Personality Cafe banner

Are NFJs "harder" than NFPs?

15K views 114 replies 42 participants last post by  lecomte 
#1 ·
Maybe my perception is distorted, but I think NFPs are softer compared to NFJs. A while ago, an INFP poster told me he thinks he is too "blunt" for INFJs. Lol no. Every single INFP I've met IRL is more of a pacifist and less stubborn than I am. Maybe I'm getting this type completely wrong but I can't see how an INFP could possibly be too "blunt" for me.

There's no comparison between ENFJs and ENFPs as well. I think ENFJs can be tough and pushy AF compared to ENFPs, mainly due to Fe lead and terc Se.
 
#3 ·
I'm not saying they can't. I just don't see it as typical INFP behavior from what I've gathered. In fact, I see INFP as one of the softest types (they are high up there with ISFJ).

I can only imagine an INFP being a blunt hardass if someone crosses their Fi boundaries.
 
#9 ·
I have been accused of bluntness many times, more often when I was younger though, I am a bit better at thinking before I speak now. But I think it might be different kinds of blunt. I can easily put my foot in my mouth when it comes to social faux pas. I also have quite often made comments that I thought were either just neutral observations (show I care enough about the company to pay attention), or even compliments, when not thinking twice, because they were so in my mind (say I might have said a woman looked a bit like a male celebrity -everyone thought I was rude and she was hurt -but I didn't mean it as offense, she just had a few facialfeatures in common with him, and it was a pretty man, and I think slightly masculine women are often pretty, so to me it was a compliment if anything, or neutral observation, and it didn't occur to me before I spoke that it could be taken as "you look manly, which is bad, and like that celebrity that one might not want to be associated with" ) . I usually understand those kinds of things given a little time to contemplate (so less when writing), but it is not in my backbone to consider what the general opinion about something is, and I often speak while I think, talking being part of the thoughtprocess.

And then there is where values are crossed of course, and not being able to allow oneself to stay quiet or agree, sometimes even a tendency to disagree for the sake of it when people begin to nod and agree with each other to build a cozy groupfeel. I can sometimes when not thinking be blunt and vocal about dislikes too, which people can take offense to when they like that thing. Sometimes I understand that it can be taken to heart (some likes and dislikes are showing identity, mirror who you are, like music for example), sometimes not (like about what the best kind of bread is or something, where I see no point in agreeing)

INFJs bluntness I have come across is more like... barging in and telling you "ok, this is how it is/how things work, let me explain to you: ..." , in that kind of situation infps might be less blunt, more roundabout and state things subjectively, or show rather than tell.
 
#17 ·
When you described your experiences (especially the first part about being oblivious that certain types of factual statements could be offensive to other people), it immediately came to my head that some of these situations are more due to E5 than due to INFP. The INFP 9s I know for example are slightly different.

You make a fair point about disagreeing for the sake of avoiding "groupthink"/"groupfeel". I admit I've seen INFPs doing that, even the most pacifist ones. I'm just not sure I would call this behavior bluntness.
 
#10 ·
Yes. INFJs are extremely complicated and difficult people in my opinion. Every INFJ I have ever known has been charismatic and cute to me (INFP) in the beginning of our friendship, and slightly making fun of me and calling me "confused" toward the end. ENFPs and ENFJs have done this to me as well. Other INFPs I have known are nothing like myself, only perhaps behaviorally in terms of the laws of physics, but still in different ways. I've felt that INFJs are physically lighter and lither but definitely more idealistic to a victimization fault and maybe even feel they've lived a tougher life or something (even if that's not true, that's the aura they tend to give off sometimes). INFJs are tougher and more go-getting in the creative sense. After all, it is the Beta quadra...which I hate to do, but INFJs have excluded me from groups. One had a wedding and never actually made a point to have me there, despite meeting her husband through a date I met online.
 
#16 ·
Yes, you get my point. Few people understand Socionics around here, but you seem to do. The Beta quadra. Of all quadras, it is the most expressive quadra and perhaps the most sensitive to conflict. INFPs are in the Delta quadra, or the most chill quadra.

And I'm sorry these particular INFJs have been mean to you. They sound like jerks (and yeah, INFJs can be jerks) 🤷‍♀️
 
#11 ·
I find the exact opposite. INFJ's are naturally pinging for validation cookies. They're much less likely to do things that are disagreeable because then they don't get those sweet sweet cookies. INFJs are obligated to others, so they aren't going to do whatever they feel like unless it's ok with everyone else.

INFPs, on the other hand, couldn't care less about validation. They do whatever they want, whenever they want. As a result, their actions will often run up against others boundaries and cause tension. INFPs are obligated to themselves, so they're going to do what feels right for THEM, regardless of what anyone else thinks.
 
#13 · (Edited)
Agreed, but I would also add that "what feels right for THEM", can be not to hurt people's feelings (for example by being blunt), so that ought to factor in and differ quite a bit from infp to infp, how important they think that is compared to what their bluntness acheives.

edit: oh, and remembered a second aspect to it is that one can reign in the bluntness by plain tactics. I for example hold my tongue about animal rights/veganism quite often nowadays, compared to when I was a teen. Because I have come to the conclusion I often find it is not contra-effective (not always though), and I generally value that things change more than getting to express what I feel about it.

So what I mean is that I agree there is less incentive to reign oneself in because of validation, but it doesn't mean one just speak one's mind all the time, there are other reasons to hold one's tongue.
 
#12 ·
Maybe it has to do with the Jungian definition of judging vs perceiving.
When Jung describes the two, it seems like, in this sense, they mean, basically, deciding vs taking in information for deciding.
People with a perceiving preference tend to put more priority on information getting than making the decision, whereas people with a judging preference like to decide on something and be done with it. It has actually been one of the few sources of contention/conflict between myself and my INTP. He often procrastination the decision making process, because he wants to take in more information, first, and I see where there are times when you don't have enough time to take in all the information you need, and need to just make a choice, so it's actually rather difficult for me not to be a bit pushy with him in some scenarios.
 
#20 ·
MBTI J and P measure symptoms of intro and extraversion. MBTI E and I doesn't measure shit. Introverts hence Js are habit reinforcers so they are all invasive and pushy. But bluntness can be achieved in may ways, depends on who's getting hurt by it and why.
 
#22 ·
I dunno where or why you came up with this theory, but it doesn't make any sense. Out of all the Jungian dichotomies, introversion and extroversion are the most validated by modern Psychology and they have nothing to do with reinforcing habits. Introversion/extroversion already have their own definitions that are completely distinct from what you are describing.
 
#28 ·
@witty The problem I have with your testimony, is that so called Js (introverts) are building their beliefs in confirmation bias since it's all about thought reinforcement so I can't take what you say for granted. Introversion is the cherry picking root of perversion. Introverted feelers are so logically deficient that they can call themselves entp because they don't like having tested as isfj and somehow convince themselves that the opposite of that is what they must be instead. I have given up on trying to argue with anyone but extraverted intuitives, whom I test by other means than the opinion they have of themselves.
 
#29 · (Edited)
Well I was willing to admit to my ignorance as I didn’t follow the topic enough to give a better reply. But curiously, I see that you’re the one with the bias. You’re generalizing so much I encourage you to forget about personality types and go study personality psychology. Some theories like Self determination theory and personality system integration, etc. Your understanding of the human personality is misguided. Hit me up in private so we get to know each other and share ideas. I may be gravely misunderstanding you. But your generalization makes me digress. You’re so objectively wrong and it’s so easily prove-able that I don’t think it’ll be possible. So I’m not gonna try. Just informing you that you’re over simplifying the human personality. Maybe you’re speaking from a perspective frame I’m not aware of right now. I know we’re talking about MBTI, and Socionics too (which I admittedly don’t know a lot about, I haven’t read the original work.) But your understanding of introversion, whose definition MBTI shares with Big Five, but with different uses, is wrong. Again, maybe you’re talking from a framework I’m not aware of, in which case I take the blame and apologize. But if that’s not the case, the only next logical explanation is that we’re both from a different parallel universe. And things are different from where we come from.

We’re not agreeing on the definition of introvert.
We’re not agreeing on the definition of J and P.
We’re not agreeing on the definition of logic.
We’re not agreeing on the definition of Introverted feelers.

Why do you bracket introvert after Js? Is that a sinthatical error or am I missing something?

Do you mean introvert that are feelers like IXFX?

Im rereading your message over and over but I’m so lost.

what’s going on here? 😅

I’m INTJ, I’m objective as it gets. I can expose my own ass with logic or let someone do so, even when it hurts.

You’re not better off having a logical conversation with ENFP (extraverted intuition) than with me, introverted intuition. And a J. Unless we’re also not in the same page what Extroverted intuition is and how it has nothing to do with logic, it’s a sensing function, it’s for information gathering.
Logic is done with thinking.
And it should be independently provable, nothing to do with belief.
I studied mathematics, there were INFPs. Doing well despite what you claim.

Why don’t you test me by the means you use to test extraverted intuitives?
I’ll respond only with proofs independent of my opinion. You get to vet the proof yourself.

don’t argue, provide proof that someone else can confirm and I’ll do the same and an introverted J.

I’m actually so confused I don’t know what to say but this is fun that’s why I’m keeping up. There’s something special for me to learn here.
 
#31 ·
Introverts can't notice how pushy they are since they have very little awareness of their impact on their environment, which they underestimate especially the negative, since this cherry picking or confirmation bias generally mutes into a self serving bias to protect one's ego, unless the introvert is already convinced to be the worst person in the world.
 
#32 ·
Being an introvert means to manipulate the datas that don't match the prognosis. The range of invasiveness solely depends on the range of the prognosis. An introvert living alone in a cave and having a system belief that only works in this cave doesn't make it less invasive, the absence of side effect is only incidental.
 
#33 ·
Jesus Christ dude, what do you think it is you're doing here? Being open to new ideas? lol
You are defending your own POV very stubbornly, all the while claiming people who aren't like you ("bad introverts") are the stubborn and close-minded ones. Can't you see how ironic and how much of a paradox this is?
 
#48 · (Edited)
My experience mostly comes from my INFJ friend of over a decade. We have a ton in common but he has an easier time being assertive with his words and having outward expressions of what he feels. So in that sense I guess NFJs can be “harder” than NFPs.

However, remember that NFJs are primarily perceiving while NFPs are primarily judging. We both have very strong beliefs but deep down he’s more open to exploring different avenues than I am and sees tangled webs of complexities while I’m much more straightforward and set in my ways. I have less of a need to “think out loud” than he does. In a way he’s more at peace with the world (though still deeply dissatisfied and unhappy towards it) and all its uncertainties and different experiences while a lot of what he takes a fair amount of calm in is unnerving to me. Deep down he’s more flexible and open to different ideas and experiences than I am.

It’s funny how he has these brooding moments but then I follow up by being even more brooding and he has to cheer me up lol. We’re both fascinated by the human condition but he studies the human condition in terms of universals (Fe) while I study the human condition according to how it relates to me and what I wish to see (Fi).
 
#50 · (Edited)
My experience mostly comes from my INFJ friend of over a decade. We have a ton in common but he has an easier time being assertive with his words and having outward expressions of what he feels. So in that sense I guess NFJs can be “harder” than NFPs.

However, remember that NFJs are primarily perceiving while NFPs are primarily judging. We both have very strong beliefs but deep down he’s more open to exploring different avenues than I am and sees tangled webs of complexities while I’m much more straightforward and set in my ways. I have less of a need to “think out loud” than he does. In a way he’s more at peace with the world (though still deeply dissatisfied and unhappy towards it) and all its uncertainties and different experiences while a lot of what he takes a fair amount of calm in is unnerving to me. Deep down he’s more flexible and open to different ideas and experiences than I am.

I’ll put it this way. The idealism of an NFP can get on the nerves of an NFJ, but once the NFP displays cynicism it can come as a shock to the NFJ and the NFJ can scramble to lighten the mood lol.
 
#64 ·
@Aiwass is right about the softness in my experience and I will explain why I think it is usually correct.

I personally saw bluntness (rudeness?) as something to be carefully avoided for most of my life and I still mostly do until I started having my Te come in and started to play with being blunt when it either seemed funny (and if I thought other people thought it was funny too) or if I felt justified and like the occasion warrants it. Te is naturally a blunt function. It’s also naturally honest. Often when I feel justified to be blunt I can feel remorse for it later. My natural tendency used to be to take most hits with silence...I’m a better communicator now and that helps to alleviate most Te assumptions and rudeness that used to be daily and common emotional bruising for me.

The softening is usually part of Fi and I will explain why:

The thing that often gets skipped over when people talk about Fi and what it does is that Fi is constantly putting itself into the other person’s place. Sometimes hurting someone can make me feel worse than they do since if I am putting myself into their place then I am pretty sensitive to criticism. So therefore the softening effect. Fe blends and doesn’t exactly do this, so with Fe the manner of kindness meets the occasion, whatever is perceived to be socially correct. It’s not blunt like Te naturally is but it CAN be pushy for whatever seems socially right. Fe can also be very very critical, depending on whether or not the Fe person takes a humanistic approach to people and/or has learned to accept and be aware of their own weaknesses and therefore those of others. I think the socially accepted way of being very critical is the Fe door-slam and/or stoney silence,but sometimes it’s a reprimand, depending.

We’ve each got some self-growth to go through and in different directions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: odinthor and Aiwass
#71 ·
The MBTI has never been an attempt to rectify Jung's definitions in any way so if they don't line up, it is pointless to pretend that it wasn't a mistake and two entirely separate theories. Unless the point is not to be right but to win a debate on the internet and play the intellectual. So every time I quote Jung to back up my claims you lots vanish into thin air. I'm used to it. It's only an RPG to you. You can't be bothered to do the minimal work required to grasp whatever you're talking about. Better go on quora and cherry pick some opinions as if the frequency of it would give it some weight, typical sensor epistemology. Who's the one coming up with new arguments, pointing both MBTI and Jung fallacies in great details, many times here ? You just stick to what you know because it's been built by people like you to feel special no matter the result and that's all there will be to write in your epitaphs. You're used to do so little efforts to make sense that it doesn't disturb you to present me as a conventionalist and at the same time argue that I'm alone thinking the way I do. No matter how many times I'll quote and analyse what is saif by Young or Myers, I already know that you have given up on reading 1 line of it. All that works is what fuels your mood without taking any mental effort, such as this answer. Those who actually want to challenge their brains will easily find my serious posts, which wouldn't be required for they would have already read Jung carefully and reached the same conclusions.
 
#72 · (Edited)
The MBTI has never been an attempt to rectify Jung's definitions in any way so if they don't line up, it is pointless to pretend that it wasn't a mistake and two entirely separate theories. Unless the point is not to be right but to win a debate on the internet and play the intellectual. So every time I quote Jung to back up my claims you lots vanish into thin air.
MBTI doesn't have to rectify Jung, because it's based on it, and it's free to make slight changes or expanding on it. Same as Socionics. Same as 16 personalities expand on the Assertive vs Turbulent types.

I have been made to understand (not by you) that I jumped into an argument I didn't fully understand (because I didn't read the previous messages). I mentioned that could be the case in my first messages in this argument. I'm still concerned about you using Jung to back up your claim about MBTI when they are clearly different. You, and your friend, keep pointing to the fact that you've explained this thoroughly in other messages but you're tired of explaining yourself. Understandable. You can make outlandish generalizations, that's ok too. Not everything I say is right, I don't deeply understand any of these theories and I've never read beyond the shallow info available online. I've never read any research regarding this.

But if I wasn't in intellectually lazy mode, I wouldn't be here. I'd be reading on astrophysics and cosmology. So, thanks but no thanks. I understand well enough about these theories to know they don't deserve my time for more in-depth research.

If you want to enlighten me though, show me the light, my DM is always open.

Plus I didn't say you were mentally ill, I only wondered because I was [pretending to be] seeing so many inconsistencies (some of which your friend explained to me in private) which were caused because I missed a lot of your other messages and a link in your signature(?)

You're still wrong though, with your absolute statements and generalizations. Talking about MBTI. About Jung, I don't know. MBTI E and I do measure shit. They measure how much you prefer Introversion vs Extroversion. Percentage-wise. And your statement that Ni is not capable of understanding Ne. In MBTI. I don't know about Jung but Ni dom is a better match for Ne dom than Ne is, in MBTI, research says. Also, you say Introverted feelers (do you mean the MBTI INFPs and INFJs, or Jung introverted feelers, the Js?) and Ni (INTJs?) are not capable of logic. You're wrong about those statements about MBTI (again, I don't need you to use Jung to back up your statement on MBTI, use what MBTI says instead, even if wrong and incomplete).

I think you hit your limit and instead of adapting yourself to the situation and explain yourself better, you're being defensive, acting thereby as introverts are supposed to act. According to Jung. You got defensive by accusing me of pretending to see your inconsistencies because I hinted at you being mentally ill.

We all have it all in us, what shows more depends on preferences, what's more normally used, and developed, and the situation we find ourselves in. Saying you'll not bother explaining yourself to anyone that's not Ne dom... A certain Ni or even Si or Se dom can understand your logic and perspective better than a certain Ne dom. If you're not capable of understanding this, well you have a long way to go when it comes to human functioning.
 
#76 ·
The problem is the Infjs I’ve spoken with just will not accept their positivity bubble being burst. One in particular I know just won’t be told things that are contrary if it messes with the vibe she wants. It’s like a cult of fake positivity. It is stifling, oppressive if you like.
 
#79 ·
I think both NFPs and NFJs can be hard or stubborn depending on their lifestyle. It's subjective.

For example... For me as NFJ i feel quite more comfortable making plans and analyzing stuff before I act. But for NFPs is more comfortable to open themselves to different options and they can feel overpressured or stressed when analyzing too much. For me (NFJ) i get stressed when I have a lot of options at the same time, i have to take away the options that are meanless so I can concentrate in only one goal.

So it depends what is your type and who you feel more comfortable with.

This is what I think about stubborness. But is that what you meant with being hard? Or how hard?
 
#83 ·
I feel like Fe and Fi types both confront in different ways for slightly different reasons.

They both confront because something has been violated.

But I feel like for Fe types it's more to "air out" grievances and to confront behavior--they expect a result. They also want to get it done with so that you know where both of you stand. So it's almost like it's a necessary thing they want to happen to solidify the relationship a little too, and to make way for better experiences.

For me, Fi is more about...I don't think it's necessary unless I have to do it. And that's often times not about the relationship at all, but something completely different bothering me. If I get mad enough to confront it's already pretty advanced.

For Fe it's more like they also need to go through the drama. It can't be a neutral, unemotional, "so this happened, and we need to resolve it." Like I will sometimes resolve things for the sake of relationships, but then I try to present it in the most non-confrontational way and I don't want to have to get a lot of emotions involved.

Fe is like--it has to be done with the drama. It's like the idea of emotional catharsis or something. Once you get it out it is gone and just move on.

But for me it's usually quite different--if the damage is done, I sense it is not all finished. In fact you can just add little micro-injuries to the original injury if you are in a rush to "air out grievances" too bluntly or crudely.

That's also where you get back to Fe being blunt in one way where Fi is blunt in others. Fe is emotionally blunt so that it will make you upset on purpose.

Fi is blunt in thoughts--Fi doms express themselves bluntly sometimes, but not because they are anticipating an emotional reaction, but because they are just saying something impersonal. And it's interpreted as offensive or upsetting.

Fe--I think they actually want to say something that hurts because they anticipate a better result that way.

Anyway, that's my limited experience with Fe doms and also as a Fi personality type.

I don't feel like editing, so there's probably some redundancies.
 
#84 ·
I guess another way to look at it could be stereotypes (because how could MBTI not need more of those?) of like a highschool jock.

Fe is the highschool jock. His confrontations are treated like it's part of his nature. It's also, some of it, a show--and for group cohesion or solidarity. He confronts in order to achieve some kind of end for his group or his standing with another person. He does what needs to be done for his aims. Fe doms might not justify it the same way as a jock, but the behavior reminds me more like that--the assumption that it's just part of life.

Fi is probably more like the awkward kid who is really quite sensitive and weak in many ways, but who also tries to hide it and look like a tough guy if bothered too much. And he can be tough. But it just comes out more unexpectedly. It's more of a defense or an accident. It's not something anyone really likes--it's not pretty or anything either. It's ugly.

IME Fe, (though tbh I've only known SFJ not NFJ) likes drama to a degree. They admit it to themselves often. It's a tiny bit of spice of life. Fi is usually trying to avoid hurting someone or getting hurt...sometimes they like drama but it's not as common I don't think--at least not to consciously like it.

But both can underestimate/overestimate each other. My ex boss and I got into it once. She was sort of spouting out stuff she knew people would take offense to. I made a sarcastic remark and she replied--and I retreated. She then thought my retreat was because I couldn't respond or something, when it was actually just self-restraint and seeing the conflict as pointless.

So then she threw the gauntlet down hard and tried to rub it in my face (my retreat gave her confidence) and I came back at her with an even harder and more thorough response IN PUBLIC (bc tbh it's all there, just more contained with Fi and it gives it a bit more of a surprise and force), and she ended up crying about it. So that kind of thing can happen. But often times I do back down if it's someone who's really close--so they never see that side completely (or rarely do). Just because I value the relationship over showing I'm right.

But imo Fe thinks it's playing sometimes and Fi sometimes takes it way more seriously, at least that's the issue I've had. But I'm also a pretty sensitive person. Not all Fi types are sensitive. But most of them do have a bent of seriousness when it comes to emotional values that Fe sometimes finds a bit extreme.

Fe also can value relationships, but they think of emotions more like "storms that pass," if you just vent them, and fighting is just something people do. Fi understands that in principle but holds onto pain much longer so it's more careful about not causing injuries because it is slower to heal and it assumes other people are too. IME
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top