things for me. Both your description look similar but I do tend to hold a general idea of world, first thing rining into my head is "People are irrational" , "People take attraction for love" , "People are misguided" , well not all people but most people, general ideas of the world and then I come to details.

If someone would ask me "Why people take attraction for love ?" there are two kinds of answers for this because this is actually 2 questions "Why is this true ?" , "Why would this happens ?", first is the evidence supporting it's validity, and second is the cause which led to his effect. But I would generally answer: because of this, because of that, what I'm trying to say by this is that I do have arguments for my general ideas.

Why I look at Theories (Ti) - Because I find them important to make sense of the world. Everything as a logical explaination and our facts being limited I'm interested to see how things work.

Why I look at Facts (Te) - Because I find them important since they are what reality is made of. They discribe reality, to dismiss facts is to dismiss reality itself.

Why I find your own values important (Fi) - Because they are important to me, they are the reason I live, this is why I stand for, I find it important to stand for your values _(that you consider to be what's right)_ even when others disagree with you because if not you who else ?

Why I find other people's values important (Fe) - Because I find having a good relationship with people important since we are social animals, and also not hurting other people is one of my values _(which could actually be Fi rather than Fe so I'll skip this)_ because I consider it the right thing to do, actually I don't just consider it's kinda the bedrock of the right thing to do. I also like making other people feel confortable, but when the time comes of my values vs them it depends on other factors specific of that situation on whether I give up my values because even though harmony is important, my values are also important, and vice-versa.

Why I find Awarness of the present Se Important - Because being aware of the present moment is one of the best things you can have since we all actually live in the present and make decisions in the present, being more in the present would enchant your ability to do so.

Why I find Awareness of the past Si Important - Melancholy is beautiful, also experiences from the past can give you an insight on the present or the future, it's good to have experience and use it, and also good to use the past to learn from your mistakes.

Why I find ideas Ne Important - Because it's always good to have new ideas, new perspectives, new things to do, every "could be" could eventally become "should be" and then "would be" folowed by "will be" and "is".

Why I find Awarness of the future Ni Important - Because I find it essential to have a vision on the future, to know where you're going and what you're doing, and whether you're working towards that future or not, and also to understand concepts in depth, not only on a superficail level.

So, does that make me an INFJ ? or I'm still at "looking for your type" stage ?


----------



## Kuzami (Feb 20, 2014)

Dezir said:


> Thank you for this post, you gave me a good insight on MBTI.


I'm glad I could help you out. I'll be honest, I started picking apart your post and telling you everything I saw, not in _what_ you said, but in the _way_ you said it. I almost posted it, but then I thought... I could probably tell you all those things and claim you're a certain type (and since you probably want to know, yes, I think you heavily use Ni-Fe, so hey, starting point, there ya go) but you'd still be left with some shades of doubt if I couldn't completely convince you. I think you need to verify these things for yourself, as frustrating as that may be, so go ahead and chuck a shoe at me or something if you need to. -- _Gosh darn it, why can't he just make this simple?_

I will tell you this, though. I think there's a bit of misconception in the way some of the cognitive functions have been portrayed and it's reflected in your understanding of them. I think S and F in particular get misinterpreted. Si, especially, being a focus on the past, while possibly a tendency, is not what the function actually does. The best way I can explain S, is by comparing it to it's counterpart, N. N and S are perceiving functions, the way a person takes in information and makes sense of it. N tends to hinge on concepts and what could be while S tends to hinge on reality and what actually is (thus follows the stereotype of N's being 'dreamy' and S's being 'pragmatic'). Whether the function, any function, is extraverted or introverted depends on whether the individual's focus is external or internal when using it, which can be pretty nuanced from function to function.

I honestly don't think I can go any deeper than that, because I understand the functions in pairs rather than individually. So if I were to start describing Si to you, I'd have to choose between describing it as Si-Fe or Si-Te, and that might lead to confusion because even though they have Si in common, Si-Fe is pretty different from Si-Te.

Anyway, stay conscious of whether someone is talking about behaviors or cognition when seeking your information. I have personally found this site very helpful (as well as a few wonderful people on these forums, of course!), as the writer(s) know the difference between cognitive and behavioral psychology and they take a cognitive approach when they describe the types and functions.
A Little Bit of Personality: Start Here
It may or may not help you out, but at the very least it's another resource to check out.
I hope this doesn't seem like I'm advertising... I just really think they've got a good grasp on this stuff. Not to mention, it's all incredibly positive.


----------



## Dezir (Nov 25, 2013)

Kuzami said:


> I'm glad I could help you out. I'll be honest, I started picking apart your post and telling you everything I saw, not in _what_ you said, but in the _way_ you said it. I almost posted it, but then I thought... I could probably tell you all those things and claim you're a certain type (and since you probably want to know, yes, I think you heavily use Ni-Fe, so hey, starting point, there ya go) but you'd still be left with some shades of doubt if I couldn't completely convince you. I think you need to verify these things for yourself, as frustrating as that may be, so go ahead and chuck a shoe at me or something if you need to. -- _Gosh darn it, why can't he just make this simple?_
> 
> I will tell you this, though. I think there's a bit of misconception in the way some of the cognitive functions have been portrayed and it's reflected in your understanding of them. I think S and F in particular get misinterpreted. Si, especially, being a focus on the past, while possibly a tendency, is not what the function actually does. The best way I can explain S, is by comparing it to it's counterpart, N. N and S are perceiving functions, the way a person takes in information and makes sense of it. N tends to hinge on concepts and what could be while S tends to hinge on reality and what actually is (thus follows the stereotype of N's being 'dreamy' and S's being 'pragmatic'). Whether the function, any function, is extraverted or introverted depends on whether the individual's focus is external or internal when using it, which can be pretty nuanced from function to function.
> 
> ...


I hate to be like this... but now I'm more confused than I've ever been before about MBTI.... I just don't get it... too much conflicting information.

The author uses her own words like: concept, experience, general information, specific information, "meaning of action", "use of action" whithout a dictionary, they look like anything but specific to me.

One could argue a lot of what a concept is and what experience is. I don't even know what meaning of action or use of action is supposed to mean. Like how does that work on a cause and effect system ?

I don't even think I understand what I, E, N, S, T, F, P and J are anymore.

I is the inner world - what does that mean - Abstract world (Our inner world is abstract, we don't work with objects)
E is the outer world - what doe that mean - Concrete world (The outer world is concrete, it doesn't have subjects)

N is abstract information 
S is concrete information 
But aren't I and E already abstract and concrete ? So these things perceive what where ?

T is judgement on whether is true or false
F is judgement on whether is good or bad
How are these opposites ? And how is even possible to put ture or false before good or bad or vice-versa ?
it's not like N-S, you can't have one higher than the other, at least from my perspective, wihout T you'll make stupid decisions, without F you'll make misguided decisions, I know they're tendencies, but how can you pot one above the other ?

J is T or F before N or S (in the outer world)
P is N or S before T or F (in the outer world)


----------



## Juiz (Dec 31, 2014)

There is this thread about the cognitive functions explained through Winnie the Pooh. XD thats how ive come to understand them and conclude I am INFJ. It's very simple and to the point so I think it will help you.


----------



## Kuzami (Feb 20, 2014)

Dezir said:


> I hate to be like this... but now I'm more confused than I've ever been before about MBTI.... I just don't get it... too much conflicting information.
> 
> The author uses her own words like: concept, experience, general information, specific information, "meaning of action", "use of action" whithout a dictionary, they look like anything but specific to me.
> 
> ...


Ah, yeah, until you get used to the words she uses and what she means by them, yes, her explanations can be confusing, but they are no less accurate for that. I apologize for not warning you about that, it took me a while (and a lot of site digging) to figure out what she meant when she used each word.

concept, experience, general information, specific information, "meaning of action", "use of action"
Yeah, they're not extremely specific like saying something is a green granny smith apple. It's more like saying this is an apple, and an apple can be many things but they're all still apples. They're broad words that encompass a set of more specific words.

Alright, let me take a crack at it.

- Concept means ideas or interpretations, somewhat abstract ways of understanding things. It's in the way that 'good' is a concept or an idea and not entirely tangible though no less real.

- Experience means something that's been witnessed or observed in the physical world, the things you can touch, taste, smell, see, or hear.

- General information is information that is very broad and encompassing and can be applied successfully and repeatedly in various situations that have a common factor on which the information is based. General information would be something like 'people smile when they're happy'.

- Specific information is very precise and is applied on a situation by situation basis. It's subject to change based on the situation and thus is only applicable in any one particular situation. A mirror example to the general would be the information "Jane smiles when she is happy."

Meaning of Action as Use of Action are significantly less universal to the English language and are her own phrases she uses to refer to certain concepts. 
- When she says "Meaning of Action" it's in reference to Fe, and refers to the sort of broad question of 'what does it mean for someone to build a bridge.' 'Meaning' being the value or idealogical significance. In this case, to build on my example, an answer might be 'It means that they are connecting two separate places." 
- The "Use of Action" on the other hand, is in reference to Te and the broad question might be 'Why should someone build a bridge" and an answer that makes sense of how it's useful might be 'So that people can get from point a to b more quickly." 

I realize those examples are fairly nuanced, so if they're not enough to distinguish the definitions of and differences between the two, let me know.

I and E are simply the direction of focus of your first cognition step. Whether you look inward first or outward first, and the way that works will depend on what your dominant function is. I think she was trying to explain how Introvert and Extravert in the sense of cognitive typing are not the social functions of being an introvert or extravert, but rather which direction your mind is inclined to go first for information. So I is abstract in that it comes from within while E is concrete in the sense that it draws from the outside world. The latter is more tangible.

S and N are your perceiving functions, which are information-gathering functions. So when she talks about these being tangible or abstract, it's in reference to the type of information that is gathered. S being concrete in the sense that it gathers information in the form of experiences and observations and other tangible things, while N is abstract in the sense that it gathers information in the form of concepts and ideas.
And just as you mentioned with F and T, it is also true that one person will use both. What makes cognition between individuals different is which they do first, or what they prioritize, and their direction (I or E) of emphasis when they do it.

For T and F, these are the judging functions, or information-using functions. They take information that has been gathered through perceiving functions and evaluate it and make use or sense of it. Saying T is true or false judgement and F is good or bad judgement is an oversimplification meant to illustrate the difference between them, and definitely not literal. T 'judges' or evaluates and uses information by figuring out what its applications are or how it fits into a system. F deals with information by evaluating the meaning of it and what it represents, illustrates, or stands for. These are two different ways of utilizing and making sense of information, and individuals will prioritize one or the other in their thought process even though they can and often will make use of both functions.

And the above two pairs of functions are differentiated by J and P.
So by saying "J is T or F before N or S (in the outer world)" - outer world means it's the extraverted function, and J means it's the judging function of either T or F that comes first in cognition before the extraverted perceiving function. Similarly, P means the extraverted perceiving function falls before the extraverted judging function in the cognitive process.

Another way of wording this is that a J will have Te or Fe in their first or second cognition step while Ne or Se will be third or fourth. And a P will have Ne or Se in their first or second cognition step while Te or Fe will be third or fourth.

To figure out which it is, specifically, the E or I at the beginning tells you whether the Xe function is first or second (Xe being any of the extraverted functions). So, for example, an EJ would use their Je function first and an IJ would use their Je function second (Je being either Fe or Te, extraverted Judging functions).

I hope that elaboration clears up what she's talking about and helps you understand what she's talking about if you read some of her other explanations. If not, then I apologize and suggest you simply disregard it and look for sources that help you understand it best.

Edit: Shoot, that was a wall of text... Sorry.


----------



## Kuzami (Feb 20, 2014)

Eden4 said:


> There is this thread about the cognitive functions explained through Winnie the Pooh. XD thats how ive come to understand them and conclude I am INFJ. It's very simple and to the point so I think it will help you.


Oh yeah, I saw that too and it was an enjoyable read as well as an interesting perspective on the cognitive functions and the characters themselves. I can't say it helped me figure out the cognitive functions, but after I did, it helped me to go back and solidify my understanding of the concepts.

@Dezir , here's the thread Eden4's talking about, if you want to take a look at that too. http://personalitycafe.com/articles...-understand-cognitive-functions-pictures.html


----------



## Dezir (Nov 25, 2013)

Kuzami said:


> Ah, yeah, until you get used to the words she uses and what she means by them, yes, her explanations can be confusing, but they are no less accurate for that. I apologize for not warning you about that, it took me a while (and a lot of site digging) to figure out what she meant when she used each word.
> 
> concept, experience, general information, specific information, "meaning of action", "use of action"
> Yeah, they're not extremely specific like saying something is a green granny smith apple. It's more like saying this is an apple, and an apple can be many things but they're all still apples. They're broad words that encompass a set of more specific words.
> ...


So:

Concept = Abstract _(ideas or interpretation)_
Linear = Concrete _(witnessed or observed in the physical world)_
Use = Efficency _(Whether work or not to do something)_ _(Whether the cause gives the desireable effect)_
Meaning = Value _(Whether is good or bad for something)_ _(Whether the desireable effect is good)_

But what does: Principles, Action, Data, Character Observation mean ?
Principles are Universal truth you know and Data specific truths, but what exactly draws the line between universal and speicifc ? and how does that work with abstract and concrete ? how does that also work with efficency and value ?

Also about Winnie the Pooh, I've seen some episodes and I only know: Pooh (Si), Tigger (Se), Eeyore (Fi), Rabbit (Te), Rabbit (Te). Piglet (Ne) was there too in the 2 or 3 episodes I saw but I didn't noticed him much

And can't relate to any of those I noticed above: Se, Si, Fi, Te.
I just don't felt like any parts of me are like that.

If I were an INTP I should have tertiary Si, and I don't know if this is really because I don't relate to Pooh or I subconsciously wouldn't like to relate to Pooh, but he's way too pasive, he looks like his is about to pass out from my perspective, not from a judgemental point of view but from an objective one, and I don't think I relate to that, I'm only passive when I'm bored or tierd.

Given the fact that I also don't relate to Fi and Te I think I might be an INFJ but I need a good knowledge of MBTI to know for sure.


----------



## Kuzami (Feb 20, 2014)

Dezir said:


> So:
> 
> Concept = Abstract _(ideas or interpretation)_
> Linear = Concrete _(witnessed or observed in the physical world)_
> ...


Concept and Experience, yes, that's pretty much it.

Use and Meaning, you've mostly got it.

Another way to differentiate those two, and this is going to sound cheesy, but give an F and a T an apple.

The F takes the apple, looks at it, and thinks about its meaning or significance. Maybe they'll recall the tale of Snow White and the poisoned apple and think about how things aren't always as they appear. Maybe they'll look at the color and think about the flavor it will have in relation to its color. - F doesn't have to be about whether something's good or bad.

Then the T takes the apple, looks at it, and thinks about what they can or should do with it. They might think well, it's food, so I could eat it (that's practical). Maybe they'll toss it up and down some and think hey, this would make a great projectile, I can use it to knock that box off the top shelf. - T doesn't have to be about if something's useful or not, just what _can_ it do?

Both types might think about all those things, but they'll still do one or the other first.

Principles - Underlying patterns that govern the way things work 'in general'; "fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning."
It's very much the dictionary definition. Ni and Si will often think in principles and concepts, with Ni concepts being more abstract (ideas and thoughts) and Si concepts being more concrete (events and observations).

Action - The things you actually do or what others actually do when acting upon their thoughts, ideas, or even impulses. These actions are driven by Fe looking at the meaning of things or Te looking at the use of things. In the congnitive process, this is the step where a person decides how to act on the information they've gathered and sorted through and used.

Data - Think of it like tiny pieces of information about something: A cube of ice is cold, hard, has square sides, loses shape and melts in heat... All of those things are data about that ice cube. Ti often uses data to sort through ideas and make sense of things, kind of like putting together a puzzle where the data is all of the pieces. Fi uses data in a similar way, though the subject may often be more personable than an ice cube, and make sense of the data through its meaning.

Character Observation - 'Character' when used like this often means a person's 'moral' character, but can also encompass their habits, tendencies, and general behaviors. A Character observation is an observation about people and the things they do or say. Ne and Se both do this, taking in information about people (or objects, though that doesn't fall under the 'character' category) and their behaviors or actions. Ne will often look at a person and wonder 'how will they react?' - the abstract mental concept, while Se will often look at a person and wonder 'what will they do?' - the concrete, tangible observation. Note that this is dealing specifically with people.

On the Winnie the Pooh thing, though, Tigger (Se) was one of my characters. He was the one I had a sort of soft spot for, where he wasn't exactly me and I didn't quite understand him, but I appreciated him and could almost relate to him. Of course, the way I relate to my inferior function and the way others relate to their inferior function isn't always (and probably usually) won't be the same, but there will probably be something there that's identifiable but seems a little far out of reach.


----------



## Dezir (Nov 25, 2013)

Kuzami said:


> Concept and Experience, yes, that's pretty much it.
> 
> Use and Meaning, you've mostly got it.
> 
> ...





















What's the difference between principles via Ni and principles via Fe ?


----------



## Kuzami (Feb 20, 2014)

Ni gathers and forms principles in the form of concepts, ideas, or thoughts.

Fe evaluates the meaning of the things they've learned and observed to form principles about those things.


----------



## 1yesman9 (Jul 10, 2014)

Socionics - the16types.info - MBTI: Form of the Inferior Function

Looking at inferior functions could be useful in discerning wether you're an emotional intp, logical infp etc...
Inferior Te for INFP
Inferior Fe for INTP
Inferior Se for INTJ/INFJ


----------



## Dezir (Nov 25, 2013)

Kuzami said:


> Ni gathers and forms principles in the form of concepts, ideas, or thoughts.
> 
> Fe evaluates the meaning of the things they've learned and observed to form principles about those things.


So basically Ni forms objective principles, and Fe makes values principles starting from those objective principles.
But how does the INTP operate ?



1yesman9 said:


> Socionics - the16types.info - MBTI: Form of the Inferior Function
> 
> Looking at inferior functions could be useful in discerning wether you're an emotional intp, logical infp etc...
> Inferior Te for INFP
> ...


• Logic emphasized to an extreme
_ “If a problem comes up that I'm unable to resolve, I work at it anyway and can't let go of it, even if I know I can't solve it.”_ *- I doubt the author was a Ti user. This is not logic, this is emtions. A logical decision would be to let go of things you cannot control because there's noting you can do about that and and focus on the things you can control[/I]

Whoever wrote this, is not good with differentiating Thinking from Feeling in my opinion. Which makes me doubt this article's vality. There are many things I disagree with like:

Comfortable inattention to logic - Is this dominant Fe or lack of Ti ? Seems more like the latter to me. I doubt the author understands logic. Here's an example, I have a strong feeling (This is not even Ni, it's Se, it's too obvious, I just have to read the text and notice problems) that this article is so wrong, but I can't tell for sure since this is only my assumption, now, where do I call for backup ? Logic.

Basically the author is saying "If you have good Fe, you'll feel like it's ok not using logic", I saw an ENFJ killing himself once, he didn't meant to suicide, he was just such a good Fe user that he was confortable not using logic to his decision making, and never thought what will happen if the puts a gun to his head and pulls the trigger. Correct me if I'm wrong but logic is the science of valid reasoning, every "this is true or false" thought is use of logic. No, seriously, correct me if I'm wrong because I feel I'm right but someone writing an article that big must know some stuff, but still his logic (or definitions) is incosistent.




Thinkers
Thinkers are people who pride them-selves on being objective. They respond according to ‘the principle of the thing’ and apply standards to measure the appropriateness of behaviour. They are often seen as critical (less accepting), who will always question others decisions before accepting them. They tend to step out of their situation and apply their logic to it, working through it in a sequential way until reaching a conclusion.

Feelers 
Feelers are more subjective. They make decisions based on their feelings, gut reactions, what is important to them, and how things affect other people. They value harmony highly, and will try to avoid argument, often to the point of doing something they don’t want just ‘for a quiet life’. They thus appear more accepting, and trusting of their ‘gut instincts’. In a situation they will not step out of it and reason, but stay within it to assess its impact on ‘the whole’. They see a problem not as something linear, but more like a web, where anything occurring on it is felt all over, by everyone connected to it. This is the only filter where there does seem to be an orientation based on gender. Most men describe themselves as Thinkers, while most women are more comfortable with Feeling. Perhaps no surprises there for you.

Click to expand...

I feel like this is where the problem is.

I find logic working perfectly with values, so I basically can't see how / why would one pick Thinking over Feeling or Feeling over Thinking, or how does one use one of them first ? you would have no direction without Feeling and no sense of reality without Thinking. I basically see no conflict between them (I don't see them as opposites at all), one makes sense of reality, the other makes sense of what you want.

I can relate to both of these descriptions, and to others T - F descriptons too. So my key questions are:

How do you (by you, I mean you the person reading this) know you're a T or an F ?

Is there a deeper comparation between T or F ?

Is there any way to find out whether I'm an INFJ or INTP without reference to T or F, and even J or P ?*


----------



## 1yesman9 (Jul 10, 2014)

Dezir said:


> --


What the author is describing is the possible manifestations ( experienced in "gripes" ) of your inferior function. It's not meant to constitute an entire facet of your personal, but how you might act when you're being affected by your least mature functions.

When the author says "logic" in this case, he's referencing a conscious aversion to the use of detached and pure logic, of which INTPs have a conscious connection to. The use of logic is there, as the basis of your dominant function judgements are motivated by your inferior function judgments, but it's usage is not as "mature" ( consistent, reasonable? ) nor is it openly recognized. This also means to describe Fe doms, not aux's and the differences between your most prevalent inferior function manifestations and your tertiary manifestations are massive. In interaction with Fe doms, when if I explain a normal situation that doesn't specifically beget the usage of Ti, it's usually met with "why you do you always have to be so logical". In the inverse, if the Fe dom were to make a few Fe based judgements, it might come off to me as shallow, irrelevant or too opinionated. It's not about wether you see one function as worthless or not, it's about which one you prefer and more immediately use when the situation isn't specifically requiring the usage of one.

You can even look at it as a means to an end. Is ti used merely so you can more effectively come to Fe orientated goals? Something like Spinoza. Or is Ti used in itself, in the search for truth merely to comprehend truth. This doesn't imply that more Fe orientated goals are irrelevant, they just take second place to Ti orientated goals.

I wouldn't say you could necessarily figure out INTP or INFJ without attention to TP/FJ, given that those are the prime differences after determining Introversion and Intuition. How are you when it comes to Ne vs Ni? Ni for an Ni dominant might have a certain conflict point with Ti in the form of others, in that Ti attempts to define terms to their core definitions, and Ni might dislike their subjective interpretations of things being so readily defined. In contrast, it's wholly typical of Ne's yearn for freedom of experimentation/action to conflict with Te's attempt to do things dependent on external efficiency.


----------



## Dezir (Nov 25, 2013)

1yesman9 said:


> What the author is describing is the possible manifestations ( experienced in "gripes" ) of your inferior function. It's not meant to constitute an entire facet of your personal, but how you might act when you're being affected by your least mature functions.
> 
> When the author says "logic" in this case, he's referencing a conscious aversion to the use of detached and pure logic, of which INTPs have a conscious connection to. The use of logic is there, as the basis of your dominant function judgements are motivated by your inferior function judgments, but it's usage is not as "mature" ( consistent, reasonable? ) nor is it openly recognized. This also means to describe Fe doms, not aux's and the differences between your most prevalent inferior function manifestations and your tertiary manifestations are massive. In interaction with Fe doms, when if I explain a normal situation that doesn't specifically beget the usage of Ti, it's usually met with "why you do you always have to be so logical". In the inverse, if the Fe dom were to make a few Fe based judgements, it might come off to me as shallow, irrelevant or too opinionated. It's not about wether you see one function as worthless or not, it's about which one you prefer and more immediately use when the situation isn't specifically requiring the usage of one.
> 
> ...


There is no such thing as "pure logic", the only thing you can analyze with pure logic is whether something is true or false, nothing more. Logic comes hand to hand to values, logic has the objective of making you realistic, values are the objective you want. N and S aren't in conflict with each other either, they just complete each other, theory with practice.

One does not simply want "reality", because that's what T without F is like, simply reality, true or false, with no personal preference. You can't make good decisions without Thinking and you can't be fulfilled in life without Feeling _(no, this is not proof I'm a feeler, this is valid for everybody, whether they're aware of it or not)_.

People say thinking and feeling are in conflict but it's more of a management problem I think. Acting on feelings like Anger are wrong _(from my point of view because it's confilict with another value, not hurting other people)_ but I doubt that's what "Feeling" means, I don't see people on the street making decisions without consulting reality first.

------------------------

*S: Concrete Practical World. *
- Si: Concrete Sensations Based on Self's Interpretation. (Examples: Memory, Nostalgia, Your bodily needs)
- Se: Concrete Sensations Based on Reality. (Examples: Adrenaline Rush, Food Taste, Screaming)

_Sensations = Information by Practice
Experience =/= Sensations
*Experience* = Information by Practice already classified as whether Good or Bad._

*N: Abstract Theoretical World.*
- Ni: Abstract Ideas Based on Self's Interpreation. _(*100 Facts give you 1 idea;* Examples: We need to stop world hunger, the world would be a better place if people were less selfish, death is only the begining of a revelation)_
- Ne: Abstract Ideas Based on Reality. _(*1 Fact gives you 100 ideas;* Examples: How are boots reled to desks, maybe I can connect that cable to the socket and I'll create fireworks, Mabye I could start learning french right now)_

_* The main difference I find is that you can't judge Ni ideas whether they have perfect logical explaination within the first few seconds since they are based on self's opinion, they are much more elaborated (A Ni idea like "Most africans are Greedy" is not something you're going to be able to prove whether this is true or false within the first few seconds, because you don't have an immediate point of reference in reality to draw judgment from)

* While you can judge Ne ideas whether they have perfect logical explaination or not in the first few secodns since they are based on reality, they are much more short-term (aka: That is True / False ; That's gonna work \ That's not gonna work ; That makes sense \ That doesn't make sense ; use whatever words you want, they're all are the same criteriea)._

_Ideas = Informations by Theory
Concept =/= Ideas
*Concept* = Information by Theory already classified as whether True or False.
(Basically an opinion, cause unlike experiences, this is not already proven)
(Also Concept = Principle, same thing)
(We could also apply good/bad to concepts, but I don't see how a concept is either good or bad, it just is)_

_* Ne being based on reality and Ni being based on self's interpration DOESN'T mean Ni ideas are crazy while Ne ideas are normal, it has more to do with whether you prefer N over S or how well your N is developed. Both Ne and Ni can and will have advanced ideas but since most people in the world are S, those ideas would be seen as crazy, they're not crazy ideas (except one is based on reality, the other is based on self's opinion), only advanced ideas considered strange because most S people cannot understand, this doesn't mean the ideas are always correct (true) or good though._

*From the P functions, you get information, raw information that's not clasified as either true \ false or good \ bad, this is what the J functions are for. (Judgment and Interpreation mean the same thing to me)*

*T: True/False Objective Judgement.*
- Ti: Internal Theoretical Judgment on whether something is true \ false (Theoretical Logic)
_A+B=C therefore C-A=B, You may want to eat burgers but that will get you fat (Eat a lot = Getting Fat (True))_
- Te: External Practical Judgment on whether something is true \ false (Facts)
_I saw A happening, therefore A is true and this can't be denied, I was here first, I saw you comming after (I saw you comming after me happening, therefore you comming after me can't be denied)_

*F: Good/Bad Subjective Judgement.*
- Fi: Internal Theoretical Judgment on whehter something is good \ false.
_Does A seems good or bad to me ? Why do we hurt others if we don't want to be hurt ourselves, I may suffer for this but I know I have to stand true to my moral values, people are so fake pretending they have values they don't have and I find this a bad thing._
- Fe: External Practical Judgment on whether something is ture \ false.
_Does A seems good or bad to the world we live ? People should help other people more (since I'm an N naturally I'm going to have more ideas based examples), What that little kid did was a bad thing, It is never to late to stop being so selfish._

**Now being an F doesn't make you a good person ask Osama Bin Laden, you're more aware of what is good and bad than what is true or false (this is how I see it, and is supposted to be F before T or T before F ; just like S before N making reality over ideas ; I'm more aware of what is good and bad than what is true and false which would make me an INFJ but this is just how I see it and I don't know for sure), but that doesn't mean you're obligated to pick what's good, another point is that GOOD or BAD comes ONLY FROM YOUR INTERPREATION while TRUE or FALSE has REALITY-CHECK in REALITY.*

-----------------------------------

This is how I see this whole cognitive functions thing.

Basically this things goes nowhere, if I had article-reading (I don't know the right word for this) problem this problem would've been solved long ago, but my problem is past are you more of a T or F because this is the problem in the first place. I know the data, but I don't know which one is true, and I'm the only one able to make a decision, since I'm the only one around here who knows myself.

This is why I was trying to find a different route and ask:

*How do you (by you, I mean you the person reading this) know you're a T or an F ?

Is there a deeper comparation between T or F ?

Is there any way to find out whether I'm an INFJ or INTP without reference to T or F, and even J or P ? ok, maybe some J or P too, but with refference whether Exterior P/J or Dominant J/P*

_* I would like concrete stuff, because theory is again, based on my interpretation, and my interpretation is the problem._


----------



## bzn (Jan 4, 2014)

You could be ENTP.


----------

