# INFP or ISFP?



## djf863000

anon said:


> Sounds very familiar. I think along these lines too... but it's important to note that if I regret something in the past I will usually think about what you mentioned. However, even in normal circumstances I am still assessing my path and that what I discovered isn't enough yet... Hence, I'm usually open for new information all the time... is it the same for you?
> 
> How often do you find yourself daydreaming? Does it occur in one large dose, i.e excessive daydreaming?
> 
> When you think about alternative paths in the future, do you do this with the yearning for a wish to be fulfilled?
> 
> If it helps, as an INFP, when I get lost in a sea of thoughts, I imagine people, events and situations that will/may never happen. I have an ISFP friend and I definitely consider her more practical than I am, bless her cotton socks... she would daydream about how she can improve her current situation by imagining paths and what not that suit her hopes and wishes.


 
I find I do it alot at work, when I am doing repetitive tasks. It just make time go faster, when you work long hours.


----------



## Jack Rabid

Grey said:


> Behavior isn't an indicator of type; if you feel you are an INFP, contrary to how you act, but in tune with how your functions relate and how you relate to the descriptions, then you are an INFP.


 How could I end up with Cognitive functions that look like this??

 -15 Si 
-15 Fi 
-15 Ne
-15 Se
 -14 Ti
 -13 Fe
 -12 Te
 - 5 Ni

Or a score that looks like this

Introverted (*I*) 53.33% Extroverted (E) 46.67%
Intuitive (*N*) 51.88% Sensing (S) 49.12%
Feeling (*F*) 60% Thinking (T) 40%
Perceiving (*P*) 61.76% Judging (J) 38.24%

How could the NI be so low?? and someone still test as an INFP???


----------



## Grey

INFPs use Ne, not Ni. INFJs and INTJs use Ni dominant.


----------



## Jack Rabid

Grey said:


> INFPs use Ne, not Ni. INFJs and INTJs use Ni dominant.


I see... this is very interesting indeed..


----------



## djf863000

*Cognitive Process**Level of Development (Preference, Skill and Frequency of Use)*extraverted Sensing (Se) **************** (16.5)
limited useintroverted Sensing (Si) ******************************************** (44.8)
excellent useextraverted Intuiting (Ne) ************************** (26.4)
average useintroverted Intuiting (Ni) ********************************* (33.6)
good useextraverted Thinking (Te) ********************** (22.7)
limited useintroverted Thinking (Ti) *************** (15)
unusedextraverted Feeling (Fe) ********************************* (33.7)
good useintroverted Feeling (Fi) ********************************************** (46.9)
excellent use


*Summary Analysis of Profile*
By focusing on the strongest configuration of cognitive processes, your pattern of responses most closely matches individuals of this type: *ISFJ* *Lead (Dominant) Process*
*Introverted Sensing (Si):* Stabilizing with a predictable standard. Carefully comparing a situation to the customary ways you’ve come to rely on. Checking with past experiences. Stabilizing a situation and invest for future security.

*Support (Auxilliary) Process*
*Extraverted Feeling (Fe):* Building trust through giving relationships. Empathically responding to others' needs and take on their needs and values as your own. Checking for respect and trust. Giving and receiving support to grow closer to people.
​If these cognitive processes don't fit well then consider these types: *ESFJ*, or *INFP*


----------



## djf863000

If we take for example building something, I tend to be more S, I carefully look at instructions. But in Cooking, I am definataly a N. like to improvise, and always of new ideas on how to make the same meal. I like to experiment alot.


----------



## Nomenclature

I can relate to the original poster as well. I am SURE I'm IxFP, but the N/S divide confuses me.

I used to think that Ne was finding and figuring out patterns while Se was being in the moment. However, I have read articles that state that Se is actually more efficient at finding patterns and Ne is also an in-the-moment function. :frustrating: Yeah, that helps narrow it down.

Is it as if Se more about coming to conclusions through interpolation of data and Ne through extrapolation?

What about learning styles or mannerisms? How do those differ in NFPs and SFPs?


----------



## iceman44

Well, djf863000, it appears that you are an ISFP.


----------



## Grey

Croire c'est voir said:


> Is it as if Se more about coming to conclusions through interpolation of data and Ne through extrapolation?
> 
> What about learning styles or mannerisms? How do those differ in NFPs and SFPs?


It would be incredibly easy to decide type if people could agree on these functions. Se and Ne, like Si and Ni, seem to be judged differently by everyone, and therefore, the only standards across the board happen to be that Sensory functions are 'in the moment', whereas the Intuitive functions are more subconscious mechanisms. The differences I've found relate along that line - sensory functions, on an average level, respond consciously to environmental cues, and are easier to explain. Intuitive functions, however, appear to be more unconscious, and when attempting to explain conclusions drawn by these functions, on the average level, many can fall short. The reasoning appears more 'hidden' than sensory functions.

I could be wrong, but this is what I've drawn.


----------



## Nomenclature

So it's like... Ne is taking in background information and taking a huge leap in logic, while Se is taking in foreground information and knowing the mental path you took to get to the conclusion about it? It's still confusing to me. What are some examples?


----------



## Grey

Essentially, that is what I've said. The examples I can offer are truly only personal, however:

I see Ne as, put previously, subconscious. Therefore, the dominant or supportive users of Ne, unless well versed in identifying, may not realize they use Ne in the first place. Two judgments made by Se and Ne might come to the same conclusion: a bird going by had a speed of 50 - 55 mph (as an example). The Se might be able to validate this answer, first and foremost, by going through various 'goals' that recognize this: the species of bird has an average speed of 54 mph, the bird was going with the direction of the wind, so it would have had a better speed, etc. Ne might draw the conclusion via other methods: while Ne might not know the bird has an average speed of 54 mph, it might make the connection between a similar bird who has a similar speed, recognizing patterns along the way. Ne is less concrete, in that it seems typical for those using Ne not to exactly know 'why' they come to the conclusion they came to, whether it be right or wrong. Some attribute it to a 'gut' feeling, or true intuition, and others to just knowing.

It's difficult to describe, and I'm not sure if I made it clear. The more it's explained, the more contradictions can be made.


----------



## dizzygirl

Grey, do you think it is possible for someone to shift from being an ISFP to another type because of gradual changes? I mean initially my functions are that of an ISFP(at least were around 2/3 months back) but every time i take the test when i feel i have changed, my results change. and so far xxxP is the only thing that has been constant.
any idea if it really is possible to have what can be called fluid personality till emotional maturity is attained completely?


----------



## Soma

Grey said:


> Essentially, that is what I've said. The examples I can offer are truly only personal, however:
> 
> I see Ne as, put previously, subconscious. Therefore, the dominant or supportive users of Ne, unless well versed in identifying, may not realize they use Ne in the first place. Two judgments made by Se and Ne might come to the same conclusion: a bird going by had a speed of 50 - 55 mph (as an example). The Se might be able to validate this answer, first and foremost, by going through various 'goals' that recognize this: the species of bird has an average speed of 54 mph, the bird was going with the direction of the wind, so it would have had a better speed, etc. Ne might draw the conclusion via other methods: while Ne might not know the bird has an average speed of 54 mph, it might make the connection between a similar bird who has a similar speed, recognizing patterns along the way. Ne is less concrete, in that it seems typical for those using Ne not to exactly know 'why' they come to the conclusion they came to, whether it be right or wrong. Some attribute it to a 'gut' feeling, or true intuition, and others to just knowing.
> 
> It's difficult to describe, and I'm not sure if I made it clear. The more it's explained, the more contradictions can be made.



Are you saying Se would be more factual about drawing a conclusion, and Ne more "knowing" ? hate to derail this thread, but you don't happen to have anymore examples to help clarify the Se / Ne divide do you :laughing:


----------



## Grey

> Grey, do you think it is possible for someone to shift from being an ISFP to another type because of gradual changes?


Wow, this is an old thread.

No, I do not believe this is possible. I believe situations and behavior change, but unless you're righting yourself through the stages of childhood, then I believe your personality has been set in and any changes you experience are cosmetic at best. There has been some talk of a personality being capable of change via a traumatic or distressing event, but it's hard to speak on this, as I have not heard this clarified ever. If you're going on scores, please keep in mind that the test is not likely everything to do with your personality type.




> Are you saying Se would be more factual about drawing a conclusion, and Ne more "knowing" ? hate to derail this thread, but you don't happen to have anymore examples to help clarify the Se / Ne divide do you


My answer may come at a conflict with my previous reply, as this thread was done over five months before. I believe Se is more factual in that it is in the present moment and perceives things as they are without shifting - only after other functions come in do things change. Ne is associated with constant connections to other things via the perceived information (Bird links to feathers links to pillow feathers links to pillow fights links to childhood fun links to sentimentality links to the past links to people who cling to the past, etc.). Therefore, you may argue it's less factual than Se, as it perceives information entirely differently. For a function that 'just knows', however, I suggest you look at Ni or Si.


----------



## Soma

Grey said:


> Wow, this is an old thread.
> 
> No, I do not believe this is possible. I believe situations and behavior change, but unless you're righting yourself through the stages of childhood, then I believe your personality has been set in and any changes you experience are cosmetic at best. There has been some talk of a personality being capable of change via a traumatic or distressing event, but it's hard to speak on this, as I have not heard this clarified ever. If you're going on scores, please keep in mind that the test is not likely everything to do with your personality type.
> 
> 
> My answer may come at a conflict with my previous reply, as this thread was done over five months before. I believe Se is more factual in that it is in the present moment and perceives things as they are without shifting - only after other functions come in do things change. Ne is associated with constant connections to other things via the perceived information (Bird links to feathers links to pillow feathers links to pillow fights links to childhood fun links to sentimentality links to the past links to people who cling to the past, etc.). Therefore, you may argue it's less factual than Se, as it perceives information entirely differently. For a function that 'just knows', however, I suggest you look at Ni or Si.




So Se would perceive the shape of the bird the speed of the bird things within the immediate context (within the box). While Ne will connect whats seen with things completely unrelated to the immediate context (outside of the box) ?


----------



## Grey

> So Se would perceive the shape of the bird the speed of the bird things within the immediate context (within the box). While Ne will connect whats seen with things completely unrelated to the immediate context (outside of the box) ?


Ne does not jump to something random immediately - I would say that the connections Ne makes are very specific at first, but as they branch out, they may seem random to the outside view but make sense to the person. It all depends on what that person has personally associated with the context and connections. Se, however, would be 'in the box', yes.


----------



## djf863000

Would ISFP be better at puzzle at INFP? or is this a myth?

How about looking at a Schematic drawing with let say 40 numbers on them connected to 40 different measurement. Would an ISFP find each number on paper easy to find and INFP would take longer to find them but can INFP see the finish product (if it hasn't been milled yet) just by looking at the drawing?


----------



## MilkyWay132

You know, I have been noticing a pattern with ISFPs and INFPs. INFPs tend to score really high on Intuition, while ISFPs are sometimes borderline Intuitives. So, basically, INFPs are usually strong Intuitives and ISFPs are weak Sensors, I think.


----------



## rapono

I'm having trouble with this too! I have qualities of both ISFP and INFP.


----------

