# Noticable Differences between ISTP and ISFP?



## ayyymenn (May 9, 2017)

my indecisive ass can't tell if i'm ISFP or ISTP so i was wondering if someone can explain noticable differences between dominant Fi/Ti and inferior Fe/Te.


----------



## Candy Apple (Sep 10, 2015)

ISFP vs. ISTP | Prelude Character Analysis does that help?


----------



## zynthaxx (Aug 12, 2009)

ayyymenn said:


> my indecisive ass can't tell if i'm ISFP or ISTP so i was wondering if someone can explain noticable differences between dominant Fi/Ti and inferior Fe/Te.


If you like to look at things rationally, you're more likely to be an ISTP.
If you're offended by the previous statement, you're likely an ISFP.


----------



## jetser (Jan 6, 2016)

There is a lot. ISTPs are usually technical minded, crafty people, ISFPs are more artistic.
They both are really outgoing (for an introvert), like good visuals and everything sensory experience, but have a healthy dose of intuition as well which they later put in good use.
But honestly, you should tell the difference just by looking at how they handle and behave in a situation.
ISFPs will often fake their feelings in a situation, ISTPs not so likely, if that helps.


----------



## Stevester (Feb 28, 2016)

ISTP are rough around the edges. They speak bluntly and often don't care nor realize they're hurting people. But they say what they mean and they mean what they say, no bullshit.

ISFPs are generally much nicer and fuzzy, but but they can hide a lot of stuff from you, tell you one thing, but do something else. It's not so much shady behavior as it is inferior Te contradicting itself, lost in what Fi wants in the moment.


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

ISTP - Ti, Se, Ni, Fe in that order.
ISFP - Fi, Se, Ni, Te n that order.

IMO they're really different in theory.

ISTP leads with Ti - Logical. Systematic. Prefers to think things through before speaking. Objective.

ISFP leads with Fi - In touch with themselves. Compassionate (yet still introverted so might not open up easily). Can put themselves in another persons shoes. Prefers to go with how things align with their morals and beliefs etc.

IMO these are just about polar opposites and there should be no confusion as to what your dominant function is after doing some research.

Have a read of this:
If You’re Confused About Your Myers-Briggs Personality Type, Read This: An Intro To Cognitive Functions | Thought Catalog

They both share Se as their auxiliary function which means they are both going to be more in the here and now, observant as to what is actually happening etc, and for this reason might not come across as the introverts they are to others.

IMO tests are pretty silly for this stuff when you start reading and begin to understand how differently these functions work.. one little letter.. ISTP to ISFP.. and we're talking a completely different dominant function. An entirely different way of seeing the world. A completely different way of making decisions. 
Vast difference. Tests will say like 49% T, 51% F, but that's just.. bullshit. Doesn't work that way.

Sorry for the overly long post. I just find this all fascinating, and the more I read, the more I realise the online tests are pretty much bogus!


----------



## Notus Asphodelus (Jan 20, 2015)

Don't worry.. you'll figure it out soon.


----------



## vhaydenlv (May 3, 2017)

I recommend this website: FiSe (ISFP) — Type in Mind it helped me a lot.


----------



## OHtheNovelty (Aug 14, 2016)

Do you ever feel like you need a feeling translator because you're feelings are so vague and irrational, that you put them away because they make no utter sense? Then you are most likely an ISTP, because when it comes to my own feelings, I have no idea what the hell is going on. When I feel about something or someone, I won't be able to put a name on that feeling or know what to do with it. I know the basic feelings like happiness, sadness, anger, fear and jealousy, but anything other than that, I'm lost. I can identify symptoms of more complex emotions and how they affect me, but I can never put a name on that particular emotion/feeling until I'm deep in it. I like to think more about things in a realistic, technical standpoint than one in an emotional one. Thinking deeply about subjects I'm interested in keeps me more happy and content than figuring out my emotions and how others feel about me (because I could care less how others perceive me).

If you feel like you can relate to a lot with what I said, then you are most likely an ISTP.
Can't speak for everyone, but I think a majority of ISTPs might be like this too.


----------



## soop (Aug 6, 2016)

ISTPs are going to approach everything from a logical and practical perspective first and foremost. I don't know what ISFPs are like, I know one other than possibly myself (I might be one) but it seems logic and practicality are second to what is "right". What I mean by this is that they will do what is practical and logical to achieve what is right, rather than doing what is most logical and practical period.

Fi is basically the same as Ti but with an extra deeper layer of introspection that Ti really doesn't have.


----------



## jetser (Jan 6, 2016)

ISTPs and ISFPs are so different that it's not even funny. To even mistake them for each other must mean that you've only seen them briefly. Shared Se-Ni means nothing in terms of behaviour and thinking.


----------



## Cataclysm (Mar 16, 2015)

If you ask them "why" enough times the ISTP will eventually shrug his shoulders and the ISFP will defiantly defend their basic reasons. So the ISFP is more certain in their principles whereas the ISTP is more certain of the implications. Obviously the ISTP too has reasons for whatever they do but they will not be as nuanced as in the ISFP, as basically everyone has already more or less said.


----------



## zynthaxx (Aug 12, 2009)

Cataclysm said:


> If you ask them "why" enough times the ISTP will eventually shrug his shoulders and the ISFP will defiantly defend their basic reasons.


The shrugging and letting go is impatience with someone who doesn't grasp what you're saying. Defiantly defending your basic reasons is not a type-specific thing, but a naïve belief that the other party will suddenly understand you if you just throw enough words on them. Many people of all types make this mistake.



Cataclysm said:


> So the ISFP is more certain in their principles whereas the ISTP is more certain of the implications. Obviously the ISTP too has reasons for whatever they do but they will not be as nuanced as in the ISFP, as basically everyone has already more or less said.


This is an utterly wrong conclusion. ISTP and ISFP base their principles on different values, but how nuanced the principles are, is an individual matter, not a type-related one.


----------



## Cataclysm (Mar 16, 2015)

zynthaxx said:


> The shrugging and letting go is impatience with someone who doesn't grasp what you're saying. Defiantly defending your basic reasons is not a type-specific thing, but a naïve belief that the other party will suddenly understand you if you just throw enough words on them. Many people of all types make this mistake.
> 
> 
> This is an utterly wrong conclusion. ISTP and ISFP base their principles on different values, but how nuanced the principles are, is an individual matter, not a type-related one.


Every individual have different reasons for their beliefs but since a belief is ultimately rooted in how one feels it only makes sense that the ISFP is going to be able to articulate it better. ISTPs are better at logic and consistency but values aren't necessarily logical or consistent so when you get down to the bottom of their reasoning they're going to find things that they are inherently uncomfortable with. ISFPs aren't very concerned with everything being totally consistent so when someone grills them about their reasoning they are okay with putting the foot down before an ISTP would. For instance, I could say that killing cats are wrong but it's okay to kill cows and horses. The ISTP argues that they're all animals so I should either be okay with killing them all or none at all. "No, I don't think so" would be my response and to me that's perfectly reasonable. The ISTP wouldn't be entirely satisfied by this answer because it's not consistent so he'd ask me to explain myself, and since I'm pretty smart I'd be able to do that but I'd be annoyed as fuck because I don't like using Ti. In the same vein, if the ISTP is also smart he'll likely recognize that people can have beliefs that aren't as consistent as theirs. This also works in the other direction towards the ISTP although instead of being annoyed by being asked to reason they'd be annoyed by having to justify that because their Fi sucks. Like, when I press my ISTP buddy to that point he's perfectly calm and reasonable until it comes to the point where he has to give a final verdict or whatever. So I ask him "So that's what you believe then?" and the response is something like "Yeah, what's the big deal?!  " So maybe shrugging ones shoulders was a bad way of describing what I was trying to portray. 

I realize this isn't very clear so what am I saying here? Yes, the nuance of a persons principles is individual but the articulation of said principles aren't going to be if you're an ISTP because you'd rather explain what they entail, and that's what the ISFP has a problem doing. So if you're impatient with people understanding your values it's probably because you feel like you have to present them with something similar to Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, and in the other end you have the ISFP who can't explain themselves. So I guess there's a balance you have to find.


----------



## zynthaxx (Aug 12, 2009)

Cataclysm said:


> Yes, the nuance of a persons principles is individual but the articulation of said principles aren't going to be if you're an ISTP because you'd rather explain what they entail, and that's what the ISFP has a problem doing. So if you're impatient with people understanding your values it's probably because you feel like you have to present them with something similar to Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, and in the other end you have the ISFP who can't explain themselves. So I guess there's a balance you have to find.


I think the first difference in our world view is that to a thinker, a belief rooted in how one feels isn't really valid. In fact you'll probably find a lot of thinkers expressing their line of thought something like "I try not to believe things". Basically, humans "feel" a lot of stuff that is demonstrably false. In fact, in many areas of life, to be "right", we need to actively suppress what feels correct and use other tools to determine what's actually true - that's one of the main uses for statistics, for example. 
In many situations, this is where an ISFP throws out their arms and walks away from the discussion. Why? Because to them, a belief _is_ rooted in how they feel. They can probably describe _that_ perfectly well, but just like an ISFP needs to have reached a certain level of maturity to even accept, say, statistics over their own feeling for what's true, an ISTP may need to have reached a similar level of maturity to acknowledge that a large part of Earth's population doesn't deal well with facts and seem to do just fine anyway, in most cases.
Regarding having to explain your values, I'll just point back to my previous post: Usually trying to do that is just a waste of breath. People whose values don't align will never agree with each other for a common reason, though they may ultimately arrive at similar conclusions. 

What I mainly wanted to get at was that contrary to your previous post, an ISTP world view isn't any less nuanced than an ISFP one, but unless you share a common base for your values, nuance may be lost in translation.


----------



## Cataclysm (Mar 16, 2015)

zynthaxx said:


> I think the first difference in our world view is that to a thinker, a belief rooted in how one feels isn't really valid. In fact you'll probably find a lot of thinkers expressing their line of thought something like "I try not to believe things". Basically, humans "feel" a lot of stuff that is demonstrably false. In fact, in many areas of life, to be "right", we need to actively suppress what feels correct and use other tools to determine what's actually true - that's one of the main uses for statistics, for example.
> In many situations, this is where an ISFP throws out their arms and walks away from the discussion. Why? Because to them, a belief _is_ rooted in how they feel. They can probably describe _that_ perfectly well, but just like an ISFP needs to have reached a certain level of maturity to even accept, say, statistics over their own feeling for what's true, an ISTP may need to have reached a similar level of maturity to acknowledge that a large part of Earth's population doesn't deal well with facts and seem to do just fine anyway, in most cases.
> Regarding having to explain your values, I'll just point back to my previous post: Usually trying to do that is just a waste of breath. People whose values don't align will never agree with each other for a common reason, though they may ultimately arrive at similar conclusions.
> 
> What I mainly wanted to get at was that contrary to your previous post, an ISTP world view isn't any less nuanced than an ISFP one, but unless you share a common base for your values, nuance may be lost in translation.


Yeah I agree. Nuance wasn't a good way of describing it.


----------



## Drecon (Jun 20, 2016)

In my experience, ISFP's tend to be on a quest for self-fulfillment or one for greater understanding of people. They tend to spend a lot of time thinking about how people work and how they themselves work. They reflect on their goals in life and what that means to them. 
ISTP's tend to be a lot more straightforward. They tend to know what they want and don't like to stray from their set path. They often want understanding, but more about the mechanics or process of things (or people of course) than people's emotional state. 

Interestingly, both often want to understand through action, but while the ISFP looks to the meaning, the ISTP looks to process. 
From the outside, both can look very similar, since Fi and Ti are introverted functions. If you know the reasons for their behaviour, everything is different though.


----------

