I have a theory: INFPs are less common than INFJs, INTPs are less common than INTJs - Page 2

I have a theory: INFPs are less common than INFJs, INTPs are less common than INTJs

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27
Thank Tree14Thanks

This is a discussion on I have a theory: INFPs are less common than INFJs, INTPs are less common than INTJs within the Myers Briggs Forum forums, part of the Personality Type Forums category; I can see Ni-Te and Ni-Fe being impractical, but Fi-Ne and Ti-Ne might be even more useless. They become more ...

  1. #11

    I can see Ni-Te and Ni-Fe being impractical, but Fi-Ne and Ti-Ne might be even more useless. They become more valuable when Si has time to develop. During this period is when INXPs become truly adept in formulating ideas and making insightful connections. INTJs and INFJs seem to be late bloomers, and intuitives in general, but INFPs and INTPs are on a whole other level as far as I can tell. INFPs and INTPs are in my opinion the most capable of coming up with ideas that alter the course of society in unexpected ways, but the slowest to produce anything meaningful with their time. I'm speaking very generally and based on my observations again, just to be clear.

    Ni/Ne and Si/Se are the 'absorption' functions. Therefore, INFJ and INTJ are very good at absorbing certain abstract information and making sense of it. I don't think Ni is paradoxical at all. It's just reading into a level of abstraction as opposed to something more concrete, aka Si. Ni gives INXJs more direction than INXPs, I think. INXJs are a lot likely to be happier working within existing frameworks and systems.

    Ti and Fi are the deep thinking functions. INXPs create their own internal systems through constant, unending analysis and value that over 'what is'. Ni doms (and Si doms) by definition and functionality, do not prioritize their own analysis. They are perceivers first. Despite being Js, INXJs are actually more open minded to new information and perspectives than INXPs. INXPs are the judgers. Ti and Fi are categorising, labeling, sorting everything they encounter through their unique Ti or Fi lens, first and foremost. INFPs or INTPs that have systems which are rooted in faulty perception, false truths, etc. will not go anywhere with their analysis and that's where it becomes so important for any type to recognise they have massive blind spots in their cognition and need to have healthy relationships with all kinds of people to fill in that hole.

    Also, I think idealism was the wrong word to use. I would just disregard that part of my post entirely lol
    Last edited by zoboomafoo; 08-24-2019 at 06:14 AM.

  2. #12

    @zoboomafoo

    I'm just wondering where you're getting these conclusions from and which theorist you're basing these conclusions off of? I think it's ridiculous to say that any 1 person has an edge in forward-thinking than anyone else because of type. If talking about MBTI type, we're just looking at preferences, not aptitude or capabilities. If talking about Jungian type, we're just looking at the most differentiated way a person exists. I only offer these two as they're the most used theories on this forum.

    I only ask because I find your conclusions compelling but I don't follow and I'd like to.

  3. #13

    I don't think it's ridiculous at all. Aptitude can mean a million different things. There is a unique power and specialty in every functional stack. INXPs are good at analysis through Ti and Fi. Ne creates abstract, far flung connections with the relevant information. That's not to say they are the only types that can produce original or divergent (abstracted) thought. They are more just more likely to do so, and it's not inherently a good thing. It can come across as combative and constantly 'against' the group or the system. And again, it's not practical. INXPs HAVE to do EVERYTHING their own way when for a lot of things, established systems work just fine.

    INXPs are first analyzing human/technical components of their experience and ONLY THEN using intuition to connect and piece the information together. That's where my belief that INXPs are more likely to produce ideas that alter society/society's systems originates. They are thinking, systematizing internally and then externalizing abstract thoughts about society and systems. Whereas a Ni dom is perceiving and then externalizing action based on that clarity.

    INXJs are more likely to be correct when they act or speak. INXPs externalise ideas that are not fully formed and are going to be wrong, often, because they are analyzing first and then perceiving. INXPs are less aware of the true nature of reality, society and it's systems and will always refer back to their own internal structure for reference. INXJs are more aware of reality and less structurally rigid internally. INXJs are black holes of information, INXPs are producers (even though 99% of what is produced is actually just useless)

    Ti-Ne and Fi-Ne idealism to me is essentially just the confidence and weight they put on their own ideas and analysis, even when they have been wrong over and over again. In immaturity, this is nightmare and can be very turbulent. In time however, as they are constantly adjusting/refining their internal world and adding new layers to it, it becomes more and more stable with a clearer picture of reality. This development, along side a pool of information that comes from life experience, is when INXPs start producing abstract ideas that actually benefit others. And Ni doms are essentially the ones who filter the garbage from the gold
    Last edited by zoboomafoo; 08-24-2019 at 07:24 AM.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    PersonalityCafe.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #14

    I may have scored ISFP when I was really young and had no real interest in MBTI, but after becoming older and more aware of myself I have scored INFP very consistently (I did score INFJ / INTP once but 99% of the time I score INFP). I am pretty sure I'm not ISFP because I'm way too "in my head" and I read between the lines way too much. I often miss details in the environment around me because I'm in my head, and it's much harder for me to talk about the details of executing something than it is for me to speculate possibilities and the overall picture. I'm also a lot more philosophical than artistic. I was a bit artistic as a kid, but my older self is a lot more philosophical, it's much easier for me to think about the world and the different possibilities than to actually focus my energy in a particular direction when it comes to creativity. I'm much more likely to be wondering about something than actually getting something done.

    I feel INFPs are rarer than the 4.4% listed on some websites. I feel INFP makes up about 3% of the population, anything above a 4% is a bit overestimated. Definitely more common than INFJ, perhaps about the same as INTP, but not as common as what some websites believe. I'm definitely an Ne user than an Se user, I take in observations from the external world and I almost always try to synchronize them with my inner world rather than just accepting them as they are. This process of synergy and synchronization can take a long time. There is often not a single, clear goal in mind, but a process that I like to view as giving me a better overall understanding of life, of the world. I believe almost all knowledge might be useful at one point or another (at least the things I choose to take in), sometimes in unexpected ways. This only applies though, to things I'm interested in / I'm okay with taking in. I'm so scatter-brained and oblivious to much of the physical world a lot of times, but I can also be sharply observant and focus on the details others might miss.



    I match my Ne with my Fi to see how an experience or a set of observations / revelations fits into my inner world (which is constantly being upheld, but updated / examined when I feel it's necessary), and the Si takes time to process my Fi-Ne and shape it into a set of memories / experiences that can be used as a reference for making sense of things (how I choose to remember things, which may or may not be the same as they actually were) and a model of response / behavior so I'm not completely lost when put into a new or at least somewhat new situation. However, I also believe that I should try to be adaptable, and sometimes I feel stability can be overrated.

    Another reason why I strongly believe I'm not ISFP is because I talk a lot about enjoying and savoring the present moment, but that's actually one of the most difficult things for me to put into practice. My Ne makes my mind overly active, something's always on my mind (or several things) that I often can't put into words, and it's just so hard for me to accept things as they are. I tend to ask "why" more than the average person, and I tend to be critical of things that I FEEL should be a different way, yet these criticisms often come out as flawed / unrefined (inferior Te) to a very logically oriented person.


    I also identify far more with Ne than Ni. I don't really see Ni in me. I'm a lot more scattered than convergent when using my intuition.
    Last edited by WraithOfNightmare; 08-24-2019 at 08:19 AM.

  6. #15

    @zoboomafoo

    Well, from this I can tell you're using the Grant Stack, so you're saying an INFP = Fi-Ne/Si-Te and an INFJ = Ni-Fe/Ti-Se.

    So, given that I follow the Jungian school of thought, of course your conclusions would have a question mark above them. The Jungian stack is different. Instead of it going I-E/I-E (since we're only talking Introverted Types), it goes II/EE. I have noticed that the middle functions are a bit blurred, too.

    Given this, the types are as follows:

    Ni+ Fi or Ti
    or
    Fi + Ni
    or
    Ti + Ni

    I could further break this down into an even more nuanced positioning to say that since the auxiliary function is less differentiated, it's more this:

    Ni + Tx or Fx
    or
    Fi +Nx
    or
    Ti + Nx

    So, by using Jung's theory as my primary perspective and focus, your argument doesn't hold to my understanding of type. That is NOT to say that your argument isn't valid though. Now that I know which theorist you're using (some sort of mesh of Meyers + Grant), I can see some of your points. I haven't seen any evidence of some of your points, but I'll be sure to keep an eye out.

    If you don't mind, could you provide examples of both INTX and INFX?

    I'm an INTJ (Ni-T) partnered up (16 years so far) with an INTP (Ti-N) and between us, some of your conclusions are reversed and some of them apply.

    - - - - - - - - - -

    As for rarity, I don't really care about that. As I said before, it's a silly concept to me plus it's something that is going to change with every generation depending on the pressures and needs of society. Evolution demands that a species adapts to change.

  7. #16

    Quote Originally Posted by zoboomafoo View Post
    I don't think it's ridiculous at all. Aptitude can mean a million different things. There is a unique power and specialty in every functional stack. INXPs are good at analysis through Ti and Fi. Ne creates abstract, far flung connections with the relevant information. That's not to say they are the only types that can produce original or divergent (abstracted) thought. They are more just more likely to do so, and it's not inherently a good thing. It can come across as combative and constantly 'against' the group or the system. And again, it's not practical. INXPs HAVE to do EVERYTHING their own way when for a lot of things, established systems work just fine.

    INXPs are first analyzing human/technical components of their experience and ONLY THEN using intuition to connect and piece the information together. That's where my belief that INXPs are more likely to produce ideas that alter society/society's systems originates. They are thinking, systematizing internally and then externalizing abstract thoughts about society and systems. Whereas a Ni dom is perceiving and then externalizing action based on that clarity.

    INXJs are more likely to be correct when they act or speak. INXPs externalise ideas that are not fully formed and are going to be wrong, often, because they are analyzing first and then perceiving. INXPs are less aware of the true nature of reality, society and it's systems and will always refer back to their own internal structure for reference. INXJs are more aware of reality and less structurally rigid internally. INXJs are black holes of information, INXPs are producers (even though 99% of what is produced is actually just useless)

    Ti-Ne and Fi-Ne idealism to me is essentially just the confidence and weight they put on their own ideas and analysis, even when they have been wrong over and over again. In immaturity, this is nightmare and can be very turbulent. In time however, as they are constantly adjusting/refining their internal world and adding new layers to it, it becomes more and more stable with a clearer picture of reality. This development, along side a pool of information that comes from life experience, is when INXPs start producing abstract ideas that actually benefit others. And Ni doms are essentially the ones who filter the garbage from the gold
    a lot of these don't sound like any INP I know tbh
    yea they can get stuck in analysis-paralysis sometimes, but being NE means you have a positive relation to the world, which in Jungian terms means you redefine your ideas with new information. In Jungian terms an INP is actually a TE/FE type, because the P in MBTI clusters behavioral traits of Jung's Extraversion - adapting oneself to the environment. The MBTI messes up the definitions as it switched around the meaning of the attitude of functions, people who relate a lot to the descriptions of Ti/Fi that have to do with being disconnected from reality are actually people with introverted perception too. That's because in Jungian typology, if you are introverted then both your functions are expressed in this attitude and all of them together are part of your conscious personality. Perception informs judgment even in the case of judgers.
    Gossip Goat and brightflashes thanked this post.

  8. #17

    I think that any attempt to "puzzle out" which type is the Most Rare or who is Most Secretly Typed, based on anecdotal evidence, is going to go nowhere. @brightflashes has pointed out some issues on the difficulty of discerning the "true" rarest type based on your reasoning from idealized type descriptions...

    Have you taken a look at the statistics yet e.g. as posted by @lowergroundfloor or any published literature of a wider scale study? It seems the best way to attack this is to find studies and raise specific points of objection.

  9. #18

    Just one more thing about INXPs being less concerned with reality than INXJs:

    How can you make this statement knowing that INXJs have Se (literally, facts and reality) as their inferior function?

    Again, I'm not picking on you or anything - I can sometimes come across as critical when my interest is piqued as you have. I'm just wondering where this particular statement comes from. I have noticed personally that between me and my bff who are both Ni with inferior Se and me and my partner, who is Ti, the Ni types are so far removed from reality that, again, it's like being in a state of constant bewilderment with one's environment.
    hornpipe2 thanked this post.

  10. #19

    Ns are for sure removed from reality no matter what, but again for me it goes back to INXJs being most comfortable when there is an external system to reference, even if relating to abstract concepts. They are more concerned with refining, defining and clarifying existing parameters. I think this is why INXJs tend to be so successful in academia/work. INXJs are concerned with 'correctness' in the sense that they want datapoints to fit into preexisting frameworks. They are scientific by nature. They are open to new ideas, but unless there is sufficient evidence to support the idea, it is rejected by Ni. This also makes them much better at analyzing distinct sets of data and finding patterns/discrepancies/improvements as they relate to the specific system.

    INXPs create their own systems based on experiences. They are much more experimental and are willing to be wrong, fuck up and look stupid, but only if they feel secure enough to do so. This is healthy behaviour in INXPs. INXPs value their perspective more than anyone else's, always. To the point where they can be distrustful and stubborn in regards of established facts and truths. it is necessary however to be aware of this stubborness and blindness to detail for the sake of growth. INXPs that haven't found internal harmony, aka the 'perfect system', will look like they are living life accidentally and without direction, which they are.


    Through this process of abstractly systematizing they are more inclined to circumvent existing societal/other systemic institutions and create something entirely different. INXP and INXJs are very big picture, but I think the difference is that INXJs tend to view the meta reality of combined societies/systems to be more fixed, because it is more clear to them


    Sorry if it seems like I'm ignoring certain comments, I just am not sure how to respond and I am still mulling a lot of stuff over
    brightflashes thanked this post.

  11. #20

    Quote Originally Posted by zoboomafoo View Post
    Ns are for sure removed from reality no matter what, but again for me it goes back to INXJs being most comfortable when there is an external system to reference, even if relating to abstract concepts. They are more concerned with refining, defining and clarifying existing parameters. I think this is why INXJs tend to be so successful in academia/work. INXJs are concerned with 'correctness' in the sense that they want datapoints to fit into preexisting frameworks. They are scientific by nature. They are open to new ideas, but unless there is sufficient evidence to support the idea, it is rejected by Ni. This also makes them much better at analyzing distinct sets of data and finding patterns/discrepancies/improvements as they relate to the specific system.
    I would say that this is an INaccurate description of myself and Ni types as a general rule. It does describe Te and Se types pretty well, though.

    An Ni type (rather than an Fi or Ti type), will at least 80-99% of the time trust their intuitive perceptions over facts/systems/etc..(Se). For an Fi or Ti type, if N is the auxiliary function, they will be more likely to do that as well, but would be much more open and capable and connected to examining facts, data sets, etc ... as S is not actively repressed for them. For an Ni type to be an Ni type, this means that Se HAS to be inferior, so Se (facts, systems, data points, etc...) is naturally mistrusted.

    This is the primary "issue" that is the difference between what I have come to understand and what you have come to understand.

    Perhaps an INXJ is more certain of the little Se that they do have because they don't trust Se and can only hold a conclusion about Se impressions if it has been scrutinized and examined ad infinitum. The opposite would be that INXPs are more accepting of S impressions and are more flexible with them so may come to incorrect S conclusions just by allowing so much more of them in than an S inferior would.

    Similarly, an INXP would be mistrustful of their inferior extraverted Judging function (Te, Fe) and would have a harder time interacting with the general public opinion than an INXJ might - (perhaps, we are both introverted types, after all). I only speculate this because for an INXP to be a Ji type, they must have an inferior extraverted judger.

    In other words, the two judging functions (T, F) are easier for the IXXJ to handle because their T & F functions are not so polarised. Similarly, the two perceiving functions (N, S) are easier for the IXXP to handle because their N & S functions are not as polarised. Perhaps looking at it this way some conclusions can be made? I'm not certain, but that's where I'd start if I were going to do that myself.


    Sorry if it seems like I'm ignoring certain comments, I just am not sure how to respond and I am still mulling a lot of stuff over
    Oh, no worries. I'm sorry if I'm coming across as anything other than curious; I like checking my "reality" every so often so when something like this comes up, it gives me something to think about. : )


     
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [INTJ] Are INTJs Right-Wing or Left Wing and Are INTJs Racist?
    By Theories in forum INTJ Forum - The Scientists
    Replies: 134
    Last Post: 03-18-2019, 05:39 PM
  2. [INTJ] What do Intjs think about Intps? What do Intps think of Intjs? inb4 intj master race
    By Polk3456 in forum INTJ Forum - The Scientists
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 09-16-2017, 09:28 AM
  3. [INFJ] SO, why are there supposedly less INFJs than INTJs, in your opinion?
    By Juiz in forum INFJ Forum - The Protectors
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 09-07-2016, 01:29 PM
  4. Calling all INFPs, INFJs, INTJs, INTPs...HELP!
    By apatheticus in forum What's my personality type?
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 12-15-2011, 02:06 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:47 PM.
Information provided on the site is meant to complement and not replace any advice or information from a health professional.
© 2014 PersonalityCafe
 

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0