# INFJ or INTJ?



## PursuitofVikings (Sep 8, 2011)

Hi I am a 19 year old male. Now, I have taken the personality test in other places many times and I always came up as INFJ. Well I took it again and came up as INTJ on this website. If someone asked me, I would tell them I am an INFJ because I have always been the good guy that stood up for kids getting picked on.

I go to a good university, and study engineering. I go to the gym every day because I love the burn and I love the mental and physical strength it gives me.

Socially I am often considered arrogant but people still tend to like me and find me funny. I get lost in my own world (I am without a doubt a huge introvert) but I still go to parties and socialize as much as any other college student. 

I am less emotional now than I thought I was. I am very driven with my goals, and I see personal success mind and body to be the greatest accomplishment in life. I realize that I do not need anyone in order to be happy, only myself something that only occurred to me after letting go of trying to please people and instead work only for myself.

I have high standards for my friends and family. Sometimes they think I do not like them but really I am just disappointed in their shortcomings.

My greatest fear is failing to meet my goals. I do not fear death, and even though I do believe in peace I always dream of dying in some epic war like the movie 300.


----------



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

Sounds more INTJ.

Try and work out whether you use Te or Ti.

If you use Ti, you work things out for yourself without using external data (or not much external data) - you see it working in your own mind and you may distrust "experts" believing that someone having a qualification does not necessarily mean they aren't an idiot.  Meanwhile, a teenager on an internet forum could be correct, even if they go against the experts, so long as it sounds more plausible to *you*.

If you use Te, you are more likely to see things working externally. I don't understand Te too well, but I think it is more that you will see things in facts and external rules.

If you are either INFJ or INTJ you are an Ni-dom. I found this is very easy to understand, possibly because it is a theory formulated by another Ni-dom http://personalitycafe.com/cognitiv...ng-perspectives-truth-language-l-thomson.html

Try and find out through looking at that whether you use Ti or Te, or Fe or Fi - I thought the wood breaking example she gave was brilliant.

Te understands where the wood will break if you bend it at either side because a Te-user understands that x amount of force on one side and x amount of force on the other will put x amount of pressure on the wood.

A Ti user sees the wood breaking in their mind, like a video. Or they might just break the wood with their hands - they watch it happening and that's how they understand how it works. Or at least, that's the way it works for me.

This probably seems very vague to you but you might find it easier to look over that link.

If you are an INTJ, you use: Ni, Te, Fi, Se. If you are an INFJ, you use: Ni, Fe, Ti, Se.


----------



## PursuitofVikings (Sep 8, 2011)

From what I've read I do not feel like I have Te. I do not compartmentalize bits and pieces of info. I am more big-picture oriented. But at the same time I feel like I definitely have Fi. ???


----------



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

PursuitofVikings said:


> From what I've read I do not feel like I have Te. I do not compartmentalize bits and pieces of info. I am more big-picture oriented. But at the same time I feel like I definitely have Fi. ???


Hm....INTJs are still big picture thinkers, you see, because Ni is a very big picture mechanism and all of the functions compartmentalise in different ways - sorry if that's just thrown a spanner in the works, but maybe you could explain what you mean by compartmentalisation? 

I can see Fi in you, yes, that was why I initially said INTJ. The part I felt was Fi was that you feel disappointed in your family sometimes - which suggests they are not living up to your values. If you use Fi you by definition use Te, but you could be a feeler type with Te low down in the scale - like an INFP. 

But it's not really right of me to see Fi in one paragraph - it's not quite how it works - so why don't you explain to me. What relationship do you think you have with your value system?

Or rather, which sentence seems better to you? (even if you like both - if you HAD to choose one):
1) I must stay true to what I think is right and good and am uncomfortable compromising on this.
2) I want the people around me to feel comfortable and supported and for society to be equal - if this means compromise then I would prefer that.


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

Te isn't merely about compartmentalizing, though Ni-Te likes functional categorization (similar to "assume the object is circular" in physics problems). Mostly it is about dealing with the explicit data available. It's basically empiricism - you fit the theory to reality, rather than reality to the theory. Empirical evidence is held over logical consistence, Ti is vice versa - though both evidence and consistency can be valued.

If you are Ni-dom, you are big picture anyways.

Standing up to bullies doesn't make you an INFJ.

Commonly INFJ males mistype as INTJ due to social pressures, especially when they start developing their tertiary function, Ti. This is a possible option.

Reading up on the functions might help. So far, seems slightly more INTJ, but there is not enough info.


----------



## sanari (Aug 23, 2011)

How would you answer this question?

"What is the real value of a human being?"

This will provide us fodder to determine [according to us] what your type is. The more words you use, the easier it will be for us.


----------



## PursuitofVikings (Sep 8, 2011)

ukinfj said:


> Hm....INTJs are still big picture thinkers, you see, because Ni is a very big picture mechanism and all of the functions compartmentalise in different ways - sorry if that's just thrown a spanner in the works, but maybe you could explain what you mean by compartmentalisation?
> 
> I can see Fi in you, yes, that was why I initially said INTJ. The part I felt was Fi was that you feel disappointed in your family sometimes - which suggests they are not living up to your values. If you use Fi you by definition use Te, but you could be a feeler type with Te low down in the scale - like an INFP.
> 
> ...


Man that's a tough question for me. I think I would pick the first one because under certain circumstances I would compromise but I wouldn't like it. I would still do it though


----------



## PursuitofVikings (Sep 8, 2011)

sanari said:


> How would you answer this question?
> 
> "What is the real value of a human being?"
> 
> This will provide us fodder to determine [according to us] what your type is. The more words you use, the easier it will be for us.


I believe that all human's have a right to life and equal opportunity. But having said that I believe some people are more in balance with the universe or "enlightened" if that is what you want to call it. These people feel fear just like anyone, but they do not allow it to stop them from doing the right thing. They are not doormats or pushovers. They always have at least one goal during the span of their life and are willing to fight to achieve it no matter how long it takes or how difficult it is to accomplish. Failure is not something that they fear, no matter what the consequence. As long as it is the right thing to do they will attempt it. 

Obviously these are very high standards. I don't know anyone who lives up to all of these, but I have respect for those who try to. Essentially my "value" on a human being is how much respect I have for them.


----------



## Jessy Lashway (Jun 11, 2011)

I was going to say that you are an INTJ, based on your first post. However, after your answer to Sanari's question, I have little doubt that you an INFJ. All the talk of "right thing" and "fear" coupled with respect led me to believe so. 

To me, right and wrong are generally what an F talks about, whereas a T concerns his or herself with what is and is not.


----------



## sanari (Aug 23, 2011)

I vote INFJ as well.


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

I think we can concern ourselves with right and wrong also, particularly the enneagram ones, but the _way_ they are talked about here is sounding less and less INTJ.


----------



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

It doesn't sound particularly INFJ to me either, though. The way they are talked about sounds very Fi to me. 

Have you looked into other options? If I had to choose between INFJ and INTJ I'd still go for INTJ on the way that you are speaking about morals and values - they are quite different, I think, from an INFJ standpoint. 

I think that you would like to think of yourself, and try to be, committed to your values and fighting for them but you can get disappointed in those who don't match up. This is moral perfectionism, which could come with Fi or Fe, but......

Hm. Ok, let me try this. 

You have a friend you really, really like. One day you find out he is stealing other people's coats from parties. Not because he is a kleptomaniac or there is any valid reason to, just because he enjoys the thrill.

What do you think of this friend now?


----------



## Metaplanar (Apr 2, 2011)

ukinfj said:


> You have a friend you really, really like. One day you find out he is stealing other people's coats from parties. Not because he is a kleptomaniac or there is any valid reason to, just because he enjoys the thrill.
> 
> What do you think of this friend now?


Hm, I don't think this question really separates INTJs and INFJs. The reasoning behind the answer _might_, but I'm not even sure about that.


* *




"He's still my friend and I like him":
INTJ: As long as he doesn't steal from me/my other friends, it doesn't concern me.
INFJ: I don't want to lose the friendship, so I better pretend I don't care.

"How can he do something horrible like that? I must stop associating with him if he doesn't change":
INTJ: Stealing is _wrong_: He doesn't even need those coats for survival, so this goes against my inner moral compass. If I tolerate this, I'm indirectly involved, and I can't stand that.
INFJ: Stealing is _wrong_: Those coats are the property of other people and they're unhappy when they get stolen. He causes unnecessary grief and doesn't even feel guilty for that, I don't want to associate with such a person.

Perhaps? But I think the line is probably blurry.




Try this instead: Imagine you're on a busy beach and some salesman with tourist crap is walking up to you. Which reaction is the better one:

- Smile and agree to look at his stuff if he insists, even if you aren't interested: at least you show him a friendly face and perhaps make his day a little brighter that way/don't cause unnessecary bad feelings. That's not an easy job and you don't want to make it harder by being unfriendly.
- Immediately make it very clear you aren't interested, don't make eye contact, don't smile. You don't want to waste his time, after all he can use it better by showing his stuff to someone who might actually buy something.


----------



## ukinfj (Apr 15, 2011)

@Metaplanar Hm, perhaps you're right, although I would act in neither way in my situation and I would suggest your situation might not separate Fi or Fe either, as an INFP would act like the first example so as not to hurt people's feelings. I think this is going to be very difficult to just separate Fe and Fi from other functions isn't it?

But in the first situation, which I have been in, I tend to believe that stealing is wrong but not judge the person by it. My understanding was that Fi will judge a person "bad" if they have acted immorally, even if they previously liked the person (is this not correct) Whereas I usually see the person as a whole myriad of things and will not really judge them by one portion of their character. If they are nice and good to be around and in many ways generally a lovely person but they do something utterly idiotic and selfish as the person described, I will not want to talk about it with them or I might say I don't think they should be doing it but I will remain friends with them and not really change my opinion of their character. I'd be irritated, I guess, that they would do something immoral, but it wouldn't actually change my feelings toward them. 

But I don't know. Perhaps I have not understood Fe/Fi well - though it can't be so polarised as one or the other, I suppose, we must be on a spectrum that it wouldn't be possible to put entirely in one camp or another.


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

I don't think Fi is that black and white, no.

But there is a line that, once crossed, you are an asshole - however, there is a huge area of grey before you get there. With INFPs it can come off more as 'bad person'; INTJs would probably have dismissed the person for other reasons before it ever got to that point, as not on the same wavelength, or not a useful/compatible acquantanceship.

Perhaps a question that might work:
When there is a miscommunication and someone is hurt because they misinterpreted something:
Ignoring the issues of apologies, assuming that is dealt with, which solution is best?:
Do you think that the speaker has to change how they talk to suit the other?
Or do you think that the speaker should explain and the offended one change their understanding of the situation?
Which do you think is easier, more natural? I've noticed the default assumptions _tend_ to be divided by type.


----------



## MoonLight (Apr 15, 2010)

Metaplanar said:


> Try this instead: Imagine you're on a busy beach and some salesman with tourist crap is walking up to you. Which reaction is the better one:
> 
> - Smile and agree to look at his stuff if he insists, even if you aren't interested: at least you show him a friendly face and perhaps make his day a little brighter that way/don't cause unnessecary bad feelings. That's not an easy job and you don't want to make it harder by being unfriendly.
> - Immediately make it very clear you aren't interested, don't make eye contact, don't smile. You don't want to waste his time, after all he can use it better by showing his stuff to someone who might actually buy something.


I'm an INFJ and I would do the second one (maybe a little smile and no thanks if he/she wasn't aggressive in the approach). 

It is possible the OP is an INFJ with enneagram type 1 (possible wing 9) from what was mentioned about his values and high stardards.


----------



## MoonLight (Apr 15, 2010)

lirulin said:


> I don't think Fi is that black and white, no.
> 
> But there is a line that, once crossed, you are an asshole - however, there is a huge area of grey before you get there. With INFPs it can come off more as 'bad person'; INTJs would probably have dismissed the person for other reasons before it ever got to that point, as not on the same wavelength, or not a useful/compatible acquantanceship.
> 
> ...


The Fe-user will use words that communicate the meaning better for the other person but if a miscommunication happens then they try to mediate by doing what the second one suggested.

Does anyone have a clear Ni-Te versus Ni-Fe example without taking each function alone?


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

MoonLight said:


> The Fe-user will use words that communicate the meaning better for the other person but if a miscommunication happens then they try to mediate by doing what the second one suggested.
> 
> Does anyone have a clear Ni-Te versus Ni-Fe example without taking each function alone?


Exactly, they would prefer the first way.
Though we both can move past first instincts to do the other.
INTJs are often forced to change the way we talk, since others aren't interested in understanding.

I'm not sure there really _is_ a way to look at a function in a vacuum, beyond basic definitions...


----------



## MoonLight (Apr 15, 2010)

^ Yes I agree, I meant to avoid the miscommunication in the first place that way but if it happens then the second solution is applied.

Ok for the OP, if you don't mind sharing how do you deal with the distress of a loved one not only how you act outwardly but how do you feel towards the distress?

Another one do you wish your values to apply to everyone? Not only do you personally follow your values but everyone else has to have them too? Like fairness, equality, respect, honesty, etc. (I mean universal ethics here)


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

MoonLight said:


> ^ Yes I agree, I meant to avoid the miscommunication in the first place that way but if it happens then the second solution is applied.


I wouldn't agree entirely. In my experience, many first tell others (often not directly, but it happens) to talk differently because they find their way is offensive, impolite, violates a social standard, etc. Like what you said about everyone having to have their values. Many times one has to point out that if you consider the issue from the context of the speaker's _values_, it may not be wrong to them. I was unclear in my setup, sorry - I was talking more of a values issue and when it is a values issue, I don't find Fe is so quick to consider the situation according to another's _values_ - though according to the other's _feelings _will not be so hard. When it is only about the latter, the mediation will probably go as you described it. Is that more clear? Either way though, there is more focus on adjusting to the audience personally where Ni-Te adjust to the content.


----------



## Ephemerald (Aug 27, 2011)

Human beings are valueless. They're complex with unique attributes, yes, but isn't everything?

It just makes for an occasionally, enjoyable distraction (i.e. not thinking about it).

What am I?


----------



## Metaplanar (Apr 2, 2011)

ukinfj said:


> @_Metaplanar_ Hm, perhaps you're right, although I would act in neither way in my situation and I would suggest your situation might not separate Fi or Fe either, as an INFP would act like the first example so as not to hurt people's feelings. I think this is going to be very difficult to just separate Fe and Fi from other functions isn't it?


I never claimed that this is the difference between Fi and Fe. Maybe tertiary Fi and secondary Fe. Maybe only in combination with leading Ni? It turned out to work more often than not in another thread, but obviously there are exceptions.

Like this.


MoonLight said:


> I'm an INFJ and I would do the second one (maybe a little smile and no thanks if he/she wasn't aggressive in the approach).


Continuation: Assume it works. Would you then feel slightly bad for having disappointed the salesman/maybe having appeared to be impolite when thinking about it, or should the salesman be grateful for not having to waste time with another uninterested person?
(Though considering the addition in the brackets, it probably wouldn't work at all...he/she is pretty aggressive in the approach)



> But in the first situation, which I have been in, I tend to believe that stealing is wrong but not judge the person by it. My understanding was that Fi will judge a person "bad" if they have acted immorally, even if they previously liked the person (is this not correct)


No, that's making it too simple. Fi is about personal values, so not every Fi-user will find stealing equally bad. And even then, not the person is bad, but the behavior. The person still has good traits, but depending on how bad stealing is considered to be, they might be overshadowed. Tolerating the immoral behavior makes the Fi-user part of it, and if it does violate their values enough, a Fi-user will not be comfortable with that - so if the thief doesn't change, the friendship is pretty much doomed, either because the Fi-user can't let go until the thief promises to stop being bad or because the Fi-user is uncomfortable around the thief, making things awkward, not keeping in contact, etc. until the friendship dissolves.



> Whereas I usually see the person as a whole myriad of things and will not really judge them by one portion of their character. If they are nice and good to be around and in many ways generally a lovely person but they do something utterly idiotic and selfish as the person described, I will not want to talk about it with them or I might say I don't think they should be doing it but I will remain friends with them and not really change my opinion of their character. I'd be irritated, I guess, that they would do something immoral, but it wouldn't actually change my feelings toward them.


Which basically puts you into the INFJ section of my first paragraph. The friendship is so important to you that you decided to ignore that facet for the sake of keeping social connections intact, even if you still believe it is a bad thing to do and not morally justifiable.


----------



## MoonLight (Apr 15, 2010)

lirulin said:


> I wouldn't agree entirely. In my experience, many first tell others (often not directly, but it happens) to talk differently because they find their way is offensive, impolite, violates a social standard, etc. Like what you said about everyone having to have their values. Many times one has to point out that if you consider the issue from the context of the speaker's _values_, it may not be wrong to them. I was unclear in my setup, sorry - I was talking more of a values issue and when it is a values issue, I don't find Fe is so quick to consider the situation according to another's _values_ - though according to the other's _feelings _will not be so hard. When it is only about the latter, the mediation will probably go as you described it. Is that more clear? Either way though, there is more focus on adjusting to the audience personally where Ni-Te adjust to the content.


Ok let's see if I got it, sometimes putting ideas in words does not comes so smoothly. I answered your situation on a different premise than what you presented (the miscommunication already happened) rather I presented a preventive solution to a possible miscommunication then fixing the problem if it occurred. So I didn't really answer the exact context you presented. So when I noticed I didn't do that I agreed with you that yes it is possible for the Fe-user to answer the context by preferring one over another. 

As for Fe-users sometimes don't consider the values of the other person from the person's perspective but how this might affect the feelings instead (if I understood correctly) then yes I can see the difference indeed and this might cause the person to act in a different way. I suppose because Fe is objective considering the values of another goes to the background and general ones come to the surface, though I think this does differ between types even if they use Fe and how they express it. If we are considering a "thinker" who uses Fe in this would they too consider it the same way or an S type (I sure don't express Fe like an ISFJ/ESFJ)? From my position I would react to the distress of the other person because I can clearly see it and want to end it. I need to mull this over some more.


----------



## MoonLight (Apr 15, 2010)

Metaplanar said:


> I
> Continuation: Assume it works. Would you then feel slightly bad for having disappointed the salesman/maybe having appeared to be impolite when thinking about it, or should the salesman be grateful for not having to waste time with another uninterested person?
> (Though considering the addition in the brackets, it probably wouldn't work at all...he/she is pretty aggressive in the approach)


 
Ok, if my reaction was harsh (they were a aggressive) I may feel bad that I was a bit more harsh than needed and would consider being less harsh in the future but will still act the same.

If he/she was not aggressive then no I would just move on. I did it yesterday to several ones in shops. I go in shop, one comes to help I say “no thanks I’m just looking” because I hate when they start to lump things on you to buy when I just want to look for what I want and if I find it I ask for help if not I leave the shop.

Though I do think this is because of my enneagram type and might not apply to other INFJs. 

This link was to me and it was helpful, type 1:



> When planning to make a purchase, do you ignore the person who tries to give you a sales pitch and look for someone who will give you the information you need and let you make up your own mind?


Hurley & Dobson Questions


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

MoonLight said:


> As for Fe-users sometimes don't consider the values of the other person from the person's perspective but how this might affect the feelings instead (if I understood correctly) then yes I can see the difference indeed and this might cause the person to act in a different way. I suppose because Fe is objective considering the values of another goes to the background and general ones come to the surface, though I think this does differ between types even if they use Fe and how they express it.


Yes, it's similar to Te, which considers the sort of general/mutual reality (or, as we see it o_bjective_, because, since everyone can access it, things can be tested and verified) rather than the individual realities (which we don't tend to see as realities at all, but rather perspectives on the objective reality). For either Fe or Te, when there is something mutual/objective, there is a tendency to start with that & work with it - possibly irritating Fi and Ti that don't necessarily agree/share the values/reality. The instinctive reaction is to go for the external/shared/mutual/objective, often forgetting/ignoring that it _isn't _shared. Or not really valuing the idea of it being unshared. A personal reality to Te seems empty and arrogant and nonsensical; I presume unshared values appear similarly to Fe.



MoonLight said:


> If we are considering a "thinker" who uses Fe in this would they too consider it the same way or an S type (I sure don't express Fe like an ISFJ/ESFJ)? From my position I would react to the distress of the other person because I can clearly see it and want to end it. I need to mull this over some more.


I think Si/Ni might affect the perspective on it? Both see the 'mutual' values, but Si sees their justification in working in the past, tradition, etc. and Ni more for future effect, something like that? This is a guess, merely.
Most Ts with Fe would have it lower so there would be a higher extraverted function - Se or Ne - that would be the higher extraverted function & that would reach out, and Ti would handle more of the valuing. Making sure things are logically consistent comes higher than compromising but there is still the idea of 'general'/'shared' values underlies it. I think.


----------



## Carola (Apr 26, 2011)

Metaplanar said:


> Which basically puts you into the INFJ section of my first paragraph. The friendship is so important to you that you decided to ignore that facet for the sake of keeping social connections intact, even if you still believe it is a bad thing to do and not morally justifiable.


Between me and a supposed Fi dom fried it worked in reverse.
He said that if he love someone doesn't count what he does because what is important is the ''essence ''of the person and the love he has toward the person.It is not important what the person do but the love.

For me , if a person do something bad , that's all.I don't dismiss him , but i Need an ''objective'', a detached vision of the person, not only a personal sentimental idealization. Then , i don't assume that i know the ''essence'' (does it exist?) of the person , i have to constantly change my assumptions to have an idea of that person. That doesn't mean that my love will be influenced by this , anyway.
I think , in my case is not Fe , some other fuction , i don't know. 

I assumed that he was Fi because his accent is on the intrisic value of the person . The value that he can see in that person.This is a personal thing , it is not important the objective (actions).To me that seems a strongly idealized vision of Love.As if the actual person disappear behind the personal love.

What do you think about this?


----------



## Metaplanar (Apr 2, 2011)

<--obviously not Fi dominant.

Actions and the reasoning behind them are the only visible effects of a person's "essence". Obviously, the picture we have of others can be flawed, and needs to be adjusted when conflicting information comes in (usually in the form of actions and words). No single (real) person is entirely good or bad.
In any case, I usually assume that my friends (as well as most other sensible people) don't find it fun to steal other's coats at parties. If it turns out they do, I obviously had a wrong idea about them. To say "Oh, but that's ok because I love them" would be really stupid. I have to readjust the picture I have of them, then decide if I actually do love them or if I was only attached to an illusion.


----------



## Carola (Apr 26, 2011)

Ok thanks for the answer.

Anyway he seemed to me an Fi dom for a lot of reasons ( feelings are the most important part of him in his own vision ,in tune with his emotions , adversion for logical view of reality , strongly empathetic, values derived from personal reasoning and experience ,he was constantly saying to me that i made he feel bad , or good or whatever etc).

I think that he feared the idea of revaluation itself because it could affect himself negatively:he has serious self esteem problems. He was scared by the idea to be dismissed by others.That's only my evaluation anyway.


----------



## MoonLight (Apr 15, 2010)

lirulin said:


> Yes, it's similar to Te, which considers the sort of general/mutual reality (or, as we see it o_bjective_, because, since everyone can access it, things can be tested and verified) rather than the individual realities (which we don't tend to see as realities at all, but rather perspectives on the objective reality). For either Fe or Te, when there is something mutual/objective, there is a tendency to start with that & work with it - possibly irritating Fi and Ti that don't necessarily agree/share the values/reality. The instinctive reaction is to go for the external/shared/mutual/objective, often forgetting/ignoring that it _isn't _shared. Or not really valuing the idea of it being unshared. A personal reality to Te seems empty and arrogant and nonsensical; I presume unshared values appear similarly to Fe.


 
Exactly, I wanted to mention this today but you mentioned it first. A person with Fi may realize that others values may differ than theirs and consider this during any interaction. A Ti-user may see that people have their own ways of making sense of things and take it into account. Now, I'm not saying ones with Fe or Te would not be able to do the same thing but as a default behavior the realization might not be clear to them, at least at first. Can it also be viewed it this way?




lirulin said:


> I think Si/Ni might affect the perspective on it? Both see the 'mutual' values, but Si sees their justification in working in the past, tradition, etc. and Ni more for future effect, something like that? This is a guess, merely.
> Most Ts with Fe would have it lower so there would be a higher extraverted function - Se or Ne - that would be the higher extraverted function & that would reach out, and Ti would handle more of the valuing. Making sure things are logically consistent comes higher than compromising but there is still the idea of 'general'/'shared' values underlies it. I think.


 

Functions work together and even though some types may share similar functions that doesn't mean the outcome may be the same. As in the case of ISFJs/INFJs (both Fe and Ti are shared). In this thread the difference between the expression of Fe is different in connection to Si or Ni. ISFJs need a concrete experience that happened to them or ones they know to empathize with other people which is not the case with Ni. Also, I have an anecdote that happened between me and an ISFJ. I may adhere to ethical standards but traditions and social norms mean practically nothing to me. I may follow a tradition if I see use in it or out of respect for cultural purposes, which is not the case with ISFJs. I was at a funeral and changed my seat several times because some elders came in and sat in it and because it was painful to sit in it. I moved and sat beside an ISFJ who is a family friend who suddenly in a low voice berated me: "Why did you move out of your seat?!"


Me: "Huh? (in my mind who cares where I sit? Is there some social norm I have to sit beside my sister? That's absurd? What is the point?). Of course that didn’t come out that way so using Fe (she is my mother's age and her friend) I said "Well, because someone sat in it" in an *are you kidding me* tone of voice though. I'm not sure about other INFJs but I think such things are not remembered or taking into account when using our Fe. 

This is why I asked before if there is a clear example of Ni-Te vs Ni-Fe because the expression would be different and maybe be clear for others to know their type.


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

MoonLight said:


> Exactly, I wanted to mention this today but you mentioned it first. A person with Fi may realize that others values may differ than theirs and consider this during any interaction. A Ti-user may see that people have their own ways of making sense of things and take it into account. Now, I'm not saying ones with Fe or Te would not be able to do the same thing but as a default behavior the realization might not be clear to them, at least at first. Can it also be viewed it this way?


Yes, I think that is a good way to explain it also.



MoonLight said:


> Functions work together and even though some types may share similar functions that doesn't mean the outcome may be the same. As in the case of ISFJs/INFJs (both Fe and Ti are shared). In this thread the difference between the expression of Fe is different in connection to Si or Ni. ISFJs need a concrete experience that happened to them or ones they know to empathize with other people which is not the case with Ni. Also, I have an anecdote that happened between me and an ISFJ. I may adhere to ethical standards but traditions and social norms mean practically nothing to me. I may follow a tradition if I see use in it or out of respect for cultural purposes, which is not the case with ISFJs. I was at a funeral and changed my seat several times because some elders came in and sat in it and because it was painful to sit in it. I moved and sat beside an ISFJ who is a family friend who suddenly in a low voice berated me: "Why did you move out of your seat?!"
> 
> Me: "Huh? (in my mind who cares where I sit? Is there some social norm I have to sit beside my sister? That's absurd? What is the point?). Of course that didn’t come out that way so using Fe (she is my mother's age and her friend) I said "Well, because someone sat in it" in an *are you kidding me* tone of voice though. I'm not sure about other INFJs but I think such things are not remembered or taking into account when using our Fe.
> 
> This is why I asked before if there is a clear example of Ni-Te vs Ni-Fe because the expression would be different and maybe be clear for others to know their type.


Yeah, it is probably true that it is expressed more through standard social norms with the Si. From the outside I wouldn't see the differences as clearly as you would, because, honestly, a lot of imposing Fe on the outside world still looks like a social norm to me, even if it isn't, well, 'normal.' Just the idea that we all have to adapt to it to make things 'run smoother' - whether this is the way it has 'always' functioned or not - is kind of the same thing to me. It is adjusting to some generalised idea rather than a negotiation of individuals. I don't think, therefore, that I could explain the differences as well as some.


----------



## Blazing_Glitter (Sep 13, 2011)

I'm guessing INTJ.


----------



## MoonLight (Apr 15, 2010)

lirulin said:


> Yes, I think that is a good way to explain it also.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, it is probably true that it is expressed more through standard social norms with the Si. From the outside I wouldn't see the differences as clearly as you would, because, honestly, a lot of imposing Fe on the outside world still looks like a social norm to me, even if it isn't, well, 'normal.' Just the idea that we all have to adapt to it to make things 'run smoother' - whether this is the way it has 'always' functioned or not - is kind of the same thing to me. It is adjusting to some generalised idea rather than a negotiation of individuals. I don't think, therefore, that I could explain the differences as well as some.


Hmm, yes it is not obvious if one is not actively looking for the difference. Actually, when I started to see some behaviors through the combination of functions they made more sense than when I was linking them to just one function.

Thanks


----------

