# How did you determine your dominant function?



## pwowq (Aug 7, 2016)

Fried Eggz said:


> I don't think I've come across a single test that was even remotely good at typing people who aren't walking stereotypes. That's the problem with tests; they are ultimately just a list of stereotypes that you say yes or no to.


People are also afraid of labels and many will actively deny them even if it is correct. It's a mindset I will never understand.


----------



## Falling Foxes (Oct 19, 2016)

pwowq said:


> People are also afraid of labels and many will actively deny them even if it is correct. It's a mindset I will never understand.


Sometimes labels just don't fit. I'm not sure why people who are afraid of labels are in the mbti-typing community though.

But then I'm saying this to an ST who's obviously going to favour logic over "but there are so many possibilities!" attitudes NFs have. XD


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

I Don't mind labels to much but not a fan of labels. It's when people try to put themselves into a box is what can erk me if the person wants to be in a box fine then I'll give them some tape to seal it if thats what they really want. 
As far as test and such go a big part is that box the more people loosely read about the labels the more the will pick whatever fits in that box no matter if it is properly defined or not. For instance I posted Socionics definitions of INFj once and considering the majority was unaware that the equivalent to the definitions I posted was a MBTI INFP. Needles to say the confusion when they found out little later on....instead of clinging on to who they are they grabbed on to the box.
Same thing happens a lot when people take a typology or MBTI test and study for it

Typology to me is like the Matrix code "I don’t even see the code. All I see is blonde, brunette, red-head."


----------



## Ozymandias116 (Nov 24, 2016)

I think I'm in the same spot as you, however a couple of days ago I started to think about my childhood so that I in an easier way could try to figure out my dominant function; I've seen people suggest this as a method (both in this thread and in other places) and I think that approach makes sense. 

I think one of my cousins described our dynamic like this "You were the one who came up with the ideas and who did all the stupid shit, I just tagged along.". I know that I, as a kid, did a lot of shit that I wasn't supposed to do, got a lot of impulses/ideas, came up with worlds and although I enjoyed hanging out with people I had no problems doing things or playing by myself. I also know that my parents thought I probably would die before I turned six because I always hurt myself; all of this makes me think that my dominant function most likely is a perceiving function and an extroverted one. Correct me if I'm wrong but I've come to think that the perceiving functions are the way you take in the world, if you have an extroverted one you do it by engaging with the world and if you have an introverted one you do it by observing it. 

Thought I would join in and maybe get some feedback.


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

INFJenNiFer said:


> My twin brother! Long time no see! I see you are yet again confused about your personality type.
> 
> I still think you're an INFJ though lol
> 
> ...


Hello twin sister >_< Long time no see indeed!
Yep, still confused, although much more certain that I'm an INFJ (it took a lot of introspection though).
There are a number of reasons that made me unsure:
1-The fact that I've seen lots of older threads where people have said "Yep, I'm sure this is my type" while their type currently is different, which implies that no matter how sure you are, there is still room for doubt.
2-The fact that lots of Ni dominants in here (and other forums, especially the INTJ forum) are described as prophets. I remember that someone in the INTJ forum said that he was driving in a foggy road (that he had never been to) and he "intuitively" knew that there was an obstacle in front of him, thus preventing an accidents. He explained this by saying that he was an Ni dominant (Stupid, I know :/).
Also, some others say that they think in patterns, that they feel Godly things etc. 
So I guess I don't have a real explanation of what Ni is. If it is all about changing perspectives, finding meaning etc, thats just like me, if it means being a prophet, it is not me at all.
3-The way I see Fe --> 



I know, stereotypes >_<

Would you mind giving your opinion on my new questionnaire?


----------



## Blackbear (Feb 10, 2014)

I'm still not sure of being INFJ and I don't I ever will be because I change moods often, and maybe the influence of my parents and chaotic childhood is a part as well. But INFJ was my first result when I met the MBTI and also is the place I go to figuratively speaking, when I'm angry, scared, anything. 
The door-slam is a HUGE problem for me. Maybe bc of my abusive dad, but I doorslam people all the time. I'm happy with it as well. 
It helps people get their place and know what they can and cannot do. 
Also at work I just close of someone crosses my boundaries. 
I certainly have Ni-Fe-Ti-Se but still doubting to be ENFP because travelling is my life goal. Also doubting for ENFJ because when travelling I am very extroverted and can go on for days and never get tired of people (I love hostels).
I hate to be alone and prefer to be with people. Only I also have "visions" and a strong intuition - I know things before others do. 
I am very manipulative, which led me to being ENFJ - but ENFJ doesn't "Fit", I AM not that, I do not "feel" being ENFJ/ENFP. INFJ fits me well and also when I was a child. 
I mean I have always been "different" somehow - I saw more than others. Also always had dreams, visions, I could foresee the future, I could "read" people's minds, I just "knew". So I think this is best. 
So the struggle is real. But maybe that is all just part of being a human being, with having different moods but the core is not the mood. 
- ok end of story  

BTW if anyone wants to share their opinion you're very welcome! I'd love to hear it. For me it's all just a chaotic mess haha. I cannot conclude anything and then I see another side again and convince myself I'm not what I decided before


----------



## INFJenNiFer (Feb 20, 2016)

Bitterself said:


> Hello twin sister >_< Long time no see indeed!
> Yep, still confused, although much more certain that I'm an INFJ (it took a lot of introspection though).
> There are a number of reasons that made me unsure:
> 1-The fact that I've seen lots of older threads where people have said "Yep, I'm sure this is my type" while their type currently is different, which implies that no matter how sure you are, there is still room for doubt.
> ...


https://www.infjs.com/threads/infp-vs-infj-a-functional-analysis.14424/

http://www.typologycentral.com/foru...gnitive-function-analysis-simulatedworld.html

I think the links explain quite well what Ni and Fe are.

But Ni doesn't always mean predicting the future. Argh. Though somehow lately I'm more relaxed because... I always believe everything will be alright in the end? IDK maybe it's not related to type.

https://www.infjs.com/threads/infj-subtypes-intuitive-ni-infjs-and-ethical-fe-infjs.23733/

I'll look at your questionnaire later.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Stevester (Feb 28, 2016)

*Me reading what Ni is:* - You have super powers, you can guess what people are thinking, you can anticipate their moves, manipulate them through mind games, push objects with your thoughts. You are part of the 1% that is a superior race of humans

_
''OMG! That is SOOOOOOOO me, finally makes sense now! ''_



*Me then reading Si:* - You're a conservative lamoid, who's too anxious to make any kind of change in your life so you just protect yourself in routine and no one will miss you when you die because your chances of impacting thew world are literally 0.00000000001%

_''Ooh..........crap! No, if I'm honest with myself, this one is much more accurate :/ ''_


----------



## pwowq (Aug 7, 2016)

Moody, atm. 



Stevester said:


> *Me reading what Ni is:* - You have super powers, you can guess what people are thinking, you can anticipate their moves, manipulate them through mind games, push objects with your thoughts. You are part of the 1% that is a superior race of humans
> 
> _
> ''OMG! That is SOOOOOOOO me, finally makes sense now! ''_


Might as well be a Ti-Se with a severe interest in people interacting in social settings.



Stevester said:


> *Me then reading Si:* - You're a conservative lamoid, who's too anxious to make any kind of change in your life so you just protect yourself in routine and no one will miss you when you die because your chances of impacting thew world are literally 0.00000000001%
> 
> _''Ooh..........crap! No, if I'm honest with myself, this one is much more accurate :/ ''_


Or a Ti-dom which hasn't learned how the world functions.


----------



## Ksara (Feb 13, 2014)

myjazz said:


> That sounds lot like Fi/Ne...actually thats just like Fi/Ne


If I am using Fi in a dominant position, to be consistent with Jung's ideas there would be mental effort exerterted with feeling through or reflection to determine what is important to me or what values I hold. 

This is not my default mindset. Often I wait and have a sense of knowing which step to take next or where certain thoughts or feelings have originated from within. I am not reflecting nor feeling through, rather just aware, suggesting the judgment made is somewhat unconcious (not dominant). This to me is consistent with Jungs idea of the irrational type.

I have only just learnt to recognize my emotional responses have some connection to values and what these values are (this could be thinking as I am discerning and identifying what they are). The more interesting development is recognising the importance they have in my life for myself and considering making decisions based on this (to me suggests the development of feeling). This development has occured early 20s, a period which has been more stressful than usual.

Ne, I can see this when I perceive connections between objects. I am not always good at reading between the lines however.
I am well aware of making connections to my own inner images, following where the inner objects in my mind have come from/are going and have a tedency to project this to understand others. I also have a sense of how events will play out, moreso than focusing on all the possible outcomes. This seems closer to Ni than Ne.

I am taking a more Jungian perspective. Modern function descriptions can differ. MBTI again can be different.


----------



## crazitaco (Apr 9, 2010)

I think that introverted feeling tends to be very "self aware" of its own existence, in a way. It's like your mind "breaks the fourth wall" of itself. You know you are forming an opinion and know how you're feeling at every given moment, both physically and emotionally, because its there telling you how you feel. Well, if its _developed_ it directly tells you how you feel. If not, such as when you're young, then Fi can seemingly come out of the blue, like an encrypted message from outer space. It takes years of developing Fi and trial/error introspection to learn the code so to speak, and how to "decrypt" it. It's sorta like trying to learning your own personal language in a way, I guess. You start out not understanding and it seems like gibberish at first, but with time and _practice_ eventually you become fluent at understanding yourself.

So basically, uh, feels is how I determined it.


----------



## Santa Gloss (Feb 23, 2015)

A friend who likes MBTI declared me a Ne dom. I resisted. I wasn't given a choice. I've been a prisoner of my type ever since. 

Jokes aside, I've heard that people closest to you can can guess your type better than you can because your dominant function is so instinctive.


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

Santa Gloss said:


> A friend who likes MBTI declared me a Ne dom. I resisted. I wasn't given a choice. I've been a prisoner of my type ever since.
> 
> Jokes aside, I've heard that people closest to you can can guess your type better than you can because your dominant function is so instinctive.


Hmmm... Not sure if any of my friends know that MBTI even exists. Is typing based on written language as effective as the spoken one?


----------



## Santa Gloss (Feb 23, 2015)

Bitterself said:


> Hmmm... Not sure if any of my friends know that MBTI even exists. Is typing based on written language as effective as the spoken one?


I have absolutely no idea :/

I tend to "break" every test I take by getting incorrect results (xNTJ mostly and occasionally xNTP). The only thing they get right consistently is N. But this particular one worked well for me. It's a self typing test. http://personalitycafe.com/whats-my...ive-scenario-questionnaire-2-0-self-type.html That's when I became convinced that I am an ENFP.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

Ksara said:


> Now I find many ideas/conclusions I come to tend not to be 'derived' from what I am aware of. There isn't a rigorous thought process passing through filters to determine what something is or what something is worth. Often the content that comes to mind are 'given'. I can 'think through' to an answer, but find I am less confident in the conclusion I arrive at and often end up with more questions than when I started. This suggests I have an irrational mindset over a rational one thus leaves Ni and Si on the table.


Reason's I said this could also be described as Fi/Ne

Feeling Judgment is not a rigorous thought process...that will be Thinking Judgment.
The way you stated while thinking through to a answer and only end up with more questions can be also described as Ne mixed with the Thinking through process.

Feeling and Thinking is both Rational not because there is a rigorous rational thought process. But because there is a Reason behind Feeling and Thinking. Unlike Perceiving which is Irrational because there is not coherent reason just the answer or whatever is perceived.
In order to get or explain the reason behind Feeling either it be Fi/Fe it goes through a thought process.

I am just saying the way you worded this can be very much taken as Fi/Ne thinking through


----------



## Afterburner (Jan 8, 2013)

The summary answer is through a combination of
(1) reading about the types and functions;
(2) constant reflection on them and how they fit and don't with my self-perception/analysis;
(3) an experienced outside observer explaining to me what she saw me as (INTP); and
(4) maturing enough (a) for my thought patterns to stabilize and (b) to reflect on myself and the functions with more precision.

All of that is/was important, but the critical point for me was (3). I thought I was an INTJ for maybe a year or so until someone said they saw me as closer to INTP and explained it to me functionally. Once I started looking into things along those lines, INTP and Ti(-Ne) fit very well. Realized after that that I didn't have a good understanding of the functions and that it's easy to mistype if you prematurely commit to a type and then read everything through that presumption or desire. Things can fit pretty smoothly when you mistype because of how ambiguous so much of this is. (Another issue is that I and some other people who type themselves as INTP on here consistently test and exhibit pretty high Te, which can be taken as fitting INTJ. This may also be the case for other types' aux. functions and their opposite attitude, but I'm not sure.)
[HR][/HR]
An online friend said that your dom. function is like the smell of your home. I don't quite like that analogy because you can become aware of your dom. function in a way that doesn't occur with the smell of your home (you usually stop smelling it pretty fast and only do again once you leave for a long enough time and return). But it does get at the more important observation, which is that when the process is occurring, it is very familiar, safe. It's "the given"; it happens reflexively and appears omnipresent and so slips from conscious attention often.

What I learned in analyzing myself through the functions is that you really need to focus on particular experiences and then analyzing them through things you've heard and read. Just asking yourself "how do I normally think?" or "what do I do when _x _happens?" and other broad questions, and trying to answer them directly won't help much. It won't capture the richness of the experiences you are trying to understand. You are looking for patterns, which are abstractions, but they are made up of all of the particular instances and streams of your mind. The better method, in my opinion, is to become reflexively self-aware of the movements of your conscious thought and look at those closely. You have to catch yourself "in the act." 
[HR][/HR]
As an example, I was playing Civilization V earlier tonight and I took notice of the way I thought about some of the interesting things in the game. I have been interested in macrohistory and civilizations so I have been trying to pick apart a lot of the discourses and histories of "Western" culture that appear in the game and are given to every civilization in the game no matter where and when they were; and some of the ideas about "civilization" in general that the game takes up explicitly or implicitly. 

For example, the game takes "civilization" to be settled society. And that is how we normally use the term. But it carries some old baggage we try to avoid now, like the moral qualities of "cultured" settled peoples over "savages," or more complex technologies meaning a better society. Moreover, it seems to draw distinctions that are too strong between settled peoples and nomadic, pastoral, etc. peoples which block a better understanding of all of them that would look at their unities as well as their differences. A more comprehensive study of human societies and history should take all societies as "civilization."

Another telling feature is the "barbarian encampments." They are like lone villages of wild and militant peoples that stand in contrast to your orderly city. You have to destroy them. This notion of the morally depraved barbarians beyond the good people of the city/state comes from Greeks and Romans. So that's contingent on the particular historical context of the game's development (the developer is based in America). 

Western cultural themes are also found in the technologies you can develop ("technologies" meant in a broader sense, including the usual way we think of technologies as particular materials we make to adapt , as well as learned practices and disciplines such as mathematics and civil service). The developmental paths of the technologies are laid out in a tree map that goes from earlier developments (e.g. agriculture, drama) to later ones (e.g. theology, nuclear weapons). The progression is divided into eras: Ancient, Classical, Medieval, Renaissance, Industrial, Modern, Atomic, Information (the present). This is a standard Western periodization of history. The Classical age and Renaissance did not occur in China or South America, but they are still the periods we use for chopping up everyone's history. It leads me to wonder about how a developer within a different civilizational tradition, such as in China or India, would make a similar game. How the discourse would differ, what kinds of material technologies and disciplines would be shown, etc. Doubtful barbarians would be shown the same way, or that theology would be present.

Another interesting thing about the game is the centrality of war in the game. You start the game with warriors ready to fight. Areas you have not yet explored are hidden behind clouds called the "fog of war" - a term for the uncertainties of situational awareness in military operations. Some have observed this tight relationship between war and civilization and have formalized and unpacked it as a thesis about civilization (which can be found here and here). So what the game reveals is an implicit understanding of this relationship. A lesson here is that interesting ideas can be derived from some of the vague ideas we hold about the world implicitly. And a lot of learning, especially in philosophy, is about making explicit what was held implicitly (like the Socratic method).
[HR][/HR]
That extended digression was to try to show what my thinking is like. Some observations you can make from it are that I tend to go into details, tangents, and possibilities. But I also always have things framed within higher levels of generality, e.g. seeing the discourse of the game as being particular to the West and not just given and universal, and seeing the things I learned from the game as instances of how we learn in general. That's just how I reflexively look at everything. Pulling it apart and then relating it to everything else I can contextualize with it. It's heavily analytical but also synthetic and holistic. Looking at all the different pieces as well as seeing how they might be otherwise.*

Going from this particular instance of my thinking (which includes the way I have written about this - so two instances in one, really) to reading about the functions might reveal a lot. To me it shows Ti-Ne pretty clearly. The impartiality, clarity of structure, organized reasoning, seeming overkill, etc. are all pretty typical of them.

So to summarize the point more clearly, your type and dominant function are to be found in (or at least, better seen through) a careful examination of your particular "concrete" experiences that occur "naturally," rather than in the broad answers you can give to broad questions. Keep reading, reading, reading, and pay attention to all the little things you do automatically so you can compare your readings with your experiences and reflections. 
[HR][/HR]
A final thing I'd add is that it may be helpful to look into Enneagram. It's much heavier on this point of seeing what underlies all of your little reflexive behaviors and cognitions, the "smell of your house." Once you figure out your Enneagram, there is an overwhelming obviousness to it that doesn't quite happen with MBTI and the cognitive functions, because Enneagram pushes into the tensions that motivate the way you live (or cope, rather) in the world (which in my opinion is more substantial to our identities than anything MBTI or the functions cover). Determining your Enneagram type may or may not help you narrow down your likely functions/types, but it will help much more with your reflective capacity, so that helps indirectly.

But idk lol.

Good luck!

*I should add, as a just-in-case precaution, that the way I've described Ti-Ne as it occurs for me is overly intellectual. Being an INTP doesn't mean studying philosophy and reading math textbooks before breakfast. I just happen to have some of those interests. Partly, it's possible or probable, out of some affinity between the subjects and my traits, but also because I invest way too much a lot of my identity in my intellect - and that's not really good (I'm pretty unhealthy lol). So this is just how Ti gets expressed for me most clearly. It's not the only way it shows up. Cognition and Ti are much broader than that. The functions describe perception and decision-making in general. But hopefully you knew all that already.


----------



## Ksara (Feb 13, 2014)

myjazz said:


> Reason's I said this could also be described as Fi/Ne
> 
> Feeling Judgment is not a rigorous thought process...that will be Thinking Judgment.
> The way you stated while thinking through to a answer and only end up with more questions can be also described as Ne mixed with the Thinking through process.


Well if this is true then it's something I can do but is not a preferred mindset lol. I prefer a sense of knowing, or direction, rather than unanswered questions.



> Feeling and Thinking is both Rational not because there is a rigorous rational thought process. But because there is a Reason behind Feeling and Thinking. Unlike Perceiving which is Irrational because there is not coherent reason just the answer or whatever is perceived.
> In order to get or explain the reason behind Feeling either it be Fi/Fe it goes through a thought process.
> 
> I am just saying the way you worded this can be very much taken as Fi/Ne thinking through


So how does feeling rationalize itself? Is it just going with ones gut response trusting it's the right thing to do? Wouldn't there be some awareness of the values one holds, how ones emotional responses is connected to these values and a process of understanding what one holds as importation?

And also, identifying the feeling and explaining that feeling is the thinking process?


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

Ksara said:


> Well if this is true then it's something I can do but is not a preferred mindset lol. I prefer a sense of knowing, or direction, rather than unanswered questions.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I didn't mean that explaining the Feeling Judgement is Thinking Judgement. Just that Feeling isn't excluded from thinking while a lot of times its the reason or such
Let's take Love as a Feeling Judgment value. There is a reason someone Loves this person for Feeling Judgment it's more about the reason than trying to define it. Not that it can't define or think through have emotional response and so on. I'm not saying Feeling Judgment doesn't think a lot either
Have you heard someone try to say that Love is just a chemical reaction blah blah blah more trash few more blahs. That's how a hard core Thinking Judgment will try to define what Love is thru Thinking Judgment.

ofc, I'm not saying that you are "xxxx" or anything as well. I am just mentioning to further elaborate different way's in the way you defined the comment previously could be taken


----------



## Ksara (Feb 13, 2014)

myjazz said:


> I didn't mean that explaining the Feeling Judgement is Thinking Judgement. Just that Feeling isn't excluded from thinking while a lot of times its the reason or such
> Let's take Love as a Feeling Judgment value. There is a reason someone Loves this person for Feeling Judgment it's more about the reason than trying to define it. Not that it can't define or think through have emotional response and so on. I'm not saying Feeling Judgment doesn't think a lot either.


What is this reason? Can it be explained to another person or is it more just a sense of knowing?
Such as the reason we choose a colour is because it is our favourite colour. It can be hard to explain why we have a favourite colour.

Or can these reasons often be explained?
Such as I value family over work. My reason is if I fall ill work is likely to give away my position as I am not profitable for the company. It is not in there interest to support me in such a situation, where as family will be there to support me and help me with the illness.



> Have you heard someone try to say that Love is just a chemical reaction blah blah blah more trash few more blahs. That's how a hard core Thinking Judgment will try to define what Love is thru Thinking Judgment.


Yup lol.




> ofc, I'm not saying that you are "xxxx" or anything as well. I am just mentioning to further elaborate different way's in the way you defined the comment previously could be taken


If it was that easy haha 

Actually there is a program I came across where you can paste a paragraph of text in and it would give you a personality type. It isn't 100% reliable as simply writing in different styles for different purposes will give you a different type.

EDIT:
Actually I think you may be interested in this:
The 5 Levels of the Feeling Function: a Phenomenological Description


@Bitterself the above link may be helpful for determining type. I would expect a weak feeling type to have lower levels of feeling on a more frequent basis, and a strong feeling type at or close to level 5 most of the time.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

Ksara said:


> What is this reason? Can it be explained to another person or is it more just a sense of knowing?
> Such as the reason we choose a colour is because it is our favourite colour. It can be hard to explain why we have a favourite colour.
> 
> Or can these reasons often be explained?
> Such as I value family over work. My reason is if I fall ill work is likely to give away my position as I am not profitable for the company. It is not in there interest to support me in such a situation, where as family will be there to support me and help me with the illness.


Of course the reason can be explained even though sometimes it may not be able to.
Like color 
I like this "color" because it makes feel good or I painted the interior of my house this "color" because I want others to feel good while here as well. This "color" whatever reason someone like's it "enter here"

A restaurant owner decide's to paint the interior red because red is suppose to make people hungry according to the studies. So if paint red people get hungry order more food than just a small meal I will increase my business. But I really don't like the color red 

In the Love is a chemical scenario such a person as elevated almost all or any Feeling Judgment

As far as that article you linked I stopped reading as soon as I read Von Franz


----------



## Ksara (Feb 13, 2014)

myjazz said:


> Of course the reason can be explained even though sometimes it may not be able to.
> Like color
> I like this "color" because it makes feel good or I painted the interior of my house this "color" because I want others to feel good while here as well. This "color" whatever reason someone like's it "enter here"


Makes sense.



> A restaurant owner decide's to paint the interior red because red is suppose to make people hungry according to the studies. So if paint red people get hungry order more food than just a small meal I will increase my business. But I really don't like the color red


The part about red making people hungry wouldn't be the feeling judgment. Thats based on empirical evidence and is more about truth. That seems like thinking.
The feeling judgment is implied, the business is important to the business owner. The other feeling judgment is they don't like the colour red.



> In the Love is a chemical scenario such a person as elevated almost all or any Feeling Judgment


I'm a bit confused with what you mean here.



> As far as that article you linked I stopped reading as soon as I read Von Franz


I'm not sure why you dislike Von Franz. The article in and of itself is good. It breaks down feeling into levels and explains how the feeling funcion can be used at a more sophisticated level than just identifying ones values.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

Ksara said:


> The part about red making people hungry wouldn't be the feeling judgment. Thats based on empirical evidence and is more about truth. That seems like thinking.
> The feeling judgment is implied, the business is important to the business owner. The other feeling judgment is they don't like the colour red.
> 
> I'm not sure why you dislike Von Franz. The article in and of itself is good. It breaks down feeling into levels and explains how the feeling funcion can be used at a more sophisticated level than just identifying ones values.


That was my point the color red scenario wasn't a Feeling judgment but a Thinking Judgement.
Just like the Love is a chemical scenario was a Thinking Judgement, what I meant was for Thinking Type to classify everything even love is almost void of Feeling Judgment completely, everything has to have a Ti or Te value to it.

I don't like Von Franz because her thesis on Fi Dom etc etc was rubbish and since her corner stone was full of holes. I don't have the need or desire to put any of her info in my head. I am kinda picky about what I will study I suppose it's the Ni-Ti in me. I don't mind reading articles though but just seeing the name made me exit 

The article may be good though idk I might read some of it later

If you go to INFP or INFJ sub forum you will see a lot of Feeling through in a lot of threads. Especially if someone ask for help or mentions they feel like "x"


----------



## Ksara (Feb 13, 2014)

myjazz said:


> That was my point the color red scenario wasn't a Feeling judgment but a Thinking Judgement.
> Just like the Love is a chemical scenario was a Thinking Judgement, what I meant was for Thinking Type to classify everything even love is almost void of Feeling Judgment completely, everything has to have a Ti or Te value to it.


Ok, we are on the same page here 



> I don't like Von Franz because her thesis on Fi Dom etc etc was rubbish and since her corner stone was full of holes. I don't have the need or desire to put any of her info in my head. I am kinda picky about what I will study I suppose it's the Ni-Ti in me. I don't mind reading articles though but just seeing the name made me exit
> 
> The article may be good though idk I might read some of it later


Reading the first paragraph it's only a mention to Von Franz. This article is about Carl Rogers work if that helps.

I understand, I have a similar disposition towards Lenore Thomson's work as she attributes her function stacking based on a left brain vs right brain model, yet there is no evidence to suggest people are more left brained or right brained. I don't necessarily discredit it entirely, much more skeptical when I come across it.



> If you go to INFP or INFJ sub forum you will see a lot of Feeling through in a lot of threads. Especially if someone ask for help or mentions they feel like "x"


I've noticed xNFP tend to relate what the post/conversation is about back to their own meaningful experiences. Just a trend I have noticed.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

Ksara said:


> I've noticed xNFP tend to relate what the post/conversation is about back to their own meaningful experiences. Just a trend I have noticed.


Yeah that is common. just like a lot of times intuitive threads may seem like they are going way off topic or derailing a thread. But there not, well maybe sometimes, it's just that's how Intuition is but usually it all comes back to full circle it may not be completely apparent though to some.

Take our conversation for instance.


Part of the conflict I have with certain things like Von Franz is a Feeling vs Thinking conflict. I am a Feeler but I also have a decent Thinking Judgment developed as well. A big issue with to much Thinking Judgment is that it can affect the Feeling Judgment so I have to draw the line sometimes, to help maintain balance. Sometimes I feel like a Intuitive Feeler and Intuitive Thinker


I'll check out that article though


----------



## Ksara (Feb 13, 2014)

QUOTE=myjazz;33087762]Yeah that is common. just like a lot of times intuitive threads may seem like they are going way off topic or derailing a thread. But there not, well maybe sometimes, it's just that's how Intuition is but usually it all comes back to full circle it may not be completely apparent though to some.

Take our conversation for instance.
[/quote]


haha yes.

Though some of it is down to introversion, the one on one aspect.
I have a tendency to engage one on one conversations. It's more a need to go in depth and flesh things out where as in a group it's too fast paced, often more surface stuff and the topic evolves much quicker in which I become a spectator rather than a contributor. I believe this is a common introvert trait.





> Part of the conflict I have with certain things like Von Franz is a Feeling vs Thinking conflict. I am a Feeler but I also have a decent Thinking Judgment developed as well. A big issue with to much Thinking Judgment is that it can affect the Feeling Judgment so I have to draw the line sometimes, to help maintain balance. Sometimes I feel like a Intuitive Feeler and Intuitive Thinker
> 
> 
> I'll check out that article though



Thinking and feeling for me has been difficult to distinguish which is more developed. Feeling is where my focus has been these days and really I just need to reign it back, look at the evidence and start making a more holistic decision.

So does that make you INFJ who has developed Ti quite a bit?


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

Ksara said:


> Though some of it is down to introversion, the one on one aspect.
> I have a tendency to engage one on one conversations. It's more a need to go in depth and flesh things out where as in a group it's too fast paced, often more surface stuff and the topic evolves much quicker in which I become a spectator rather than a contributor. I believe this is a common introvert trait.
> 
> Thinking and feeling for me has been difficult to distinguish which is more developed. Feeling is where my focus has been these days and really I just need to reign it back, look at the evidence and start making a more holistic decision.
> ...


I so much prefer the one on one conversation, I'm sure almost all Introvert's would agree also.

I have always been a introspective self aware type of person, coming to Cognitive Functions really just gave me a name to a lot of stuff I already knew about myself and others, and more in depth. I was around 14 when I realized I lacked Fi after a situation with Ni. The thing with Ni is sometimes it's like decoding a message and if the message that is received get's decoded improperly due to lack of understanding of one's own feeling's the message doesn't get fully understood properly. To go deeper with introspection due to lack of Fi , IxFJ, have to develop Ti properly. This is what some may call fake Fi just like IxFP can develop fake Fe. Fake Fe or Fi doesn't develop the actual Feeling Judgment but instead use's Thinking Judgment to understand better. But for IxFJ the Ti can also benefit the Fe if Ti isn't just kept roaming searching for answers, same for IxFP with Te.

I know what you mean by needing to reign it back, that's why I don't let it wonder to far like the Von Franz situation.


----------



## tangosthenes (Oct 29, 2011)

Via lots and lots of evidence-based experiential thinking, I decided on my type. HA! Take that, socionists.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Through a lot of bullshit, mistyping and traumas.
We all have issues and this journey will often expose them.
Reading Jung helped, but that is beyond most people.


----------



## Bash (Nov 19, 2014)

_What you are looking for is already where you are looking from_


----------

