Personality Cafe banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,350 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I was wondering how to tell INFJs and INTPs apart with their function usage. They seem to have a lot of similarities despite using Ni and Ne and the Ti and Fe being placed differently.

Similarities:
-Spend a long time just considering.
-Try to be unobtrusive.
-Enjoy using metaphors and manipulating language.
-Both can appear disconnected from reality.

And so on. I think Enneagram type may also heavily influence differences - for example: and type 5 INFJ may appear more driven for understanding/knowledge like an INTP and a type 9 INTP could appear more harmony-seeking and accommodating than an INTP (just throwing ideas out there).

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,791 Posts
I don't really see how you could confuse the two. They have a few similarities (manipulating language isn't one of them, by the way), but their respective systems of values are completely different and they approach the world in completely different ways. Check out The Personality Page for pretty good descriptions of them; especially take note of the personal growth pages and see the potential problem areas; that's where it's easiest to differentiate between types, in my opinion.
 

·
MOTM June 2010
Joined
·
2,507 Posts
I agree with Zynthaxx, besides Laurie what you refer to in your examples:
Similarities:
-Spend a long time just considering.
-Try to be unobtrusive.

-Enjoy using metaphors and manipulating language.
-Both can appear disconnected from reality.
has nothing to do with function usage instead it's what all introverting types do. As for using metaphors and manipulating language, you may want to give some examples where you believe it is exclusive to those two types.

Granted there are some similarities in the relative dominant function-attitudes they use, per Linda V. Berens.
Ti and Ni are often accompanied by a sense of detachment and disconnection. With both there tends to be comfort with complexity. The difference is that when we are engaging in Ti, we usually have a clear sense of the principles or models something is judged against, whereas with Ni, an impressionistic image forms in the mind.

Ne and Fe often focus on people and their interactions. With Ne, it is the meanings and inferences that come to mind relative to people and their interactions. With Fe, it is the actions that keep people connected or disconnected that matter.
Yet the differences should be apparent to the observer, if one actually knows and appreciates how Ni and Ne works. If any type resembles INFJ it's the ISTP type since they actually do use identical function-attitudes, but in different order.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,350 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
I don't really see how you could confuse the two. They have a few similarities (manipulating language isn't one of them, by the way), but their respective systems of values are completely different and they approach the world in completely different ways. Check out The Personality Page for pretty good descriptions of them; especially take note of the personal growth pages and see the potential problem areas; that's where it's easiest to differentiate between types, in my opinion.
Thanks for the link - it was very helpful :)

I agree with Zynthaxx, besides Laurie what you refer to in your examples:has nothing to do with function usage instead it's what all introverting types do. As for using metaphors and manipulating language, you may want to give some examples where you believe it is exclusive to those two types.

Granted there are some similarities in the relative dominant function-attitudes they use, per Linda V. Berens. Yet the differences should be apparent to the observer, if one actually knows and appreciates how Ni and Ne works. If any type resembles INFJ it's the ISTP type since they actually do use identical function-attitudes, but in different order.
Bolded: just observation. I've seen several different descriptions and posts from INFJs and INTPs about enjoying metaphors and such. It's probably just a random correlation.

I just find it difficult because the descriptions of Ti and Ni sound very similar to me, and the fact all the functions affect each other means that, with the right developed functions, they could appear quite similar. Ti and Ni being the dominant functions means they both work from systems, but in different ways and, as they would be most likely unconscious (I may be wrong here, but I remember someone saying the dominant function is unconscious) it would be hard to figure them out.
 

·
MOTM June 2010
Joined
·
2,507 Posts
Bolded: just observation. I've seen several different descriptions and posts from INFJs and INTPs about enjoying metaphors and such. It's probably just a random correlation.
And that is possibly true if you are merely looking at the intuition function as a dichotomy. There is no distinction between the function-attitudes at that point, thus one would easily perceive everyone with "N" in their type code uses the same function-attitude. But as you know Ni and Ne are used very differently in actuality.
I just find it difficult because the descriptions of Ti and Ni sound very similar to me, and the fact all the functions affect each other means that, with the right developed functions, they could appear quite similar. Ti and Ni being the dominant functions means they both work from systems, but in different ways and, as they would be most likely unconscious (I may be wrong here, but I remember someone saying the dominant function is unconscious) it would be hard to figure them out.
Again this would be correct if all the function-attitudes have a guarantee of development. But they do not. In fact to paraphrase Jung:
This, of course, does not exclude the fact that individuals certainly exist in whom two functions stand upon the same level, whereby both have equal motive power in consciousness. But in such a case, there is also no question of a differentiated type, but merely of a relatively undeveloped dominant function. Uniform consciousness and unconsciousness of functions is, therefore, a distinguishing mark of a primitive mentality.
A rule of thumb for anyone who has not had the time to actually develop their dominant function because they simply are young and inexperienced (roughly less than 25), are generally confused about their own type because they have yet to develop a function-attitude enough for it to be considered differentiated. Until that develops, discussions of what comes afterwards are relative.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,791 Posts
I just find it difficult because the descriptions of Ti and Ni sound very similar to me, and the fact all the functions affect each other means that, with the right developed functions, they could appear quite similar. Ti and Ni being the dominant functions means they both work from systems, but in different ways and, as they would be most likely unconscious (I may be wrong here, but I remember someone saying the dominant function is unconscious) it would be hard to figure them out.
I think it might help you to differentiate between them if you think about it like Ti being an executive function, while Ni is the way you parse experience you've gathered. It's not entirely correct, but it's close enough, for this discussion, at least.
 

·
MOTM June 2010
Joined
·
2,507 Posts
I think an easier way to make the determination is ask if you are developing your thoughts from internal images (Ni-Si) or are you basing them on principles of a model (Ti) or values (Fi). In this case, Ni does not seek experience to make their thoughts known. Ti actually will have used the Ne or Se to bring in information to be considered and base their principles on what makes sense to them. Unlike Ni, Ti may actually change their mind later when new information conflicts with existing information. But it always remains a principle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,350 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
And that is possibly true if you are merely looking at the intuition function as a dichotomy. There is no distinction between the function-attitudes at that point, thus one would easily perceive everyone with "N" in their type code uses the same function-attitude. But as you know Ni and Ne are used very differently in actuality.Again this would be correct if all the function-attitudes have a guarantee of development. But they do not. In fact to paraphrase Jung:A rule of thumb for anyone who has not had the time to actually develop their dominant function because they simply are young and inexperienced (roughly less than 25), are generally confused about their own type because they have yet to develop a function-attitude enough for it to be considered differentiated. Until that develops, discussions of what comes afterwards are relative.
Oh, yes, but I was referring to the chance happening that the functions had been developed rather than the possibility of them being developed. I was trying to put forward a hypothetical situation.
I'm not particularly confused about my type currently. Now I'm more interested in discerning the differences because I don't see them obviously. Or maybe it's just because I haven't found good sources for researching the functions in use.

I think it might help you to differentiate between them if you think about it like Ti being an executive function, while Ni is the way you parse experience you've gathered. It's not entirely correct, but it's close enough, for this discussion, at least.
That makes sense - thanks :)

I think an easier way to make the determination is ask if you are developing your thoughts from internal images (Ni-Si) or are you basing them on principles of a model (Ti) or values (Fi). In this case, Ni does not seek experience to make their thoughts known. Ti actually will have used the Ne or Se to bring in information to be considered and base their principles on what makes sense to them. Unlike Ni, Ti may actually change their mind later when new information conflicts with existing information. But it always remains a principle.
I understand the idea of using internal images, but what would principles of a model/values appear like in your mind? How would you think in that way? I'm curious about how it would be processed.
Hmm, I have heard Ni does change its mind, but maybe less fluidly than Ti/Fi? Would you say Ni is less open to new possibilities?
Thanks for the replies :)
 

·
MOTM June 2010
Joined
·
2,507 Posts
I understand the idea of using internal images, but what would principles of a model/values appear like in your mind? How would you think in that way? I'm curious about how it would be processed.

Hmm, I have heard Ni does change its mind, but maybe less fluidly than Ti/Fi? Would you say Ni is less open to new possibilities?
Thanks for the replies :)
You give a good comparison of Ti vs Ni in that as a perceiving function, Ni may change their minds continuously, but never show the world they have changed their minds. An introverted thinking type may appear to be taking in information and actually may be taking in additional information to gauge it against an already existing principle or base it on how they understand a model.


There are many other ways my introverted thinking works. As Kayness noticed has observed specifically in me and which should be clear in most using Ti as a dominant function-attitude, is that I am a magnet for noticing inconsistencies, whether they are in speech, noticing something out of order, something being in-congruent, etc. It’s natural for Ti dominant types to measure everything by a model or a principle as they understand it. These models are developed by first tearing down the system or animate object to see how it works. A system can be as complex as a theory such as the Psychological Type. More information may be needed to solidify a theory or model, but once the introverted thinking function determines “it is what it is”, it now becomes a ruling principle whereby everything related to that system is gauged by until the system becomes obsolete and a new one replaces it, or parts of it. Usually the ruling principle or model will be based on the truth or at least what others consider the truth. Logically for example, any model introduced subsequent to another model must coincide with the original model, or if there are contradictions must be able to clearly show why it should replace the original. Otherwise introverted thinking types are not apt to change perspectives that easy once the model proves sound or it becomes a ruling principle. Thus the reason most Ti dominant types are considered thick, bullheaded or appear not to adapt.

Another way introverted thinking works is in knowing when something is just an opinion and not actual fact, no matter how popular the opinion becomes. I remember one intuiting type concluding that once it becomes universal knowledge or a consensus, then it is now a fact. Uh no…, introverted thinking will make the distinction that no matter how popular or mainstream the opinion becomes, it is just that a popular opinion. The logic or at least objectivity of an introverted thinking type may routinely come into question because sometimes the ruling principle defies popular opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,504 Posts
Another way introverted thinking works is in knowing when something is just an opinion and not actual fact, no matter how popular the opinion becomes. I remember one intuiting type concluding that once it becomes universal knowledge or a consensus, then it is now a fact. Uh no…, introverted thinking will make the distinction that no matter how popular or mainstream the opinion becomes, it is just that a popular opinion. The logic or at least objectivity of an introverted thinking type may routinely come into question because sometimes the ruling principle defies popular opinion.

Sometimes I wonder whether I am truly Ti-dominant in light of various personality type descriptions which may also sound familiar. However, something like this has a resonance in a much higher magnitude than most.

I think this is a very good description of the nuances of Introverted Thinking.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top