# ENTP vs ENFP. Would like some assistance and be warn there will be questions



## Xzcouter (May 13, 2014)

Well to start let me talk about trying to get my feeling functions out of the way.

I like to read books or stories that can make me feel something (of course this is not the only factor) and it tells me that it is a good book in terms of the emotional department and right after finishing it I have a habit of going and sharing the book with other people and recommending it. I have this urge of sharing what I think/feel after that emotional feeling.

I like to talk to people and love to move from one group to another at times to chat with people to prevent boredom.

Is this Fe or Fi?:
Whenever I am out with friends and we have to make a decision of where to eat or what to do next I first see what other people want and then make my decision and see if it is conflicting.

I also have to tend to have this sense of wanting to confirm what I say agrees with what other people think/feel in order to see if there are any points of conflict. I also tend to want affirmation and also give affirmation.

Now thinking functions
I guess the best way is to write down my thinking process:



> I was doing a Maths problem once in where my teacher dared us to solve sin x = cos 2x without using graph and I just went about solving trying different things such as trying to create tan or trying figure out a new variable (which I tend to do) , so at the end ai came up with cos-1 sin x = 2x and I knew I was going somewhere and I went about doing cos-1 sin x in my calculator by replacing x with a random number and found that the answer I get would always be 90-x and I followed this and solved the equation finding that x=30 and later found the relation that sin x = cos 90-x proving my theory of cos-1 sin x = 90-x





> If I have some knowledge of a specific subject I can easily form facts that would still make logical sense and seem true through pure knowledge. Oh and how I find things dont really have to start out logical if I just found out some pattern or clue I would follow it and test it out and then try to rationalize it MOST of the time and rarely the other way around in where I first rationalize then theorrize For example: One time I was thinking about blackholes and how they are and came to the conclusion that gravity is caused due to a bend in space-time as if it was a sheet that if matter is occupying that space the sheet would bend downwards causing a curve so any matter smaller would immediately get pulled towards the center due to the curve. (which was right xD). I came in the conclusion the blackholes were a hole through the sheet causing everything to fall in it to disappear hence why light can't escape it and hence why it is really small but has a large gravitational pull. (Think how a sink works) . But this was wrong due to law of conservation of energy but in that moment i thought I cracked the mystery of a black hole. Or maybe lets say when doing a Maths/Physics question if I run across a problem I can't solve due to lack of knowledge I would analyze it and try to come up with answers and this normally leads me to the right answer. Of course the answer I create will/should make logical sense to me or else I would reject it.





> I am good at pointing out things that don't add up. For example: Friend A whispered to me that Friend B asked a weird question and Friend B said that he never ask such a question. The first thing that came to me was "How did Friend B know what was the question if Friend A whispered it into my ear?". Caught him red handed ;D





> I was learning general relativity and when I came across "time dialation" I wasn't able to understand how time differs for different people that move at different speeds. So what I did is take a similar scenario to their example(train moving at speed of light)
> My scenario:
> The balls speed is constant(replacement for light) and train and ball moves at 20m/s (I know the numbers are weird I mean that's one slow train but this is just theory so it doesn't matter) I throw a ball that moves at 20m/s at my POV Outside observer sees the ball move at 20(ball's speed) + 20(train speed) = 40 m/s in his POV
> If time is relative then speed is proportionate to time
> ...





> When I am asked a question I would normally answer it through my understanding of the question if I don't understand it I cant answer it or fail to give you the right answer. I need to understand the question in order to answer it. Frequently/Oftenly I tend to have multiple interpretations of the question and tend to give multiple answers cause I can't answer it with just one cause question tends to be weird that way. I can't really give you an example right now cause I can't remember any so I would try to remember. and when I need to make a critical decision I try to look at all options and see their benefits and go off my basis of that. If I am ask a question such as the game 2 truth 1 lie I find it easy to know what is the truth and lie I would give an example: My teacher gave us 2 truth and 1 lie and we have to identify the lie 1) I went to study in USA for Highschool 2) She is 27 y/o 3) She did something crazy I don't remember what though (My memory is so bad xD I only remember the useful stuff xD). I just went off some couple of patterns and things I made up in my head to solve this and find the lie. I first went off the basis that the last one is true cause she knows how the game is played (as she is the one who suggested it) and I noticed that people tend to put the lie at the end so I would go with the presumption that she purposefully kept the unbelievable fact at the end to throw people off. so 3 was a no go for me. between 1 and 2 people believe 1 more cause she was an English teacher but presuming she played smart she probably kept the lie as the first option so that people would a) ignore it b) forget about it c) throw people off. But this wasn't enough for me so I just thought for awhile and went under the assumption that you need at the minimum of 6 year of Uni + 4~ish years of exp to work in this school so under all these presumptions I considered the lie being the first one that she studied in USA for high school. I was the only one who got it right :3


I always tend to find these new things ,concepts and theories and always prove them later if I know they work I tend to heavily rely on trying multiple ways of answering a question and trying to figure out a pattern to come up with new formulas, theories or concepts to solve the question at hand

I have to ask though is using Maths an Objective Te or Subjective Ti?

Fi is about values but what classifies something as a 'value'? What if they value knowledge and logical consistency and on top of that they also value groups and how fe is how would one differentiate Ti-Fe vs Fi-Te?

I read that Fi based users base their decisions to how they think they are so lets say a Fi base user thinks they are Ti what are some things that point that they are not xD?
ENFP tend to base their decisions of ethics right and they know what they value the most right? How does Te come into play for them? What about Ti? Same thing for ENTP but instead ethic make that logic and instead of Te and Ti make that Fe and Fi.

Ok last one for sure xD

I tend to be in my terms irrational. Such as when playing a video game always basing my decisions on how I think I would answer and never really go past that unless if I feel like two possible decisions can be done.
Or at times be irrational and not wanting to do something due to some personal preference such as not wanting to represent any faction that is the colour red or the element fire. These are all Fi based decisions right? or is this type 4?

My Enneagram is 974 (or 947) so the last question maybe type 4 but I am not too sure...


----------



## TyranAmiros (Jul 7, 2014)

This is very much Ti, not Te:



> If I have some knowledge of a specific subject I can easily form facts that would still make logical sense and seem true through pure knowledge. Oh and how I find things dont really have to start out logical if I just found out some pattern or clue I would follow it and test it out and then try to rationalize it MOST of the time and rarely the other way around in where I first rationalize then theorrize _sic_


Most of your questions don't have clear answers. Is math Te or Ti? Well, either, depending. A Ti user (like Einstein or Descartes) needs a problem to solve--that is, they'll do the math that might help them reach an answer to the problem, often reinventing first principles if the existing rules don't lead them to a conclusion they want. A Te user (like Isaac Newton or John Nash) tends to work through established principles to reach solutions, even if the problem isn't readily clear.

When we distinguish "values" and "principles" in the functions, what we're really getting at is that the Feeling functions don't require external justification and the Thinking functions do. Even Fe-dominants, whose behavior is guided by external standards, don't immediately jump to working through why exactly they do that, while Ti-dominants, with their subjective standards, do. 

Higher-order Fi doesn't feel the need to rationalize; why try to logically explain what is so obvious and clear? But it does recognize the need for solutions, and so weak Te is used to structure those Fi values: it helps the FP determine what can be done regarding the Fi principle, and gives them the tools to realize that vision. So Fi-dominants are often very good at organization and logic--not with respect to the principle itself, but with respect to achieving it. For example, Lorelai Gilmore (ENFP) uses her Te to negotiate with contractors on the path to achieving her dream of opening her own in. Comedian Jack Whitehall (ENFP) uses Te to explore variations on a theme. Poets/authors like Shakespeare (INFP) use Te to guide the form of their work. Barry Allen (The Flash, INFP in comics/ENFP on TV) uses Te to collect and examine evidence necessary to solve crime.

Now, because Fi values don't need external justification, they also tend to be broad--they set up agendas, not tasks. So an Fi who "values math" (or "science" or anything like that) values it in the abstract, not in the concrete. The INFP who values math does so because of what math means, what it symbolizes, what its potentials are. Not as an epistemology, as a self-evident truth. They don't need to have a reason for it, because as a product of feeling, it doesn't need a rationalization. 

For example, I know an INFP who strongly believes that the US should normalize relations with Cuba. She comes up with post-hoc, after the fact rationalizations for why, but when it comes down to it, she just believes it so, not because of anything. That's Fi. I'm a Ti user--I need to know the reasons why. I need explanations and causal pathways and principles before I'm going to make a judgment about something; the INFP doesn't.


----------



## ALongTime (Apr 19, 2014)

@TyranAmiros Not sure I really get your description of Fi there. Fi is all about rationalisation of information, according to a consistent set of personal moral/ethical values and principles, which may or may not involve logic but that's not the focus. I would say feeling functions require just as much external justification as thinking functions, but the criteria for those justifications may be different. The difference with Fi judgements is that it's ethical consistency taking preference over logical consistency.


----------



## Xzcouter (May 13, 2014)

TyranAmiros said:


> This is very much Ti, not Te:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ughh xD
I still am very indecisive between ENFP vs ENTP xD
I mean I guess I could relate to higher order Fi in where I dont really try to logically explain but the thing is I CAN DO IT ANYTIME and dont mind but its not my primary goal
and I can also relate to Math as a Ti-dominant in where I would do the math to help me reach an answer to a problem and also reinventing and inventing new formulas and things to find. I mean for example the first thing I talked about regarding my thought process in where I discussed a Trignometry question. I am very well good at noticing patterns and creating a mathematical formula based on it and I just have this sense of AHA where I found the formula immediately
For example during Chem class our teacher wanted us to find an answer to a multiple choice with the maths and formula and I was the only one who did and he even brought the formula and he said I was the first kid who ever came up with a formula that was condensed as the formula he gave was too big to easily do. I just found the formula easily it was instinctive and I later rationalize it to understand it better.

What about my other thought processes Ti-Fe or Fi-Te?
What did you think of my other examples?


----------



## TyranAmiros (Jul 7, 2014)

What I'm seeing is a whole lot of Ne and Si and not a lot of judging, period. You understand "Two Truths and A Lie" so well, you're able to intuit which answer is correct because Ne spots the pattern and draws on data obtained through Si. You're creating the formula because you recognize the pattern in your answers. That's an Ne-Si process. To what end? That's where judging comes in. What motivates you to do this? What do you get out of it? Jung calls Thinking and Feeling the "rational" types because they require reasoning or rationalization. I get a lot of stories, but not why they matter. 
@ALongTime brings up something important I neglected to adequately explain. Both feeling functions of course do systematize according to moral/ethical principles, either external (Fe) or internal (Fi). And Fi in particular tends to begin with ethical absolutes and judge evidence accordingly. 

The Fi-Te function pair uses the established tools of science (experimentation, classification, regulation) in pursuit of the moral ideal. For FPs, the moral ideal comes first--the evidence and details serve the vision. That's the point in the examples--FPs tend to use established logical vehicles for conveying ethical messages: the heavily Te expectations of a play or poem to convey Fi visions (Shakespeare), the Te framework of color combinations and symbolism to create Fi art (Andy Warhol). For an ENFP, math is there to support Fi values; if Ne-Te provides new insight into Fi, then it's important. Otherwise, reject it. Much like John Lennon's use of music or Oscar Wilde's use of irony. 

Some see Professor Brian Cox as an ENFP (he's definitely an Fi user in my opinion; I would have said INFP)--look at the way he talks about the universe. It's reverent, almost like a pastor talking about God. Yes, he uses a lot of math and phsyics--but it's in pursuit of that Fi ideal of understanding the universe.

Compare that to the Ti-Fe function pair. TPs are situationalists--yes, they evaluate evidence by their own internal logic, blah, blah. That really doesn't tell you what Ti is about. A Te believes in the universality of math: it is a logical language that is the same no matter where it is. The Ti will tell you that math is a logical system like any other, open to interpretation. You can make statistics say whatever you want them to; focus instead on telling a logical story. The Te is fine with leaving loose ends--after all, there's always omitted variable bias and such. The Ti wants to explain all the evidence--oh, the model doesn't work there because of X. Like Einstein (ENTP) shows, math is only a tool in the service of the underlying story. Change the story, and the math changes too. How many "impossible" things have people done throughout history?

So TPs have reputations as "problem-solvers" because they're focused on the situation at hand. Yeah, these problems may lead them to change how we look at things, but that's not the goal. Like Thomas Edison (ENTP) inventing the light bulb or Macchiavelli (ENTP) on politics, the goal is not necessarily "rewrite the rules of politics" but rather "let's see what happens when we try to solve the problem of rulers acting poorly toward their citizens".


----------



## Xzcouter (May 13, 2014)

TyranAmiros said:


> What I'm seeing is a whole lot of Ne and Si and not a lot of judging, period. You understand "Two Truths and A Lie" so well, you're able to intuit which answer is correct because Ne spots the pattern and draws on data obtained through Si. You're creating the formula because you recognize the pattern in your answers. That's an Ne-Si process. To what end? That's where judging comes in. What motivates you to do this? What do you get out of it? Jung calls Thinking and Feeling the "rational" types because they require reasoning or rationalization. I get a lot of stories, but not why they matter.
> @ALongTime brings up something important I neglected to adequately explain. Both feeling functions of course do systematize according to moral/ethical principles, either external (Fe) or internal (Fi). And Fi in particular tends to begin with ethical absolutes and judge evidence accordingly.
> 
> The Fi-Te function pair uses the established tools of science (experimentation, classification, regulation) in pursuit of the moral ideal. For FPs, the moral ideal comes first--the evidence and details serve the vision. That's the point in the examples--FPs tend to use established logical vehicles for conveying ethical messages: the heavily Te expectations of a play or poem to convey Fi visions (Shakespeare), the Te framework of color combinations and symbolism to create Fi art (Andy Warhol). For an ENFP, math is there to support Fi values; if Ne-Te provides new insight into Fi, then it's important. Otherwise, reject it. Much like John Lennon's use of music or Oscar Wilde's use of irony.
> ...


What motivates me? and what do I get out of it?
Well...I want to answer the question at hand xD. I just want to find the answer and want to answer it myself and solve the problem myself and the thing I get is I get to sleep at night but its mostly just me wanting to answer it and wanting to satisfy my curiosity but if its not answered I CAN get bothered and think about it for a long time and it sticks unto my head.

The one thing that makes me really think/believe I am not a Fi-user is the fact of Moral ideals and stuff like that as I never really made a decision based on what *I* think what is right or wrong or just drop something just because I consider it going against what I believe it. I am highly open minded and consider everything EVEN IF it goes against my belief. Its one of the main reason why I dropped my religion is due to the fact that I found the errors in it at first I was skeptical of touching it cause of my religion but I found myself thinking about it some more and found way too many errors.

Ok so let me get this straight.
Te works WITH the rules and guidelines given but Ti would either work or not work as in they could bend the rules a bit and find loop holes , errors or ignore it just to get to the answer? If so I am certainly Ti I think.
I was given this question/challenge of 5 blanks and only using odd numbers - 1,3,5,7,9,11,13,15 I should get the number 30 and it should be addition. Its completely impossible but I had to do it. So I came up with the solution of:
3! (which is just a 6) +11+3+1+9 so that I get 30 but...I found that it wasnt allowed and that you have to get 30 by only addition so I just did some proving: First two blanks would be even and the second two blanks too hence the first 4 WOULD be even
so Even (due to the first 4) + Odd should give you Odd hence making it impossible to solve and that satisfied me xD


----------



## TyranAmiros (Jul 7, 2014)

Xzcouter said:


> What motivates me? and what do I get out of it?
> Well...I want to answer the question at hand xD. I just want to find the answer and want to answer it myself and solve the problem myself and the thing I get is I get to sleep at night but its mostly just me wanting to answer it and wanting to satisfy my curiosity but if its not answered I CAN get bothered and think about it for a long time and it sticks unto my head.


This sounds like Ti.



> The one thing that makes me really think/believe I am not a Fi-user is the fact of Moral ideals and stuff like that as I never really made a decision based on what *I* think what is right or wrong or just drop something just because I consider it going against what I believe it. I am highly open minded and consider everything EVEN IF it goes against my belief. Its one of the main reason why I dropped my religion is due to the fact that I found the errors in it at first I was skeptical of touching it cause of my religion but I found myself thinking about it some more and found way too many errors.


This is actually all very Ne, but given your previous threads, I'm not clear where the idea you might be ENFP even came from. You've always given pretty much straight up xNTP answers.



> Ok so let me get this straight.
> Te works WITH the rules and guidelines given but Ti would either work or not work as in they could bend the rules a bit and find loop holes , errors or ignore it just to get to the answer? If so I am certainly Ti I think.


Math itself isn't the purview of a single function; it's not "I use math therefore I use Te" or something similar. All types can and do use math, but in different ways and for different reasons. Te users tend to believe that logical rules dictate reason; Ti users tend to believe that logic is subordinate to reason. Te users find objective tests to confirmation of their beliefs, Ti users seek out good explanations and stories to confirm. Te users want falsifiable propositions; Ti users what rational stories. 

NFPs use Te to seek out objective evidence to prove Ne-Fi claims. NTPs use Ti to develop the logical explanations for Ne claims, then Fe to sell them to others. For FPs, the logic is always subordinate to the ethics; for TPs, the logic is an end in and of itself.


----------



## Bugs (May 13, 2014)

@Xzcouter congrats , you're an INTP.


----------



## GreyJedi (Dec 8, 2014)

Hi @Xzcouter! It is good that you stated your thought process and not how you behave. Now to your type!

Your whole post makes me think that you have low S. You're fourth and fifth quotations gave me that hint. Sensors quickly absorbs things into them. They are like blackholes for information. What I do see strongly is your N. What you stated about the time dilation problem, you didn't look at the actual problem per se but saw a different problem altogether and subjectively analyze it in your mind.

With that, I say you are a lead intuitive. The question now is if you are extraverted or introverted. Your second quotation appears that you may be extraverted by your statement "and came to a conclusion that..." I think that the intuition still held an objective point of view in your analysis. So your lead axis is Ne/Si. Doing math problems can be all of the 8 cognitive functions so it is important not to get that mixed up. But the thought process you described has an impression of Ti to back up your Ne. From your first quotation, you are judging whether the solution you come up with will fit the equation. Inside, you are trying to assess how would this solution fare if I test it out. Sure there is objectiveness but your subjectiveness prevailed. With that, your second axis is Ti/Fe.

Putting it altogether and we have Ne/Ti/Fe/Si. I type you as an ENTP. Not sure about your enneagram though. That requires more behavioristic descriptions.


----------



## Xzcouter (May 13, 2014)

Bugs said:


> @Xzcouter congrats , you're an INTP.


INTP or ENTP xD
Why INTP?
@GreyJedi
Ah Thanks 

Oh my Enneagram is 974 or 947 I am still unsure of the order but I know I am a core 9 and between the other two triads 7 and 4 is most probable


----------



## Bugs (May 13, 2014)

Xzcouter said:


> INTP or ENTP xD
> Why INTP?
> @GreyJedi
> Ah Thanks
> ...


Only INTPs go into that much detail in their posts.


----------



## Xzcouter (May 13, 2014)

Bugs said:


> Only INTPs go into that much detail in their posts.


ah that xD
I have been collecting so much info for quite a while xD.
I seriously dont think I am an INTP though or for an introvert for that matter I take energy by external means greatly and that lower Fe isn't really me.


----------



## GreyJedi (Dec 8, 2014)

@Xzcouter No prob mate


----------



## Kuzami (Feb 20, 2014)

I have to agree with ENTP, and this may seem strange, but I say that because you've left me with that 'Slow down, I have no idea what you're saying, but I'm still smiling because you're really something else.' sort of feeling that I get when I read/listen to ENTP's. One of my best friends is an ENFP and, although he can go a mile a minute and jump from idea to idea, I usually know where he's coming from and can just say with satisfaction 'you're such a dork' while nodding my head in understanding. Both types are absolutely awesome.

On a more serious note, I think you're Ne-Ti because of the way you solve problems. I'm not entirely sure of your starting point, but it seems like you take the problem, get some ideas about it and take the one that seems like the best one... Ne at work. Then you start rationalizing them out, making connections and sifting through the details to arrive at the logical conclusion... Ti at work, and also where I was able to start following your thought process again.

I think your Fe shows when you express your concern about what other people think about something and what's important to them.

Fe finds meaning in the world around you, and that meaning can often be other people and other peoples' ideas. It manifests frequently (hence the stereotype) in how we react to people's thoughts and feelings. Fe takes others' ideas into account and often accommodates for them. However, it can recognize that sometimes, you can't compromise and must stick to your own ideas even if it means upsetting others.

Fi finds meaning from within, and that meaning can often be one's individual feelings or ideas. Fi sees meaning in the things it focuses on, and thus holds them as important. When it comes to other peoples conflicting ideas, feelings, etc., Fi will recognize that while other people's ideas and feelings matter, so do the ones it has found meaning in and those should not be compromised for the sake of others' comfort. However, it can recognize that sometimes you just should just be accommodating, even if it means putting aside your own ideas.

Nuances, I suppose, but the focus and exceptions are what distinguish the two functions.

That's Fe and Fi with a focus on ideas and people, but there could easily, though less stereotypically, be Fe and Fi with a focus on actions and rules.

Ne-Ti seemed to be your strength though, with Fe rearing its head from time to time.

P.S. - Auto-correct is telling me 'stereotypically' isn't a word, but it follows the system of the English language, so I'm just gonna roll with it. Changing it just makes it seem jumbled.


----------



## Xzcouter (May 13, 2014)

@Kuzami @TyranAmiros
I just want to clarify something about Fe vs Fi
Fe loves to share their emotions and discuss thrm with people
While Fi likes to bottle it up for themselves
When faced with an emotional problame Fe searches help from other people and share it while Fi keeps it themselves and solvves it on their own

Just making sure xD
Oh and is this still a Ti response to why I like to solve questions and find formulas. I DO IT BECAUSE I CAN DO IT :3


----------



## Kuzami (Feb 20, 2014)

Xzcouter said:


> @Kuzami @TyranAmiros
> I just want to clarify something about Fe vs Fi
> Fe loves to share their emotions and discuss thrm with people
> While Fi likes to bottle it up for themselves
> When faced with an emotional problame Fe searches help from other people and share it while Fi keeps it themselves and solvves it on their own


That's a common misconception about Fi and Fe, and probably derives from some confusion about the difference between cognitive and behavioral psychology. It's not a social/emotional function, as that would be behavioral. Just like Ti and Te, Fi and Fe are also judging functions. They make use and sense of the information gathered by the perceiving functions of S and N. It's also a cognitive process.

The way they differ is that T evaluates and applies information based on its use, i.e. - what can be done with the information and how it works with other information.

F, on the other hand, evaluates and applies information based on its meaning, i.e. - what its significance or purpose is and how it relates to other information.

Fi and Fe will differ in that Fi will evaluate the meaning of gathered information internally, understanding it in the way it relates to themselves or their own understanding while Fe will evaluate the meaning of gathered information externally, understanding it in the way it relates to the world around them.

Ti and Te work similarly with use and application of information gathered.

Hence, since Fi and Ti are more depth instead of breadth, IP's especially tend to be very good with details and specific data in their area of strength whether it be use or meaning of information and how it applies to specific situation. (And since I'm an IJ and my Ji function is tertiary, I'm not as good with the details, but am better at the big picture. Right now I'm hoping I'm explaining this all well enough, because specific information isn't my forte.)

Emotions are something everyone has and whether they suppress or share them is a behavioral result from the way they've reasoned through experiences and acquired information.

To counter the distinctions of Fi and Fe you presented...

As an INFJ with auxiliary Fe, I don't like sharing my emotions and prefer to hold them back. My reasoning behind that is the realization that, in my mind, sharing feelings might be a burden to others who will have their own emotions and problems to deal with and that if I can handle and sort through them on my own, I should. I also understand what it means (and here's the heavy ni-Fe part) to be emotionally strong in our world, to be able to persevere through one's own limitations and setbacks. 

(As credit to my emotional and mental well-being, I've learned over time to confide in a few people when something becomes too much to bear alone, as I'm really NOT the only person in the world who genuinely wants to be a metaphorical, or literal, shoulder-to-cry-on when someone is in need of it. And it's pretty unhealthy to try to hold /everything/ in. We're only human.)

Edit:
As an extra note, I like solving problems too, especially math. Picking them apart, finding out how they work and the common threads that make them work. It's fun. And that's also when my tertiary Ti gets used the most.


----------



## Xzcouter (May 13, 2014)

@Kuzami @TyranAmiros

The one thing thats bothering me is the fact that Fi users is 'intuned' with their emotions. I never really understood this. But from my understanding is that they know how they feel and why.

I mean I know how I feel and why I feel the way I am (or atleast always come up with reasons why)

Fi vs Fe
Fi would speak more specific about the human and cant generalize all of humanity but Fe can.

Te vs Ti
Te can generalize logic and objects but Ti can't and needs to be specific

ENFP vs ENTP
ENTP would be much more focused onto idea based around logic and theories and would love to share and discuss new ideas and theories. NeTi is constantly thinking of new theories and patterns for example me always looking for new formulas and they are highly aware of it

ENFP would be much more focused onto ideas that are GOOD for people and would rather discuss about personal things rather than i ideas and theories. NeFi is constantly thinking of Good vs Bad and wanting to find things to add onto that list and develop it finding a pattern to easily come up with good vs bad later on

Both Types can be contemplative
Both Types can be good at Science its just that ENFPs wont put it as their main focus while ENTPs would.

ENTP looks for affirmation ,confirmation, acceptance and willing to discuss their ideas in order to further develop it and find any logical flaws in the idea.
ENFP looks for objectivity and only sees objects for their function and willing to discuss their ideas in order to seek moral truths.


----------



## TyranAmiros (Jul 7, 2014)

I wouldn't use the term "generalize" in terms of F or T--that's a concept better suited for N/S. 

What "extraverted" vs "introverted" mean in terms of the judging functions is about where the standards come from. Te/Fe finds its logic in external (extraverted) sources. Ti/Fi find their logic in one's own thought process. So a Te user looks for external standards, tests, and 'objective' logic, while a Ti user develops their own standards of coherence and whether it makes sense. An Fe user looks for external social norms and values, while an Fi user develops their own standards of ethics and social norms. 

Both ENTPs and ENFPs can be good scientists, but they'll approach science differently. ENTPs want to tackle problems and challenges (Ti) and don't like external pressures such as experimentation procedures and publications (No Te), while ENFPs wants to make sure their experiments and tests (Te) result in something useful at the end of the day (Fi).

Compare Lip from the US version of Shameless (ENTP) to Lorelai Gilmore from Gilmore Girls (ENFP). Or if you want the precis, compare Olive in Easy A (ENTP) with in Elle Woods Legally Blonde (ENFP). Pay attention to the Te in the ENFPs--Lorelai's relentless use of logic in arguing with her parents, Elle's legal skills. Also notice the Ti in the ENTPs--Lip's improvisation skills, Olive's extremely quirky logic.


----------



## Xzcouter (May 13, 2014)

TyranAmiros said:


> I wouldn't use the term "generalize" in terms of F or T--that's a concept better suited for N/S.
> 
> What "extraverted" vs "introverted" mean in terms of the judging functions is about where the standards come from. Te/Fe finds its logic in external (extraverted) sources. Ti/Fi find their logic in one's own thought process. So a Te user looks for external standards, tests, and 'objective' logic, while a Ti user develops their own standards of coherence and whether it makes sense. An Fe user looks for external social norms and values, while an Fi user develops their own standards of ethics and social norms.
> 
> ...


What can they classify as something 'useful' I mean should it have some kind or any kind of purpose in order to be useful.
For example they could be doing it for sake for gathering knowledge would that be considered useful? or does it really need to be a practical use? Would they see rediscovering ideas useful and by this I mean if there is already a solution out there vs you finding the solution yourself they are more inclined to find the already made solution rather making it on their own right?

A Ti user would love to build his own system/idea/concept but a Te user would prefer to get already made well established system/idea/concept rather than building one right?


----------



## TyranAmiros (Jul 7, 2014)

Xzcouter said:


> What can they classify as something 'useful' I mean should it have some kind or any kind of purpose in order to be useful.
> For example they could be doing it for sake for gathering knowledge would that be considered useful? or does it really need to be a practical use? Would they see rediscovering ideas useful and by this I mean if there is already a solution out there vs you finding the solution yourself they are more inclined to find the already made solution rather making it on their own right?
> 
> A Ti user would love to build his own system/idea/concept but a Te user would prefer to get already made well established system/idea/concept rather than building one right?


I mean it has to align with Fi, in support of Ne ideas. Watch the way Elle Woods uses the law in Legally Blonde. That's Te logic feeding into an Fi idealized framework.

I think you're setting up a lot of false dichotomies. There are lots of reasons for doing something beyond simply gathering knowledge (which is actually most associated with Si) and having a practical purpose (Se). For example, you could be engaging in a Te process for the sake of advancing a cause you support (That's Fi). NFPs do love gathering knowledge, but that knowledge must be in support of something greater. That's how Fi generally manifests. Scratch an ENFP and you find someone who has very strong notions of right and wrong and is willing to defend them using your own standards, not theirs. He'll demolish you with your own reasoning, while the ENTP simply argues that you were wrong because your definitions/terms are off. Like I'm doing to you  

I'm a bit unclear what your confusion is--if it's purely definitional, what about existing definitions is unclear? If it's how these functions manifest in practice, I encourage you to read/watch either real types in action or fictional characters, of which I've suggested quite a few. Personality is NOT as simple as Science=Te, as I've mentioned from the start. In particular, I think you keep transforming description into prediction--such as in the last sentence of your last response. No, Ti users don't necessarily love or want to build their own systems, but _that's what they do_. They may try do deny it the way a lot of SPs deny they need to be fully engaged, but descriptively, that's what that function is about. A Te user simply turns to externally valid sources. They can't help it. It's not always conscious. My ESTJ father doesn't even think before he asks what standards I'm using. I don't think before I start to categorize in my own way. I'd actually prefer to be a Te user (would be much easier in my field), but I'm not. Descriptively, Ti is what I use, not Te. 

Bottom line: in terms of your own personality, I'm really unclear about where the source of your confusion lies. You've pretty much been typed as xNTP from your first thread here--so, clearly a lot of us are seeing Ti, not Fi. I would strongly suggest getting a feel for the types by watching them in action, because I think that would answer some of your questions better than all the description in the world.


----------

