# Is it possible that I'm a shy, messed up ENFP?



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

No type really fits me, to be honest, but after all the typing attempts I think ENFP is the closest one.I'd like you to read http://personalitycafe.com/whats-my-personality-type/163123-so-heres-deal.html and tell me what you think.I know that many people agreed on ESFP, but it seems wrong to me.I really hope you can give me some insight.


----------



## TessaVictoria (Mar 5, 2013)

Hi hun, """" E/I-I hate people, but my identity is based on their opinions only. I'm shy, but I want attention and avoid people who don't give it to me. I avoid socialising, but think about it all the time, but then when I finally do it I'm happy.I'm even happy to be annoyed and unhappy as long as there's something to talk about.I can stay on my own for long though, as long as I'm doing something mind numbing, like watching reality shows and eating.I hate reflecting, but it sometimes happens against my will when I'm alone and bored. """ E and I - How one gets there energy or where they focus there attention. -if you get bored when you are alone, you're probably an extrovert -if you like to relate to other people, you probably are an extrovert. But, being an introvert is not defined by how you feel about socializing. It's a good stereotype. But it is natural for people to need to be around others. Talking and sharing my ideas and visions with a good friend could make me feel much better after reflecting and being alone after a while. Even if I play hermit at least 18 hours a day... Do note that I've met people who claim to be 50 - 50, E - I . """ S/N-don't understand intuition, I must admit.Could someone help me with some examples? I know some stuff, but it's really hard for me to tell anything concrete.I can only say that I kind of do live in the hopes for for future. """ S and N - they way in which one gathers information. Intuitive: -the general idea -Understands music/art quite naturally -does math in their head -sometimes struggles to find the words -listens, recalls and thinks, then responds -often perceives by visualizing .. Sensors: -the pieces -does math on paper -uses words to sort their thoughts -listen and thinks, then responds. -perceives by puzzling .. This is a bit wrong, it varies from individuals, of course. But it could be a general idea of how each functions... '''' T/F-I'm somewhat lacking in empathy and I'm admittedly (and proudly) selfish and callous.But I rarely say anything to a person's face and not even because I need them for something, but because I just can't. I can't look them in the eye and tell them the truth that would disappoint or hurt them in any way . However, I don't feel bad for people if they are hurt by somebody that isn't me.And I say a lot of nasty stuff if I'm mad or offended.I have my feelings hurt easily and I'm very prone to envy and jealousy. '''' T and F - They way in which one makes decisions Thinkers/Testers are 'typically' objective... while Feelers are 'usually' subjective. What word are you more attracted to when it comes to decision making - logics (T) or values (F). Id like to add: "...but I want attention and avoid people who don't give it to me." This here is an T trait, my dear... You look like you're confident about your P ... I hope this helps a little. I wish you the best !


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

I really can't decide between S/N and F/T.I truly have no idea.


----------



## superwowomg (Oct 2, 2013)

Living dead said:


> I took bunch of online tests, read about cognitive functions, read type descriptions and filled in two questionnaires and I still can't find my type.Online tests are sooo predictable, I don't get functions amd am probably in a tertiary loop, descriptions are totally unhelpful and questionnaire replies were kind of eye opening In some ways, but they made me even more confused.This is my last try to find my type.
> 
> E/I-I hate people, but my identity is based on their opinions only.I'm shy, but I want attention and avoid people who don't give it to me. I avoid socialising, but think about it all the time, but then when I finally do it I'm happy.I'm even happy to be annoyed and unhappy as long as there's something to talk about.I can stay on my own for long though, as long as I'm doing something mind numbing, like watching reality shows and eating.I hate reflecting, but it sometimes happens against my will when I'm alone and bored.
> 
> ...


Yeah, I think you're quite an extrovert and perceiver.
I am someone whom you called an ambivert...50-50 between extravert and introvert.
I used to thought that I am an introvert.
E.g. During one of the disco nights in high school, I left halfway feeling bored and meaningless.
At that time, I thought that people sapped off a lot of my energy and that's why I am so exhausted that night.
However, I later realized that it might be because 'disco night' was not the kind of environment that I enjoyed interacting with people. 

I am quite sure you're an perceiver too 

As for N vs. T...could you explain your train of thought instantly and clearly to someone? As an intuitive and Ne and Te, I realized that my 'stream of consciousness could go so fast when I 'think out loud' people would be like 'slow down...get back to the earth, you're way out in one of the planets..." it's like i skipped from one point to another without giving the premises for the first (without realizing..because I just thought people would 'get it') But the good thing is that I can actually learn really abstract concepts (humanities, social sciences) really fast. Also being an Ne, I find myself constantly connected two seemingly disconnected ideas together..people find it really ridiculous but interesting. 

As for F/T...I think you certainly sound like an unhealthy Fi...the part about not able to say sth bad to people's face sounds so much like me when I was in my teens. I think at that time, I was very selfish, I like to push the blame to others because they just don't fit with my ideals. You mentioned "I don't feel bad for people if they are hurt by somebody that isn't me.And I say a lot of nasty stuff if I'm mad or offended.I have my feelings hurt easily and I'm very prone to envy and jealousy." Yeah, it happened to me too. But usually those people are people whose values I don't approve of..I was secretly happy when I knew nasty stuff happened to them". I said many nasty stuffs to my family and best friends (only those who are close to me and understand my temperment...) but I think it's just a way to express my negative emotions and get them to 'hear me out' (attention seeking). I think sometimes, we hide our emotions so well that it not manage appropriate..it will explode!

 hope it helps


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

superwowomg said:


> Yeah, I think you're quite an extrovert and perceiver.
> I am someone whom you called an ambivert...50-50 between extravert and introvert.
> I used to thought that I am an introvert.
> E.g. During one of the disco nights in high school, I left halfway feeling bored and meaningless.
> ...


I took a test yesterday and got ENFP as a first possibility, ISFJ as second and ESFP as third for what it's worth. I'm still not sure about intuition although some people say they can't follow what I'm talking about and take somethings I say too lliterally. I think many people may have typed me as a S on here because I'm not good at expressing myself in written form so I choose most simple and common expressions.


----------



## Sai (Sep 3, 2012)

are you depressed, have any mental illness or are you in an stressful situation right now? this usually affects the MBTI test a lot and causes a lot of mistyping.


----------



## superwowomg (Oct 2, 2013)

that might be true too. Have you heard of shadow personality type?


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Sai said:


> are you depressed, have any mental illness or are you in an stressful situation right now? this usually affects the MBTI test a lot and causes a lot of mistyping.


I've been kind of stressed and weird with mood for almost a year now and I'm probably a bit insane in general.Read more to find out.I recommend this:
http://personalitycafe.com/whats-my...lled-questionnaire-please-help-typing-me.html


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

superwowomg said:


> that might be true too. Have you heard of shadow personality type?


I kind of know what it is.I'm not exactly sure how it works though.


----------



## dawilliams (May 15, 2012)

Look, it's okay to be confused. Most internet typology is flaky--it oversimplifies nuanced disparities, lacks depth, and often makes incorrect/misleading statements about a type. Many type portraits are riddled with inaccuracies and based on false assumptions about how typology works. Internet "lists" of notable this type or that are more often than not rubbish. 

In fact, I would more quickly blame your uncertainty on faulty source information than any tertiary loop, although I agree that there are some spectral borderline cases which can be harder to nail down (i.e. someone who is dominant F but has a strong underlying T preference which informs their F). 

But preferences are real, and you do have them. And they are discernible. Keirsey's PUMII book is probably the best source of accurate typology theory/portraits. I also had a bad case of "I don't know who the hell I am" until I read it. 

I agree with the consensus on the other thread: ENFP. 

BTW, NFs are the most likely of the types to obsess over their identities according to Keirsey. We're also more likely to badly flunk personality tests. On paid MBTI (for school) I first got ISFP, then a few years later ESFJ. Our identity is massively important to our sense of worth, and we spend our whole lives thinking about it. As a result, we are rather prone to reading between the lines of a question, knowing exactly what it is asking, and answering it with our superego (what we want to be) rather than our ego (what we actually are). 

ENFPs are sometimes stereotyped as journalists because we go out looking for Truth (NF-Truth: the underlying structures of people, relationships, society, humanity, etc.), regardless of danger/adversity, and when we find it, we want to share it with as many people as possible. (NT-Truth tends to more scientific--laws of nature, physics, etc. Hospitals would be a good example of a place where NFs and NTs intersect, the NFs trying to help people and the NTs addressing the functionality of the body.) Many of ENFPs do become journalists, and good ones more often than not. Others go into university humanity departments, especially enjoying weird stuff like anthropology or Russian. But not all of us. Whatever vocation, we tend to do what we do in a distinctly ENFP manner. 

Here are some samples of what an ENFP might look like:



Over-shook champagne.
Puppies sniffing around, barking when we discover a new, fascinating smell.
Rainbows vomiting happiness on everyone around us.
Good-guy warriors. We're fiercely opposed to liars, bullies, and any distortion of truth. Our aim is pretty good, too.
We're often attractive to the other gender because we tend to be smart, funny, flirtatious, and charming (I know right??). On the other hand, we can seem _too_ friendly with everyone else--we get a natural high off of being the center of attention, much like our ESFP cousins.
However, our ESFP cousins often wipe the floor with our best attempts to keep up with them in terms of competitive sports, fashion, or playing the guitar. We might have fine artistic expression, but technical skill takes work and attentive practice through which we often prefer to daydream.
Rod Sterling, creator of (old) Twilight series: Angry Young Man | Please Understand Me
Nelson Mandela: Keirsey Temperament Website - Portrait of the Idealist® Champion (ENFP): Nelson Mandella
Joan Boaz: The Voice | Please Understand Me
Elizabeth Bennet from Pride and Prejudice
CERTAINLY NOT a huge swath of people on this list (although it's likely true that ENFPs can claim Anne Frank as our own).

If you really want to have some lasting peace about this, I would urge you to read Keirsey. As much as I would like to, I can't elucidate the incisive depth of his theory in one post.


----------



## dawilliams (May 15, 2012)

BTW, if you are concerned about the E/I preference, this post might help: I Got You Babe: Isabel In it, Keirsey clarifies the E/I indicator from the enigmatic confusion which often surrounds it. 

E/I isn't a measure of shyness or social skills. ENFPs can certainly seem shy, especially when we are surrounded by people who don't understand us. We can also have terrible social skills, depending on how we were brought up. Our E merely means that we prefer to be expressive rather than attentive. Like all E's, we tend to say or do things immediate to our thoughts--we speak first, think later. Even if it means accidentally putting our foot in our mouth. In particular, ENFPs seem in a hurry to get through their day, even if it means skipping over important details. INFPs, on the other hand, can sweep the same step for ten minutes straight before they look down and notice that they got all the dirt off. While similar to us in terms of what they like to think about (exploring/deconstructing NF Truths) INFPs are better at listening to a conversation, observing the situation from afar, than reacting to it.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Thanks dawilliams, I'll make sure to read everything later.I already read the E/I part and I think expressive/attentive thing is an interesting way to look at it.I think I'm naturally more expressive, but I often end up just observing although it doesn't satisfy me at all.


----------



## dawilliams (May 15, 2012)

Living dead said:


> Thanks dawilliams, I'll make sure to read everything later.I already read the E/I part and I think expressive/attentive thing is an interesting way to look at it.I think I'm naturally more expressive, but I often end up just observing although it doesn't satisfy me at all.


*snort* that's SUCH an E way of interacting:
E 1: blah blah blah blah, stream-of-conscious tangent
E 2: TMI!! How am I ever going to get to the other side without drowning!!?

j/k... I really ought to learn how to better control my impulse to share _everything_. Sorry about the length...


----------



## dawilliams (May 15, 2012)

The F/T spectrum refers to the preferred subject matter of the the person--what they prefer to pay attention to, think about, act on, etc. An F would prefer to attend to things with emotional values (animate objects, people, relationships, feelings, etc.) A T would prefer to attend to things without emotional values (facts, laws of nature, automotive carboretors, etc.) 

Sure, there will be some overlap because, when required, Fs can attach emotional value to mechanical realities (F doctors for instance), and, when required, Ts are able to see feelings as non-emotional realities (T psychologists, for instance).


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

dawilliams said:


> The F/T spectrum refers to the preferred subject matter of the the person--what they prefer to pay attention to, think about, act on, etc. An F would prefer to attend to things with emotional values (animate objects, people, relationships, feelings, etc.) A T would prefer to attend to things without emotional values (facts, laws of nature, automotive carboretors, etc.)
> 
> Sure, there will be some overlap because, when required, Fs can attach emotional value to mechanical realities (F doctors for instance), and, when required, Ts are able to see feelings as non-emotional realities (T psychologists, for instance).


According to a test I took, both my Ti and Te are almost dead, so I'm probably gonna have to accept being F.Test or no test, I think I'm just a thinker wannabe.


----------



## dawilliams (May 15, 2012)

I haven't yet found a pithy way to differentiate the S and N. I can see it--can sense that you are most likely N--but definitions are harder to get right. I think I will have to mull over it a bit longer; some folks here (mostly N's, if you haven't noticed) have come up with really great ideas on it. 

For Keirsey, the N/S indicator is the most important preference. He thinks of it almost as a language--a way of communicating--the central axis of how we understand the world and the people around us. If the F/T refers to the _what _of our preferred subject matter, the N/S refers to the how_. _

Ns prefer to address things in our heads (which is probably why Jung and MB confused it slightly with the I/E indicator). We can take up an idea and become completely absorbed by it, so much that we can forget about our surroundings--even ENs (this is what I'm doing right now, btw--thinking"expressively" on this post). Keirsey called it abstract thought, but even that terminology can be confusing because it implies that S's might be stupid or unimaginative--which is obviously false. NFs are often teased as "dreamers," NTs as "absent-minded." 

S's, on the other hand, prefer to address things in the immediacy of their surroundings. Jung/MB call it "sensing" because they tend to use their five senses a lot more than we do. They can follow ideas if they wanted to, but they often don't see the point--they're more concerned with what's going on around them--from which an N's ideas might seem irritating distractions.

So an SF hostess, for instance, might look at a guest and wonder if he's had enough to drink, if he would like to be introduced to so-and-so, if he's tried the other appetizer yet, etc. 

An NF hostess, on the other hand, might look at the same guy and wonder if he's happy with his girlfriend, if he's managed to grieve the death of his mom from last year, if his job contributes to the well-being of the environment, etc. Whether or not he's thirsty--hopefully we remember to check;-)

I would love to find a more incisive way to describe it. Anyone? Ideas?

BTW, N's account for only 20% of the population according to Keirsey. 80% of the population he believes to be S. This may explain why so many ENs feel shy--we are often surrounded by people who see the world completely differently from us.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

dawilliams said:


> I haven't yet found a pithy way to differentiate the S and N. I can see it--can sense that you are most likely N--but definitions are harder to get right. I think I will have to mull over it a bit longer; some folks here (mostly N's, if you haven't noticed) have come up with really great ideas on it.
> 
> For Keirsey, the N/S indicator is the most important preference. He thinks of it almost as a language--a way of communicating--the central axis of how we understand the world and the people around us. If the F/T refers to the _what _of our preferred subject matter, the N/S refers to the how_. _
> 
> ...


If we both can sense me being N, it's true enough for me.I can't imagine myself being S, especially ES.It just doesn't feel right.


----------



## dawilliams (May 15, 2012)

Living dead said:


> According to a test I took, both my Ti and Te are almost dead, so I'm probably gonna have to accept being F.Test or no test, I think I'm just a thinker wannabe.


"Thinker" better implies the N imo--N's are the folks who tend to get lost in our thoughts so effectively that only earthquakes, loud noises, or the airing of the next Glee episode can rouse us. T=Thinker is a misnomer; F/T merely implies the subject matter, and, imo, the T would better stand for "non-emotive Thing" than "Thinking."


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

dawilliams said:


> "Thinker" better implies the N imo--N's are the folks who tend to get lost in our thoughts so effectively that only earthquakes, loud noises, or the airing of the next Glee episode can rouse us. T=Thinker is a misnomer; F/T merely implies the subject matter, and, imo, the T would better stand for "non-emotive Thing" than "Thinking."


Non-emotive Thingx100 is what I mean when I say thinker.NT would be both, and that's what I always wanted to be, preferably xNTJ.Sooo not happening.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Should I just make it official and then go from there, maybe change it up if necessary?If I can't decide now, I never will.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Did it!


----------



## dawilliams (May 15, 2012)

Living dead said:


> Did it!


Welcome!


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

dawilliams said:


> Welcome!


Thanks, I just hope people won't change my mind again.


----------



## Vianna (Jul 28, 2012)

Living dead said:


> No type really fits me, to be honest, but after all the typing attempts I think ENFP is the closest one.I'd like you to read http://personalitycafe.com/whats-my-personality-type/163123-so-heres-deal.html and tell me what you think.I know that many people agreed on ESFP, but it seems wrong to me.I really hope you can give me some insight.





> I can stay on my own for long...when I can eat and watch reality shows


 That just bumped in my eyes like no way you can be an intuitive type.


> Don't understand intiution...give me examples


 Yes this is what sensing is about...I don't understand, give me a concrete example...I'd say you use Fi, Fi actally can be very selfish.


> I need deadline when I do something


 Yeah this is what we all P types need, because we are not able to get up our lazy butts... ISFP  I see you as very clear sensor using Fi. You could think about ESFP also, but it's less likely. Fi types often mistyped themselves as intuitives, because Fi is oriented toward beliefs and use abstract inner feelings, which in some case might appear as intuition.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

People have told me I could be ESFP, but it just feels weird.Everyone has such different ideas about what makes someone N or S.I'm getting quite sure about ExFP part, so please don't mess with that.


----------



## Vianna (Jul 28, 2012)

Living dead said:


> People have told me I could be ESFP, but it just feels weird.Everyone has such different ideas about what makes someone N or S.


The true is S and N are the two most different from all the 4 letters. But I can see why people might have some difficulty with explaining it. Sensors like to see the world as it really is. They like to be a part of the physical reality around them and they are often good in noticing their enviroment. They dislike when people talk to them in puzzles, they want to see things as clear and straightforward. When for example you give an order to do a job to a sensor, you have to be clear and direct, so the sesnor could get into immediate work without the need to philosophy much abot how he actally could get the work done. Sensor just want to get it done. When you give an order to an intuitive type, you actually should use a bit of puzzles, to make the work more interesting for them. It might happen, that the intuitive type would be much more interested into analyze of the puzzle, than the actual work. Intuitive types like to create there own ways how things could be done, but making the practical work might be a problem for them. Intuition is about seeing many different possibilites, ways and angles. For example you're at the party and you see many different ways how it could end and develope. Sometimes it's like not seeing one thing with one eye, but one thing with 10 different eyes and that every eye can see something else..It sounds crazy, but that's how it work.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

I feel like I understand the difference and can notice it in other people, but I just can't apply it to myself no matter what I read.


----------



## dawilliams (May 15, 2012)

ManOfGoldenWords said:


> The true is S and N are the two most different from all the 4 letters. But I can see why people might have some difficulty with explaining it. Sensors like to see the world as it really is. They like to be a part of the physical reality around them and they are often good in noticing their enviroment. They dislike when people talk to them in puzzles, they want to see things as clear and straightforward. When for example you give an order to do a job to a sensor, you have to be clear and direct, so the sesnor could get into immediate work without the need to philosophy much abot how he actally could get the work done. Sensor just want to get it done. When you give an order to an intuitive type, you actually should use a bit of puzzles, to make the work more interesting for them. It might happen, that the intuitive type would be much more interested into analyze of the puzzle, than the actual work. Intuitive types like to create there own ways how things could be done, but making the practical work might be a problem for them. Intuition is about seeing many different possibilites, ways and angles. For example you're at the party and you see many different ways how it could end and develope. Sometimes it's like not seeing one thing with one eye, but one thing with 10 different eyes and that every eye can see something else..It sounds crazy, but that's how it work.


Sorry, this sounds like a flaky definition of the N/S dichotomy--simultaneously too specific _and _too vague. It is dangerous to narrow down a preference into specific behavior, although that's what we need for a definition, right? 

The truth is that preferences manifest themselves differently in different temperaments, so yes, while an EN*P might live in a world of endless possibilities and puzzles (i.e. what personality type am I??), an IN*J is going to be much more decided about what they are looking at. They tend to see better the worst case scenario of any situation--and sometimes it's hard to convince them that other possibilities exist, especially when they are stressed. 

The P, for instance, will manifest itself differently in an S vs. an N type. The SP is interested in deconstructing/exploring concrete reality--_doing_ creatively. They are the stereotypical Ps: STPs might be into extreme sports, climbing dangerous mountains because they exist, hunting, gaming--Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, etc. SFPs will explore concrete emotive realities--getting people to emotionally react to them through performing (E-Magic Johnson, Louis Armstrong), composing (I-Michael Jackson, John Williams), etc.

On the other hand N*Ps are more interested in exploring/deconstructing idea-based realities--_thinking_ creatively. NTPs are your philosophers, inventors, Albert Einsteins, whereas NFPs are your thoughtful humanitarians--authors, journalists, anthropology professors, etc. Bill Watterson, author of Calvin & Hobbes is INFP--hence his ability to deliver profound humanitarian insights with that distinctly NFP mirth.

Since it may linger as a debate, I can offer more specific differences between the ESFP and the ENFP. Indeed, there can be a bit of crossover between the two types in terms of vocational pursuits--ESFPs can make fine (probably very entertaining) journalists and ENFPs often dabble in the performing arts. I was a dancer when I was younger, and a lot of my friends from that world are ESFPs. They are awesome (!!) but quite different from myself. 

*1) SFPs are more focused on the technical side of inspiring an emotional reaction.* They might hone a flamboyant sense of fashion--big, loud, red, dramatic. ESFP Marilyn Monroe, for example. In the performing arts, they take care to nail the most dramatic technique-- the high F note, the triple turn, the jaw dropping guitar solo. One of my ESFP friends became a consummate NYC Rockette, another became a part-time performer/part-time nanny who can juggle, sing soprano, do arials and flips, tricks with aerial silk--for her, the world is a stage and she is constantly learning some new and brilliant feat. 

I already described ENFP in my posts above, but specifically, an ENFP sense of fashion is lower-maintenance than an ESFP's. We like to make people look at us, sure, but we aren't really into the details of an ensemble, not as willing to suffer physical discomfort or spend two hours on our hair, so we might provoke more with a oddly matched sweater and star-spangled boots. More of a bohemian flair with a carelessness that is 100% authentic. 

We also aren't as into provoking reactions from people with gags and tricks--we're more interested in authenticity--startling people with the incisiveness of our Truth, the clarity of our honesty. Mirthful wit. ENFP Elizabeth Bennet of Pride and Prejudice jestingly teases INTJ Mr. Darcy: "We are each of an unsocial, taciturn disposition, unwilling to speak, unless we expect to say something that will amaze the whole room..."

You might say ENFPs tend to be more altruistic in our application of our charm--we tend to see our wit and playfulness as tools to help other people through specific hardships rather than to merely entertain or self-express. When an NF succeeds in the performing arts (e.g. Oprah Winfrey, Johnny Depp) they tend to view their job as a serious mission or crusade--to reach out to people, to illustrate truth, etc. They would study technique out of love for the audience rather than natural compunction. The audience is the more important half of the equation for the NF. Performing=giving. All the SJs I've ever asked about this tell me that for them, it's the reverse: they themselves are the most important person in their performance--they are performing for themselves and not for the audience. For them, this is important--that their performance is one of honest passion. 

*2) ESFPs are more likely than ENFPs to pursue hedonistic pleasures.* SPs are more aware of their body and get a kick out of physical stimuli--roller coasters, spa treatments, sex--even drugs and alcohol. A healthy ESFP will usually respect their limits and resist abuse/unhealthy dependencies--whereas a mature ESFP will often avoid stupid behavior altogether. 

ENFPs, on the other hand, tend to be clumsy--walking into doors and walls--and oblivious to physical needs like hunger or pain. I often come across scratches and bloodied injuries on myself (especially my feet) with only a vague memory of having gotten hurt. Drugs and alcohol cloud our ability to think clearly, which can be distressing for ENFPs, who rely so explicitly on our thoughts for entertainment. 

*3) SPs are also more likely to exploit opportunities, *even when impinging on someone else. SPs are inherently realistic and utilitarian; not likely to become overly idealistic or sensitive about the world and society, as NFs are prone. SPs understand that the world is what you make of it--that you have to seize a chance while it's there because if you don't, someone else will. I once interviewed an ESFP and offered to buy him a coffee. "Oh really?" he said. He then ordered the most expensive drink on the menu--came to nearly 10 euro (12 U.S. bucks). It made perfect sense to him. (He was a great interview, btw.)

NFs, by contrast, are the least opportunistic of all the temperament types. In fact, it can be something of a character flaw--our reluctance to fight for ourselves, to fight for the opportunities we need to make the most of our potential--especially when those opportunities are highly competitive, or controversial to people we care about. NFPs in particular get accused of "living in la-la land" or "floating through life, waiting for stuff to happen." Usually an ENFP overcomes this as they mature--we're pretty fierce once we believe in what we're fighting for.

Here is some primary source ESFP perspective from another dancing friend: 






More ESFP in action (yes, all 10 minutes are Slash's solo; best part starts about 3 minutes in):






The female ESFP, for some gender balance (another amazing dancing acquaintance, she used to be our Sugar Plum Fairy;-):


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

ENFP seems most likely to me.I know some of you may think I'm desperately trying to be a N, but I assure you that isn't true.I don't consider being ESFP or any S for that matter inferior to ENFP.I just want to identify with a type that is most me and I think that could be ENFP and definitely not ESFP.


----------



## dawilliams (May 15, 2012)

For comparison sake, you can see here the more altruistic, meta-cognitive tone of an ENFP performance: 






While Emile Sandé has certainly honed her vocal technique and songwriting ability, they aren't her primary focus as they would be for an ESFP. She's not even interested in entertaining people as much as something more--changing people, opening people's minds to NF Truth. Her focus is on the emotional clarity of her ideas--in this case the hope that everyone be expressed and heard in the uniqueness of their own voice.


----------



## dawilliams (May 15, 2012)

Living dead said:


> ENFP seems most likely to me.I know some of you may think I'm desperately trying to be a N, but I assure you that isn't true.I don't consider being ESFP or any S for that matter inferior to ENFP.I just want to identify with a type that is most me and I think that could be ENFP and definitely not ESFP.


Goodness--I would have thought my ode to ESFPness above might have had the opposite effect. I used to envy all my ESFP friends--so wonderfully free from all the compulsive over-thinking and self-doubt which plagues me.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

dawilliams said:


> Goodness--I would have thought my ode to ESFPness above might have had the opposite effect. I used to envy all my ESFP friends--so wonderfully free from all the compulsive over-thinking and self-doubt which plagues me.


I sometimes tend to enjoy the suffering, in a weird way.I mean, I like being all bubbly and frivolous, but for some reason I also have the "need" for sadness sometimes after too much of unexplainable euphoria. I guess it's because when the feeling of happiness starts fading I need something to get me back to neutral state step by step and negative emotions are right in between of positive ones and neutrality, in my case. I'm even happy when we have a pop quiz in school (even if I didn't study enough) because it shakes things up a bit.Everyone who knows it tells me I'm insane.

Btw.I actually want to be an ESTJ poster girl when I'm thinking practically, but that's not very often.


----------



## Chascoda (Jul 12, 2012)

Marina! <3

As to S/N or F/T... Are you more concrete, what's here, what is(S) or do you look more into possibilities, abstract things(N)? Do you make patterns in your mind(N) or do you observe(S)? Do you tend to react more emotionally(F) or logically(T) when you have to make a decision? 

And, also, just a tip... try not to be affected by what the type profiles say. "ENFPs are happy, outgoing, and fun!" "ISTJs are strict and work-oriented." it tends to make you subconsciously answer a certain way to get the result you want.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Chascoda said:


> Marina! <3
> 
> As to S/N or F/T... Are you more concrete, what's here, what is(S) or do you look more into possibilities, abstract things(N)? Do you make patterns in your mind(N) or do you observe(S)? Do you tend to react more emotionally(F) or logically(T) when you have to make a decision?
> 
> And, also, just a tip... try not to be affected by what the type profiles say. "ENFPs are happy, outgoing, and fun!" "ISTJs are strict and work-oriented." it tends to make you subconsciously answer a certain way to get the result you want.


I'm not like, full of ideas and abstract thoughts like Ns are supposed to be, but I don't think I'm concrete, down to earth, here and now kind of person either.I tend to be very unobservant, dreamy and overly unrealistic. As for T and F, I used to think I was T just because I'm not the most selfless, empathic person, but now I believe I'm an F.

If I answered to get the result I wanted, I'd probably be xxTJ.Of course, I might still be pushing things to go certain way, but I can't do much about it.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Random thought that could help:
I noticed that in some situations when one is supposed to enjoy physical stimuli, I pay more attention to what kind of person that situation makes me than what I'm really sensing and I enjoy the idea of being a person that does x more than doing x.I also never got drunk because I don't see a point in losing myself that way when I can just act tipsy and get the result I wanted.

A question about communication style:
People often tell me that I speak too vaguely and beg me to give specific examples and evidence(I always manage to make smth up) and they say I have my own insane ideas that don't work in the real world and that things I worry about don't matter (ex."Who cares what your MBTI is???You are still the same person.").BUT, I get extremely annoyed if someone else suddenly gets too general if I find the specific part interesting.As you already noticed, I often ask for concrete examples, but just because I can't apply theory to myself (it's easier with others), I can't even do with examples.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Please help.I'm getting more and more self doubtful.


----------



## Kintsugi (May 17, 2011)

dawilliams said:


> Goodness--I would have thought my ode to ESFPness above might have had the opposite effect. I used to envy all my ESFP friends--so wonderfully free from all the compulsive over-thinking and self-doubt which plagues me.


Any type can suffer from over-thinking and self-doubt. This has _nothing _to do with type.


----------



## dawilliams (May 15, 2012)

Kintsugi said:


> Any type can suffer from over-thinking and self-doubt. This has _nothing _to do with type.


I would beg to differ. While it's true that any type can suffer from over-thinking and self-doubt, there are varying levels of predilection toward these sorts of behaviors that has _a whole lot_ to do with type. Honestly, what's the point of studying these theories of all we do is cancel them out with exceptions? 

Sure there are bad theories out there. But there are good theories too; theories with answers which are correct, theories from which you can draw accurate conclusions about a person. 

The trick is figuring out the good theories from the bad ones. @Living dead, I have little doubt about your ENFP-ness, but the more important point is your own confidence in that conclusion. Like I said before, if you want to have peace about knowing what temperament type you are, Keirsey's PUMII book is one of the best I've seen on the subject.


----------



## Kintsugi (May 17, 2011)

dawilliams said:


> I would beg to differ. While it's true that any type can suffer from over-thinking and self-doubt, there are varying levels of predilection toward these sorts of behaviors that has _a whole lot_ to do with type. Honestly, what's the point of studying these theories of all we do is cancel them out with exceptions?
> 
> Sure there are bad theories out there. But there are good theories too; theories with answers which are correct, theories from which you can draw accurate conclusions about a person.


Self-doubt and over-thinking is not inextricably linked to cognitive functions and is significantly influenced by individual life experiences and emotional health/maturity. Just observing the vast differences in people with the same letters above their username on this forum is enough to highlight that. Human psychology is an incredibly complex area and is why I have come to reject the simplistic model proposed by Kiersely. So, IMO, no, it is not a "good" theory. I am nothing like the ESFP stereotype illustrated and yet I know, for certain, that I am Se-dominant. Self-doubt and over-thinking is something that has plagued me my entire life. In terms of typology theory, I have found the best model that has helped me understand this aspect of myself to be Enneagram.

Anyway, as the above illustrates, this is clearly a case of differing _subjective_ _opinions._ I don't see 'cancelling out' these theories as a waste of time; I see it as an important part of analysis and critical thinking. Why should I force myself into a box/label when I clearly don't fit the system?


----------



## dawilliams (May 15, 2012)

Kintsugi said:


> Self-doubt and over-thinking is not inextricably linked to cognitive functions and is significantly influenced by individual life experiences and emotional health/maturity. Just observing the vast differences in people with the same letters above their username on this forum is enough to highlight that. Human psychology is an incredibly complex area and is why I have come to reject the simplistic model proposed by Kiersely. So, IMO, no, it is not a "good" theory. I am nothing like the ESFP stereotype illustrated and yet I know, for certain, that I am Se-dominant. Self-doubt and over-thinking is something that has plagued me my entire life. In terms of typology theory, I have found the best model that has helped me understand this aspect of myself to be Enneagram.
> 
> Anyway, as the above illustrates, this is clearly a case of differing _subjective_ _opinions._ I don't see 'cancelling out' these theories as a waste of time; I see it as an important part of analysis and critical thinking. Why should I force myself into a box/label when I clearly don't fit the system?


I hear a lot of people resenting The System here at personality cafe, and all I can do is tell them, "read Keirsey." He's not a box, and he does offer the best understanding of typology that I've seen. His website is not as helpful as his book and I think most people here draw their opinion of him from their perusing of the Keirsey website. 

Most people don't fit into a bad typology system. That's what makes it bad. Bad typology systems might look like boxes or bags, stereotypes and vague specificities which make no sense whatsoever when looking at an entire person. Maybe even I do that to an extent, and if something I've said throws you off a bit, I'm sorry. I'm NF; I tend to draw these vast inductive conclusions and I'm not very circumspect in terms of how they might be taken by someone coming from a different perspective. 

Keirsey doesn't do that. If you really feel like you don't fit into the ESFP portrait, then maybe you don't. Or maybe your alleged portrait of an ESFP is flawed--perhaps even based on something _I _said. (Again, sorry.) Either way, Keirsey would most likely help you understand better who you are and how you work.


----------

