Personality Cafe banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,229 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I use Fi all the time thinking about my self important sentimental values

I use Ne all the time in thinking out of the box and exploring new ways to implement my primary function: Fi

The weird part is, the best way my Ne comes up with to employ Fi values, is to live more like the values that are usually associated with Fe.

I value altruism, that came from Fi, and I value sense of belonging and group harmony- perhaps just as much- which sounds a lot like Fe to me.

I also constantly try to restructure the organizations I'm in and motivate people- that most certainly has to be Fe right?

Furthermore, I seem to WANT to use Ni, but I can never calm down enough to really do it- I think this relates a lot to lack of sense of belonging.

So, am I just a lonely INFP that values being social so much that I go outside myself to use what resembles Fe?

Or, am I a depressed NFJ that is just low on energy.

*shrug
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,805 Posts
I use Fi all the time thinking about my self important sentimental values

I use Ne all the time in thinking out of the box and exploring new ways to implement my primary function: Fi

The weird part is, the best way my Ne comes up with to employ Fi values, is to live more like the values that are usually associated with Fe.

I value altruism, that came from Fi, and I value sense of belonging and group harmony- perhaps just as much- which sounds a lot like Fe to me.

I also constantly try to restructure the organizations I'm in and motivate people- that most certainly has to be Fe right?

Furthermore, I seem to WANT to use Ni, but I can never calm down enough to really do it- I think this relates a lot to lack of sense of belonging.

So, am I just a lonely INFP that values being social so much that I go outside myself to use what resembles Fe?

Or, am I a depressed NFJ that is just low on energy.

*shrug
Restructure and motivate can be a lot of things... but I know that my ENFP brother, who is a manager of a restaurant, dedicates all his natural effort to those things. He has new ideas and is deeply concerned with the people (more on Fi right and wrong than Fe social ethics). He is the quintessential Joan of Arc figure... drawing lines in the sand and defending his people because of deep (overwrought?) conviction.

The real question is whether making yourself responsible for the feelings of others, whatever those feelings might be, is natural for you or not. THAT is Fe.

Ni Ne is pretty clear by how you accept new ideas of others. Ni needs a moment to internalize those ideas and decide if they might make them their own... Fe/Te is usually used as a tool to accomplish this. Ne just banters and barters ideas/concepts/conclusions freely to try to inform their internal struggle to determine a sense of Truth (based on value - Fi, or correctness, Ti). Truth needs no vision/conclusion/interpretation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,229 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
jesus cheetos... what? Lol jk ill think on that

I guess you are right.

Idk- all i know is that when Fi gives me passion, it is a very painful one, because, well *shrugs
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,491 Posts
I'd say you're making a mistake that's common among people whose knowledge of Jung and the MBTI mostly comes from internet forums and SuperDuperDave and other shining stars of the internet firmament — rather than from reading Jung or Myers or Keirsey or Berens or Thomson or other mainstream MBTI sources.

Even if you think there's something more basic about the eight cognitive functions than the four dichotomies — which wasn't really Myers' view and isn't the official MBTI perspective (and isn't my view, either) — it still makes no sense to say:

INFP = Fi-Ne-Si-Te.

Instead, you should say this:

INFP = Fi-Ne-Si-Te + common I + common N + common F + common P.

(Not to mention common IN, common NF and other combinations that have some significant tendency to correlate with noteworthy personality characteristics.)

By common I, common N, etc., I mean the characteristics that all introverts, all intuitives, and so on, share. The official MBTI instrument itself, like most MBTI tests, is based exclusively on those common characteristics — rather than on characteristics specific to the eight cognitive functions.

Jung spent far more of Psychological Types discussing the characteristics that all introverts and all extraverts have in common than he did talking about all eight of the functions put together — and, in the Foreword to a late edition of the book, he explained that he'd stuck the eight functions descriptions at the back (in Chapter X) for a reason.

If you want to create a portrait of an ENFP (for example) and the only F-related characteristics you include are the ones you find in typical descriptions of Fi — that is, if you leave out the common F characteristics (particularly the people/relationship-orientation) that are typical of all F's (whether Fi or Fe) — you'll end up with a very impoverished portrait. Even MBTI theorists who stress the centrality of the cognitive functions know better than to make that mistake. (Well, I mean the respectable ones. I'm not vouching for SuperDuperDave.) If you read Lenore Thomson's Personality Type, for example, you'll find that she devotes half a chapter to the common F and common T characteristics, concluding with a list of common F characteristics that includes "an interest in how people feel," "a commitment to social obligation, empathy, and responsibility to others," "the ability to anticipate people's needs and reactions" and "an interest in human relationships and the values they illustrate" — all characteristics that you'll find in her ENFP portrait, in addition to the characteristics Thomson attributes to the ENFP's auxiliary Fi function. As Thomson puts it, "Whether they're running a halfway house, teaching a class, mobilizing a task force, or waiting in line at the grocery store, ENFPs have a warm, empathetic approach to others, and they establish immediate affective connections. They have implicit faith in their ability to identify with people, and are often sought out by coworkers and acquaintances who have a problem to solve or need to confide in someone." As the official MBTI Manual puts it, "The ENFP's feeling preference shows in a concern for people. They are skillful in handling people and often have remarkable insight into the possibilities and development of others." Those qualities basically reflect the ENFP's common F characteristics (first and foremost, the people/relationship-orientation) — not to mention the ENFP's general extraverted approach to the world.

I think the most frequently-linked-to cognitive functions test on the internet may be Nardi's test, and the results that INTJs (for example) typically get on that test (based on the results posted at INTJforum) are significantly inconsistent with the Ni-Te-Fi-Se pattern. If you're interested in more analysis by me of the nature of the discreptancies, and whether the problem is with the test or that cognitive functions model, you could take a look at two long posts I made on the subject — one and two — at INTJforum. For purposes of this discussion, the main thing to note is that, instead of getting high Ni and Te scores and low Ne and Ti scores on Nardi's test, INTJs typically get high Ni and Ne scores (with Ni not significantly favored over Ne) and high Te and Ti scores (with Te not significantly favored over Ti). It may be that, if you take the test, you'll find that your results are more along the lines of high Fi and Fe scores, rather than a high Fi score and a low Fe score — although, as I've noted elsewhere, I think some of Nardi's Fe items are written in a way that makes them significantly more likely to appeal to extraverts than introverts.

In any case, the main point I'm trying to make is that, the next time you find yourself focusing on some F-ish aspect of your own personality and saying, "Gee, this seems more like Fe than Fi" (or some N-ish thing and pondering Ne and Ni), you should consider that it may be something more aptly characterized as a common F (or common N, as applicable) aspect of your personality.

As a final note, I'd be curious to hear whether you come out pretty clearly INFP when you take a typical dichotomy-based MBTI test or whether you tend to get a different result on dichotomy-based tests and typed yourself as an INFP based on some kind of cognitive functions analysis (or test).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,805 Posts
I'd say you're making a mistake that's common among people whose knowledge of Jung and the MBTI mostly comes from internet forums and SuperDuperDave and other shining stars of the internet firmament — rather than from reading Jung or Myers or Keirsey or Berens or Thomson or other mainstream MBTI sources.

Even if you think there's something more basic about the eight cognitive functions than the four dichotomies — which wasn't really Myers' view and isn't the official MBTI perspective (and isn't my view, either) — it still makes no sense to say:

INFP = Fi-Ne-Si-Te.

Instead, you should say this:

INFP = Fi-Ne-Si-Te + common I + common N + common F + common P.

(Not to mention common IN, common NF and other combinations that have some significant tendency to correlate with noteworthy personality characteristics.)

By common I, common N, etc., I mean the characteristics that all introverts, all intuitives, and so on, share. The official MBTI instrument itself, like most MBTI tests, is based exclusively on those common characteristics — rather than on characteristics specific to the eight cognitive functions.

Jung spent far more of Psychological Types discussing the characteristics that all introverts and all extraverts have in common than he did talking about all eight of the functions put together — and, in the Foreword to a late edition of the book, he explained that he'd stuck the eight functions descriptions at the back (in Chapter X) for a reason.

If you want to create a portrait of an ENFP (for example) and the only F-related characteristics you include are the ones you find in typical descriptions of Fi — that is, if you leave out the common F characteristics (particularly the people/relationship-orientation) that are typical of all F's (whether Fi or Fe) — you'll end up with a very impoverished portrait. Even MBTI theorists who stress the centrality of the cognitive functions know better than to make that mistake. (Well, I mean the respectable ones. I'm not vouching for SuperDuperDave.) If you read Lenore Thomson's Personality Type, for example, you'll find that she devotes half a chapter to the common F and common T characteristics, concluding with a list of common F characteristics that includes "an interest in how people feel," "a commitment to social obligation, empathy, and responsibility to others," "the ability to anticipate people's needs and reactions" and "an interest in human relationships and the values they illustrate" — all characteristics that you'll find in her ENFP portrait, in addition to the characteristics Thomson attributes to the ENFP's auxiliary Fi function. As Thomson puts it, "Whether they're running a halfway house, teaching a class, mobilizing a task force, or waiting in line at the grocery store, ENFPs have a warm, empathetic approach to others, and they establish immediate affective connections. They have implicit faith in their ability to identify with people, and are often sought out by coworkers and acquaintances who have a problem to solve or need to confide in someone." As the official MBTI Manual puts it, "The ENFP's feeling preference shows in a concern for people. They are skillful in handling people and often have remarkable insight into the possibilities and development of others." Those qualities basically reflect the ENFP's common F characteristics (first and foremost, the people/relationship-orientation) — not to mention the ENFP's general extraverted approach to the world.

I think the most frequently-linked-to cognitive functions test on the internet may be Nardi's test, and the results that INTJs (for example) typically get on that test (based on the results posted at INTJforum) are significantly inconsistent with the Ni-Te-Fi-Se pattern. If you're interested in more analysis by me of the nature of the discreptancies, and whether the problem is with the test or that cognitive functions model, you could take a look at two long posts I made on the subject — one and two — at INTJforum. For purposes of this discussion, the main thing to note is that, instead of getting high Ni and Te scores and low Ne and Ti scores on Nardi's test, INTJs typically get high Ni and Ne scores (with Ni not significantly favored over Ne) and high Te and Ti scores (with Te not significantly favored over Ti). It may be that, if you take the test, you'll find that your results are more along the lines of high Fi and Fe scores, rather than a high Fi score and a low Fe score — although, as I've noted elsewhere, I think some of Nardi's Fe items are written in a way that makes them significantly more likely to appeal to extraverts than introverts.

In any case, the main point I'm trying to make is that, the next time you find yourself focusing on some F-ish aspect of your own personality and saying, "Gee, this seems more like Fe than Fi" (or some N-ish thing and pondering Ne and Ni), you should consider that it may be something more aptly characterized as a common F (or common N, as applicable) aspect of your personality.

As a final note, I'd be curious to hear whether you come out pretty clearly INFP when you take a typical dichotomy-based MBTI test or whether you tend to get a different result on dichotomy-based tests and typed yourself as an INFP based on some kind of cognitive functions analysis (or test).
I think this is supported by the tendency of function tests to rank Ti doms as also having a high Te and Ne doms as also having a high Ni.

I agree with this overall. Though I will say that I find Te distasteful in the ways in which it is distinct from my Ti... and Ni frustrating in the ways it is distinct from my Ne. The 'attitudes' matter a great deal but recognizing that T is an entity in itself seems important.

Coming from a Keirsey background myself I can certainly see the value of this point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: angelcat

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,229 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
@reckful thats a decent answer- though- there will never be a perfect answer as to find out what are "true" preference is

haha, i dont take these tests, they are no where near as accurate as my self measure

i also dont particularly like studying anything beyond the functions i use a lot

for theory I like lenore better than the rest, though i dont read all the fluff- i just looked at her left/ right brain alternatives

I personally look at the 4 dichotomies first, then look at 8, then compare a whole type to my experiences with others like that, ahh and there is one more thing i cant remember

Anyway ive swallowed this stuff whole and spit it out so many times that it hardly has much flavor, i really just wanted to selfishly talk about myself, but here is something i spit out recently that might return the favor

Si: Traditionalism
Fe: Group Coordinationism
Te: Practicalism
Ti: Reductionism
Fi: Self Coordinationism
Ne: Innovationism
Ni: Symbolism
Se: Sensualism

Just the tip of the iceberg though, as you said, there is overlapping and commonality- and we don't need to cover the basics i suppose- but im a bit happy at the artistic nature of this list, feel free to reduce- replace- mess wtih, etc.. haha
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,967 Posts
INFP and INFJ are strikingly similar because Fi + Ne and Ni + Fe can accomplish the same goals in different ways, but they are not alike at all in terms of leading with introverted judgment or leading with introverted perception. This is why it's useful to study the differences between the expression of dominant functions in different MBTI and /or JCF types, especially when a person is confused about whether they actually use one or another.

From the Personality Junkie site,

Myers-Briggs Theory: More on Judging & Perceiving: A Point of Confusion with Regard to Introverts

Good readin' made for brain eatin' =Þ No, not zombie cannibalism -- food for thought!

@reckful people would be wise to be advised that they could be mistyped as INTJ when they are actually INTP, and could be mistyped as INTJ when they are actually INFJ. Online tests are garbage for the most part unless the person taking them fits a cast, or a model built around stereotype of expected cognitive development being uniform. There can be no 100% correct Te model for administering these subjective (needs a Ti model that is flexible and adjusts for individual context) online MBTI tests.

There are also mental health reasons for why someone would have a lower "use" of a particular F trait in stark contrast to what would be expected for the JCF functional stack or standard preference order of that MBTI.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Up and Away

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,229 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
There are also mental health reasons for why someone would have a lower "use" of a particular F trait in stark contrast to what would be expected for the JCF functional stack or standard preference order of that MBTI.
I'm no where near confused about the functions or which one I used- but its hard to know true preference. In your last sentence, you mention something more related to what I was asking, even though obviously everything can relate to mental health- you are referring to abnormality.

"So, am I just a lonely INFP that values being social so much that I go outside myself to use what resembles Fe?

Or, am I a depressed NFJ that is just low on energy."

I wouldn't expect old theories like JCF and MBTI to account for all angles. What we come up with is likely just as good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,967 Posts
I'm no where near confused about the functions or which one I used-
What we come up with is likely just as good.
Sounds to me like you just made an introverted judgment, and you did so by taking the parts of what I wrote which you already agreed with and saying, "Hey, that's what I was talking about." instead of acknowledging that if you truly understood the way your mind is working you would have already answered your own question by now.

You are INFP.

You'll get better at this by strengthening your Te (Extraverted Thinking or Objective Thinking) rather than assuming you have been objective in your understanding of a model.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,229 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Sounds to me like you just made an introverted judgment, and you did so by taking the parts of what I wrote which you already agreed with and saying, "Hey, that's what I was talking about." instead of acknowledging that if you truly understood the way your mind is working you would have already answered your own question by now.

You are INFP.

You'll get better at this by strengthening your Te (Extraverted Thinking or Objective Thinking) rather than assuming you have been objective in your understanding of a model.
I had answered my own question before I posted this question.

You missed the intent of this post- it was not for answers based on theory- even though I posed it as such.

;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,967 Posts
I had answered my own question before I posted this question.

You missed the intent of this post- it was not for answers based on theory- even though I posed it as such.

;)
Impulsive response: "Typical."

Calculated response: "Touché."

^__~
 
  • Like
Reactions: Up and Away
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top