This is a discussion on Am I an ISFJ or INFJ? within the What's my personality type? forums, part of the Personality Cafe category; Originally Posted by marblecloud95 Woah, detecting high levels of hyperactivity, you on meds? I think she's just excited that she's ...
By the way, do you have any book recommendations? I have one, this one and it helped understand the functions a bit more clearly. Not sure how reliable some of its "testing" strategies are. But it did help me determine that I was Extroverted Feeling and most likely an Intuitive, but that wasn't for sure obviously.
I have a horrible curse of being way too idealistic with relationships. I have that "dreamy" way of interpreting how people should be and get a reality check when they're not what I was expecting. I'll likely be forever single because of this until I can learn to get out of my head some. :)
Personality Type: An Owner's Manual by Lenore Thomson. This one is a bit controversial and her model for the functions is a bit strange, but the approach she takes to talking about the functions is enlightening and she has some really good stuff in there about type and just being a good person based off your type.
Gift Differing: Understanding Personality Type by Isabel Myers. I myself have (shamefully) not read this one yet, but it's rather essential if you are going to do any reading about MBTI.
There are other writers, too; Marie von Franz, J.H. van der Hoop come to mind (these two immediately followed Jung: von Franz was his protege and van der Hoop was a patient of Jung's if I am not mistaken). These two are also on my reading list. :P
I've not read the book you linked to, but I will tell you one thing about Nardi. While I appreciate his work and I think it's rather groundbreaking, his view of the functions is that they are just that: function, conscious processes of the mind. He can be insightful, but in the end he is an empiricist and is interested in data he can collect. The Jungian idea of the functions, that they are mindsets or perspectives, not an actual process, conflicts with this, since there is no real way to empirically quantify them. Nardi can be helpful, but don't take his word as gospel.
Give me an example of the kind of abstract concepts you like to talk about. Tell me the core truth of something.
ETA: I mean... check out this interview / this post.
David Bowie. Ni-dom. I thought lower Ni, until I watched more interviews.
The interview quoted in that ... is blah until about 6 minutes in, and then the Ni comes out in full force. Psychopomp is right -- Bowie has been waiting the entire interview to discuss SOMETHING like that. Something pure abstracting and remote and purely conceptual - the internet. The alien invading our lives. The symbol of rebellion and potential. Look how abstracting his language becomes. Look how the interviewer is clearly not understanding a word of it, is totally lost, and tries to bring him back to tangibles. Bowie is having none of it. That's Ni. Pure Ni.
Being creative is not Ni.
Daydreaming is not Ni.
Not being sentimental is not Ni.
Being intelligent is not Ni.
Ni is obscure, unattached, weird, symbolic, and impossible to relate. Ni art is Bowie and his Ziggy character. His music videos from the 1970's/80's where the audience thought, "Dude, what the hell does that even MEAN?"
There is a super low bar for "intuition" on PerC. You can cross it by not being a stick in the mud. But real INFJs are Bowie. And Yoko Ono. And people who are so utterly devoted to subjective impressionism that you catch them in a conversation and it turns into ... that.
Last edited by angelcat; 01-21-2016 at 09:23 AM.
If I don't get this MBTI crap put to rest for myself I'm going to scream.
I think Bowie is ENFJ and Yoko Ono is something else. Ive heard INTP. Just because someone is weird and you can't relate doesn't mean theyre Ni dom. ;)
The introverted functions are harder to grasp because they are specific to the person using them -- they are all impressionistic and abstract. So no one can describe Ni or Si to you, because they are both abstract and tied to individual perception. I use Si, but my Si is NOTHING LIKE the Si in my ISFJ friend. Yet, we both still use it. Reality is subverted through our Si, to create sensory impressions rather than Ni symbolic / conceptual impressions.
Actually, that's a good way to frame it: Si is sensory abstraction and impression, Ni is conceptual abstraction.
Doesn't help, does it? I'm sorry, I'm abstracting myself at the moment. :P
The fact that not once in the initial questionnaire you willingly led the conversation into abstraction leads me to think you're not high Ni. But if you wanted to show me some intuitive concept that excites you, I'm willing to keep talking.
Your daydreaming and enjoyment of thinking about what COULD BE instead of what IS struck me as very Ne. Not necessarily higher Ne, but Ne in general. That's the linchpin of Ne: not seeing what something is, but how it could be more idealized. ISFJs are not beyond this -- it is highly common in them.
However, their interviews and body of art all have that detachment / wildly concept-driven impressionism to them, which is indeed Ni... and much more common in Ni-doms than in Ni anywhere else in the placement stack. (Lana Del Rey uses Ni as well, but as an ISFP it's less important to her than Se-aesthetics in her work.)