Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
ESI
Joined
·
2,517 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Well, I don't know about others, but I've given up on finding my type.

I know my Enneagrams and that seems to be my best bet.

I've gotten typed so many different things from a number of people in both MBTI and Socionics.

I'd say that at least one person has given me one of each typing. I think the only types I haven't gotten are ExTP.

I'm very frustrated and don't really know what else to do! Anyone else have these frustrations?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
241 Posts
Well, I don't know about others, but I've given up on finding my type.

I know my Enneagrams and that seems to be my best bet.

I've gotten typed so many different things from a number of people in both MBTI and Socionics.

I'd say that at least one person has given me one of each typing. I think the only types I haven't gotten are ExTP.

I'm very frustrated and don't really know what else to do! Anyone else have these frustrations?
Well I'm not exactly sure what your asking but typing in general is something that can be difficult to ascertain and I've had my own lengthy experience. Did you try by cognitive functions? Also, are you looking for clarification?
 

·
Registered
ESI
Joined
·
2,517 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Well I'm not exactly sure what your asking but typing in general is something that can be difficult to ascertain and I've had my own lengthy experience. Did you try by cognitive functions? Also, are you looking for clarification?
Yes, I know about cognitive functions and have definitely only been trying to type through functions. But, people debate about what I use all the time. Hard to tell who is right and who is wrong.

I just posted this for others who are stumped too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
241 Posts
Yes, I know about cognitive functions and have definitely only been trying to type through functions. But, people debate about what I use all the time. Hard to tell who is right and who is wrong.

I just posted this for others who are stumped too.
Well I can agree with the stumped part, Ennegram was a life saver honestly.Finding out I was a 4w5 made alot more sense of the situation and the current mistype I have. It says more about the person which is what I think assisted typing misses out on. Having another voice telling you what you use can make things difficult. Its important to remember that cognitive functions work by preference, so I am concerned if you couldn't make it work and got all the types as usually most lean to a certain area. What were the most conflicting aspects of the arguments?
 

·
Registered
ESI
Joined
·
2,517 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Yes, I know about cognitive functions and have definitely only been trying to type through functions. But, people debate about what I use all the time. Hard to tell who is right and who is wrong.

I just posted this for others who are stumped too.
Well I can agree with the stumped part, Ennegram was a life saver honestly.Finding out I was a 4w5 made alot more sense of the situation and the current mistype I have. It says more about the person which is what I think assisted typing misses out on. Having another voice telling you what you use can make things difficult. Its important to remember that cognitive functions work by preference, so I am concerned if you couldn't make it work and got all the types as usually most lean to a certain area. What were the most conflicting aspects of the arguments?

Yes, I hang around the Enneagram 4 forum the most because that's something I know is me!

Well, recently in the Socionics forum they typed me ESFj, but I very much disagree with that and so did some other people, most between that and ISFj (or ISFP in MBTI)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
241 Posts
Yes, I hang around the Enneagram 4 forum the most because that's something I know is me!

Well, recently in the Socionics forum they typed me ESFj, but I very much disagree with that and so did some other people, most between that and ISFj (or ISFP in MBTI)
Well, I'm no expert on the socionics. I understand that it works on the superego, the ego, and the ID. However, Fe and Si are both present at least... Are those functions you identify with?
 

·
Registered
ESI
Joined
·
2,517 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Yes, I hang around the Enneagram 4 forum the most because that's something I know is me!

Well, recently in the Socionics forum they typed me ESFj, but I very much disagree with that and so did some other people, most between that and ISFj (or ISFP in MBTI)
Well, I'm no expert on the socionics. I understand that it works on the superego, the ego, and the ID. However, Fe and Si are both present at least... Are those functions you identify with?
Nope, though people argued with me. I definitely don't relate to Fe.
 

·
Registered
ESI
Joined
·
2,517 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Well what was it you didn't agree with?
How I dismissed relationships in favor of emotions, the ability to "change" emotional atmosphere. I literally have NO idea how to influence people. At all. Or what to say to them. I'm more blunt.

And, the guy who first typed me Fe-ego was largely because he "didn't like me" and that must mean Fe because ESFj is his dual in Socionics. I actually took my Socionics questionnaire to another site and they all said ESE/ESFj typing for me was ludicrous.
I'm not emotionally expressive. At all. Ask anyone who knows me, especially my family. I'm deeply private in my emotions and that actually irritates my family and friends some.

Also, my Enneagram, which no one has debated, correlates with Fi. 4w3. I have never once seen an Enneagram 4 ESFJ. Lot's of 2's, 3's, and 6's but no 4's. I personally think that Enneagram does have to correlate with type some. For example, I've never seen an Enneagram 7 or 2 INTJ. And probably never will.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
241 Posts
How I dismissed relationships in favor of emotions, the ability to "change" emotional atmosphere. I literally have NO idea how to influence people. At all. Or what to say to them. I'm more blunt.

And, the guy who first typed me Fe-ego was largely because he "didn't like me" and that must mean Fe because ESFj is his dual in Socionics. I actually took my Socionics questionnaire to another site and they all said ESE/ESFj typing for me was ludicrous.
I'm not emotionally expressive. At all. Ask anyone who knows me, especially my family. I'm deeply private in my emotions and that actually irritates my family and friends some.

Also, my Enneagram, which no one has debated, correlates with Fi. 4w3. I have never once seen an Enneagram 4 ESFJ. Lot's of 2's, 3's, and 6's but no 4's. I personally think that Enneagram does have to correlate with type some. For example, I've never seen an Enneagram 7 or 2 INTJ. And probably never will.
Ahh, yup. Misconstrued information. I can understand why he might of thought that as its very crude and restated thing for EXFJ's Socionics which is why I sort of avoided it. Fi types may be for you so that's a place to start I guess... You said you were rather blunt are you also somewhat organizational at all?

Also, your only 19 right? I'm rather close in age and type solidifies in 20 on up. Unfortunately while the Jungian Cognitive functions, development isn't always timely and even. Whatever function you might have may be currently hidden by circumstances so Fi and Te may be right for you. You already have and ISFP there also so what don't you like about it?
Which of the below seems more accurate?

Dominant Fi (IXFP): I know that this is good, and that is bad. I know that you’re not who you say you are. I don’t need to focus on that particular idea, because it is less important than this other idea or belief. I want to focus on what is important, and I can see the measure of importance of everything in my life: people, causes, thoughts, actions, and feelings. Does this belief conflict with mine? Do I think this action is wrong? If so, I won’t do it. I know what I believe and what is worth believing in. Please, let me have some time to mull over this life-altering decision. I don’t want to make the wrong choice. I feel strong and confident in who I am, and what I believe. I have total faith in you. I know what you need, and will stand up for you when you need me to. I am good at protecting others and showing patience in mediating between them.

Inferior Fi (EXTJ): My beliefs are very strong, but I spend little time thinking about them. Many of them are tied to my feelings, and I’m not comfortable dwelling on my emotions. It’s easier to adopt a simple, straightforward moral code and stick to it without deviation. I don’t see the point in determining which causes are more important than others. I have a tendency to think that my values are right for others. I really want to do something greater than myself, and am fiercely loyal to what I believe in but I would rather donate time, energy, and money than emotional support. It’s hard for me to be loyal to people whose decisions I profoundly disagree with. I need to respect you before I can emotionally support you in those times. Slowly, I am learning to be more tolerant and not see the world as black and white.
 

·
Registered
ESI
Joined
·
2,517 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Ahh, yup. Misconstrued information. I can understand why he might of thought that as its very crude and restated thing for EXFJ's Socionics which is why I sort of avoided it. Fi types may be for you so that's a place to start I guess... You said you were rather blunt are you also somewhat organizational at all?
Well, Socionics uses different definitions for the functions than MBTI or even Jung himself. That's kind of way I am avoiding it myself. For example, Se in Socionics is about power structure, volition, force, etc and Jung describes Se as basically being "concrete" and hedonistic in a way. Socionics Se almost sounds a bit like Jung/MBTI's Te.

When it comes to Jungian cognitive functions, I am definitely a Fi-dom. Fi in Jungian terms is about intensity of emotion, personal values, and individuality. In Socionics it's about awareness of relationships between people. Jung also states about how Fi has trouble expressing their emotions and come off as "cold", almost like a Thinking type since their true emotions are concealed. This is certainly true for me. Fi sorts through emotions internally, whereas Fe talks then out.

The best way I know to describe the difference between introverted functions and extroverted functions when it comes to Jung is "depth" vs "broad."

I know I have to have Fi-Te, with Te being lower. I have to "extrovert" my thoughts. When doing something logic-based I have to put it out on paper. Make a list, draw a graph, talk through my logical thoughts. Ti doesn't need to do this. It sorts out it's logic in it's head much better.

Same thing with Fi vs Fe. Fi sorts out it's emotions and values in it's head, preferring to make sense of them that way. Fe needs to talk them out for them to make sense to the Fe-user. Even IxTP's will do this when they are under stress or "in the grip."

When I'm stressed, I see Te kick in. I become dogmatic, rude, overly blunt and to-the-point, and am very "Move out of the way."

It also manifests in the sense that I start seeing logical inconsistencies/flaws where there aren't any. I start blaming myself (Fi) for being unable to perform something that should be obvious and seek to fix my phantom mistakes in a quick and shallow-minded sort of way (weak Te)

Go to this thread here. PaladinX is licensed in MBTI, so his references are legit. :) I read through the Fi-dom section and... wow, it's me to an absolute T.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,958 Posts
I've gotten typed so many different things from a number of people in both MBTI and Socionics.

I'd say that at least one person has given me one of each typing. I think the only types I haven't gotten are ExTP.

I'm very frustrated and don't really know what else to do! Anyone else have these frustrations?
Can't equate there. Treating everyone's opinion equally will just get you common opinion, not the truth. I don't care what people type me as; I just want to know why they type me that way so I can incorporate it into my opinion.

When it comes to Jungian cognitive functions, I am definitely a Fi-dom. Fi in Jungian terms is about intensity of emotion, personal values, and individuality. In Socionics it's about awareness of relationships between people. Jung also states about how Fi has trouble expressing their emotions and come off as "cold", almost like a Thinking type since their true emotions are concealed. This is certainly true for me. Fi sorts through emotions internally, whereas Fe talks then out.
These aren't Jung's functions. Jung's Fi AND Fe are about personal values. I also can't find a statement by Jung about Fi being remotely based on individuality. It's self-centred, yes, but that doesn't mean desiring individuality or independence.

This is what Jung said about Fi-doms as opposed to Fe:
"In the presence of something that might carry one away or arouse enthusiasm, this type observes a benevolent neutrality, tempered with an occasional trace of superiority and criticism that soon takes the wind out of the sails of a sensitive object. But a stormy emotion will be brusquely rejected with murderous coldness"

Do these sound like they're describing Fi?
"She is a woman who follows the guiding-line of her feeling."
"'But I can't think what I don't feel', such a type said to me once in indignant tones."
"feeling has a personal character, in spite of the fact that the subjective factor may be already, to a large extent, repressed."
These are quotes from Jung describing Fe-doms. He also said that Fe-doms tend to pick a 'suitable' partner based on concrete criteria.

The best way I know to describe the difference between introverted functions and extroverted functions when it comes to Jung is "depth" vs "broad."
Abstract vs concrete are Jung's words. He also used subjective vs objective. Looking up the dictionary definition of subjective will help you to get a better grasp of what that means.

It also manifests in the sense that I start seeing logical inconsistencies/flaws where there aren't any.
Te is extroverted; you should be pointing out inconsistencies with facts or something concrete when using Te. Logical consistency is Ti.

I start blaming myself (Fi) for being unable to perform something that should be obvious
Ok, think this through. The logical consequence of saying that 'blaming yourself' is Fi would be that Ti/Fe types can't blame themselves because they don't have Fi. Is this what you're saying?
 
  • Like
Reactions: CopperrHareV

·
Registered
ESI
Joined
·
2,517 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Can't equate there. Treating everyone's opinion equally will just get you common opinion, not the truth. I don't care what people type me as; I just want to know why they type me that way so I can incorporate it into my opinion.
I do that as well. I listen to why people call me Ni-dom and Ti-dom and silently dismiss them all the time due to my own opinions.
The point of this post, more so, was kind of just to see who else here walks around typeless. Wasn't intended to be anything serious.


Fair enough. Yes I've read this.

If you may, in your own words, describe your understanding of Fi and Fe through your understanding of Jung's words.


Abstract vs concrete are Jung's words. He also used subjective vs objective. Looking up the dictionary definition of subjective will help you to get a better grasp of what that means.
Yes, I know what subjective means.

Ok, think this through. The logical consequence of saying that 'blaming yourself' is Fi would be that Ti/Fe types can't blame themselves because they don't have Fi. Is this what you're saying?
This is just something I had read by someone, I forget who, over at the Socionics forum had said. Claimed that Fe tends to shift blame. Overall, no, I don't think that it is something absolutely definitive of Fi. Just perhaps a touch more likely.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,958 Posts
Yes, I know what subjective means.
It's more that 'subjective' can be applied multiple ways, and has a good 6+ meanings, most of which can be applied to introversion, and the opposite applied to extroversion.

If you may, in your own words, describe your understanding of Fi and Fe through your understanding of Jung's words.
You want an entire essay?

Context: Jung was typing patients who were repressing all other functions, so these are extremes.

Important start here; Jung said F was a function and the difference between Fi/Fe is the conclusion that the F function makes; before making a conclusion, a Fi-dom can go into the Fe-side of the function and vice versa.

Jung describes Fi-doms as placid but passionate; kinda unflappable. They'll sit there at a party, completely indifferent to the fun going on around them. Sometimes making comments implying that taking part in the fun of a group is beneath them. I can't remember/find him talking about Fe in such a situation, but it can be safely assumed that they're not going to resist having group fun unless they have actual reasons to do so (social anxiety, not comfortable with the people, etc).

Jung's comment about Fe values were extremely negative. So I'm going to turn it more neutral for obvious reasons. Some Fe-doms would have a problem dating someone significantly younger than them because it falls out of their preferred age range for a partner; age is an objective value, but to each their own; some Fe-doms will have completely different values; this is another one of Jung's core focuses; the fact that these are mental information processes, not traits, so two Fe-doms won't necessarily have values in common.

Jung describes Fi-doms as unsympathetic and Fe-doms as empathetic. Going into my own speculation here, but my understand of this is that a Fe-dom will say something empathetic to cheer you up, whereas a Fi-dom will respect your right to feel whatever you want, so they seem unsympathetic.

An example of something that falls into Jung's definitions of both subjective and feeling would be an honour code. I quite like Wikipedia's statements:
Honour is an abstract concept entailing a perceived quality of worthiness and respectability that affects both the social standing and the self-evaluation of an individual or corporate body such as a family, school, regiment or nation. Accordingly, individuals (or corporate bodies) are assigned worth and stature based on the harmony of their actions with a specific code of honour, and the moral code of the society at large.
~~Ran out of time to continue~~
 

·
Registered
ESI
Joined
·
2,517 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
You want an entire essay?
I'll be pleased with however much you are willing to indulge. The more the merrier, however.

Important start here; Jung said F was a function and the difference between Fi/Fe is the conclusion that the F function makes; before making a conclusion, a Fi-dom can go into the Fe-side of the function and vice versa.
Yes, I had a friend on here explain this to me. It's like this with all the other functions as well, yes? Thinking, Intuition, etc.?


Context: Jung was typing patients who were repressing all other functions, so these are extremes.


Noted.

Jung describes Fi-doms as placid but passionate; kinda unflappable and having an air of superiority about them. They'll sit there at a party, completely indifferent to the fun going on around them. Sometimes making comments implying that taking part in the fun of a group is beneath them. I can't remember/find him talking about Fe in such a situation, but it can be safely assumed that they're not going to resist having group fun unless they have actual reasons to do so (social anxiety, not comfortable with the people, etc).
Interesting.
Bolded this part, as I find myself doing this in a way. Correct me if this personal example strays from what Jung's example actually means.
For instance, my theater class two semesters ago was full of people that were very extroverted and who I deemed in my mind as "sheeple." I dismissed their antics and when I could not escape their presence I was completely and totally annoyed. I then put myself on a pedestal of sorts, deeming their actions and behavior as boorish.
But, deep down, I looked at my motivations to this sort of thinking. But, that I think will end up slipping into a conversation about my Enneatype 4w3 which may be all it is anyway.

Jung's comment about Fe values were extremely negative. So I'm going to turn it more neutral for obvious reasons. Some Fe-doms would have a problem dating someone significantly younger than them because it falls out of their preferred age range for a partner; age is an objective value, but to each their own; some Fe-doms will have completely different values; this is another one of Jung's core focuses; the fact that these are mental information processes, not traits, so two Fe-doms won't necessarily have values in common.
Negative, you say? I've only read excerpts from Psychological Types. I keep meaning to get my hands on a copy in some form or another. Is it that he seemed to insert his own two-cents about Fe, or just listing it's honest negative traits? Nonetheless, I like to know this sort of information, be it good, bad, or ugly. Though, if what you have said summarizes it enough and there's nothing additional, that'll suffice.

Jung describes Fi-doms as unsympathetic and Fe-doms as empathetic. Going into my own speculation here, but my understand of this is that a Fe-dom will say something empathetic to cheer you up, whereas a Fi-dom will respect your right to feel whatever you want, so they seem unsympathetic.
I see. I get called out on this and it often causes discourse that I don't express any sort of sympathy to people who expect it and/or want it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,958 Posts
Negative, you say? I've only read excerpts from Psychological Types. I keep meaning to get my hands on a copy in some form or another. Is it that he seemed to insert his own two-cents about Fe, or just listing it's honest negative traits? Nonetheless, I like to know this sort of information, be it good, bad, or ugly. Though, if what you have said summarizes it enough and there's nothing additional, that'll suffice.
He describes how they're out of touch with Ti, so they're oblivious to choosing a compatible partner. Instead, he outlines how they shallowly pick external traits, and then goes on to prove that they aren't actually shallow, and will stay loyal even if their 'suitable man' becomes completely unsuitable. Problem is, this isn't something a Fe-dom would equate with.

Interesting.
Bolded this part, as I find myself doing this in a way. Correct me if this personal example strays from what Jung's example actually means.
For instance, my theater class two semesters ago was full of people that were very extroverted and who I deemed in my mind as "sheeple." I dismissed their antics and when I could not escape their presence I was completely and totally annoyed. I then put myself on a pedestal of sorts, deeming their actions and behavior as boorish.
But, deep down, I looked at my motivations to this sort of thinking. But, that I think will end up slipping into a conversation about my Enneatype 4w3 which may be all it is anyway.
Yeah, your 4ness is showing here.

This is where typology becomes difficult. Jung's intent was to focus on abstract reasoning processes and go against traits. So traits can't be used for function-typings. It's the underlying thought process that is the focus, and most people are bad at identifying these things in themselves. I mistyped myself as Ni-Te for quite a while because intuition is so idealised, and it took someone else seeing Ti/Fe for me to be able to see it and retype myself.

And then there's this complication:
Yes, I had a friend on here explain this to me. It's like this with all the other functions as well, yes? Thinking, Intuition, etc.?
Yes. Jung put a heavy importance on T/F/N/S being the functions and E/I as a separate dichotomy.

This just complicates typology even more, because it means Fi-doms have strong 'Fe' usage, just never a Fe conclusion. So everything they do is fully considerate of Fe, and they're far more similar to Fe-doms than people usually think.

I see. I get called out on this and it often causes discourse that I don't express any sort of sympathy to people who expect it and/or want it.
So why do you hold back empathetic statements? What's the underlying reason? Is it because you want to respect other people's right to feel what they are feeling? You're a 4, so is it because you want to be different from a sibling/parent/friend?
 

·
Registered
ESI
Joined
·
2,517 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Perhaps @KalimofDaybreak can really add to this conversation since he's done very thorough reading of Psychological Types.

It's fine, however, if you don't have the time! I just think it would be pretty helpful considering you and Fried Eggz seem well-read in this. :)

He describes how they're out of touch with Ti, so they're oblivious to choosing a compatible partner. Instead, he outlines how they shallowly pick external traits, and then goes on to prove that they aren't actually shallow, and will stay loyal even if their 'suitable man' becomes completely unsuitable. Problem is, this isn't something a Fe-dom would equate with.
Maybe a very unhealthy Fe user? However, this sort of problem sounds like something much deeper than cognitive function typing.


Yeah, your 4ness is showing here.

This is where typology becomes difficult. Jung's intent was to focus on abstract reasoning processes and go against traits. So traits can't be used for function-typings. It's the underlying thought process that is the focus, and most people are bad at identifying these things in themselves. I mistyped myself as Ni-Te for quite a while because intuition is so idealised, and it took someone else seeing Ti/Fe for me to be able to see it and retype myself.
I've read somewhere that people have a habit of really idealizing their Tertiary functions to the point where they believe that it's their dominant. Underlying thought process, eh? Such as? Forgive me if my questions are getting too picky, just wanna know! Apparently, though as I've been told your dominant function is so natural to you that you literally have no idea that you're using it.


This just complicates typology even more, because it means Fi-doms have strong 'Fe' usage, just never a Fe conclusion. So everything they do is fully considerate of Fe, and they're far more similar to Fe-doms than people usually think.
What are the conclusions that Fe and Fi so different?


So why do you hold back empathetic statements? What's the underlying reason? Is it because you want to respect other people's right to feel what they are feeling? You're a 4, so is it because you want to be different from a sibling/parent/friend?
No no, it has nothing to do with wanting to be different. As in, I don't hold back empathy because it's a common thing for others to do. More so it has just never come naturally to me. I'm... bad at comforting people. As much as it hurts to hear it, I've had family members call me selfish on occasion just because I show no visible sympathy outside of a flat, "Oh. I'm sorry." I've lost a good deal of friends (well... I certainly wouldn't call them true friends) simply because I refuse to acknowledge their drama and when they ask my opinions, I give them. And they're not what they want to hear. I do this because I feel that sugarcoating/comfort doesn't solve the problem. Forgive me if this doesn't answer your question. It's actually a tough question to answer, picking at your core motivations like such.
 

·
Registered
ESI
Joined
·
2,517 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
@Fried Eggz

Oh, and I appreciate the knowledge. I certainly don't want to be walking around giving false definitions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,958 Posts
I've read somewhere that people have a habit of really idealizing their Tertiary functions to the point where they believe that it's their dominant. Underlying thought process, eh? Such as? Forgive me if my questions are getting too picky, just wanna know! Apparently, though as I've been told your dominant function is so natural to you that you literally have no idea that you're using it.
Pretty much. It's highly appreciated in other people, so people assume it's stronger than it is.

Underlying thought processes - kinda like a computer program in your head called 'Ni' that processes information. It doesn't always produce consistent traits, it simply processes information.

What are the conclusions that Fe and Fi so different?
Focus. It's not something I find easy to describe. Fe-doms will always focus on the objective, "Don't do that, don't do this, stop misbehaving." Fi-doms focus on the subjective, "Do you have no honor?"

Perhaps @KalimofDaybreak can really add to this conversation since he's done very thorough reading of Psychological Types.
The first comment on his profile contains this:
"Hi, just wanted to drop in to say I really like your posts about Ni (well mostly Ni but others as well). In one of your posts you said you felt the need to define to the best of your ability to make others understand your point, and I think you are doing it well, at least the things you say ring true to me and your posts are a pleasure to read."

Are you sure Kalim has read Psychological Types? This defies the core definition of Ni, and I say that because I am a definer; a Ti-dom. Ni is perception, which desires only to perceive information. It is not judgement that would define, sort or otherwise change information. The endless stream of subjective, ruminating thinking that results in definitions is Ti.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top