- MBTI
- INTJ - A
- Enneagram
- 10000
Nobleheart: thanks for the thread - interesting stuff.
I'd like to read further - can you recomend some sources?
I'd like to read further - can you recomend some sources?
Yeah, I did this indigo, but I don't know what the leans should be.
I think I'm a type 4, but I thought maybe I was a type 2 because I tend to score so low on the J/P scale.
Ah, in that case I'm probably Type 2 with Fi Ne
This is exactly Beebe's model of stress adaptation. When our current function preferences cannot solve an important issue, the mind adapts by reordering its function preferences.
INFJs first step into ENFJ mode, becoming more accommodating and focused and affective. This is our first 'take charge' reaction to stress. We start by becoming more charming and taking 'the nice guy' approach. Type 3 INFJs have spent a fair to large amount of time in this mode, which is what has developed their Fe.
If this does not solve the issue, we then hunker down and turn off the emotions, and focus on handling it ourselves by moving into an ISTP mode, which elevates our Ti. At this point we start to become the direct robots you've mentioned. Type 4 INFJs have spent a fair amount of time in this mode, which is what has developed their Ti.
However, if neither of these approaches works, we step into ESTP mode, in which we toss our Ni and Fe aside, and become very blunt, demanding, and focused on solving the issue by any means necessary. This is our last resort 'take charge' mode, and we're pretty hardcore once we're in it. This mode is often reserved for extreme circumstances, and is one of the reasons INFJs tend to be great in a crisis. However, this mode is certainly our least flattering. INFJs who have been forced to spend a lot of time in this mode have been forced to develop their Se and Ti, but due to the amount of stress it takes to get an INFJ to this mode, the individual will likely have developed other psychological issues and / or coping mechanisms - sometimes making them difficult to type.
Yes, you seemed like a Te lean in your video. As far as your Perception lean, I think you are rather balanced, but lean more toward Ne. You're a creative person inherently, and are very good at outside the box spotting - the ability to leap beyond logic to find the answer with Ni. Si leaning people are very good at inside the box spotting - meaning that once they've learned a system, their pattern recognition and prediction within that system is profound.
Type 1: Should have a slight lean to Fi and Ne, but this lean would be extremely slight.
Type 2: Should have a strong Fi lean and a decent Ne lean.
Type 3: Should have a strong Ne lean, a Te lean, and a slight Fi lean.
Type 4: Should have a Te lean, and slight Si lean.
Nobleheart said:Si leaning people are very good at inside the box spotting - meaning that once they've learned a system, their pattern recognition and prediction within that system is profound.
So Ni+Si would be good and comparing, contrasting, analyzing, and critiquing systems from an outside vantage point, but do less well with coming up with whole new systems, while Ni+Ne would be just the opposite.
I'm not sure I agree with your assessment, but I'd be curious Nobleheart's take.
I claimed as best fit, type 2 with a lean toward Si and Te based on independent assessment of each of his listed dynamics.
I didn't get the sense he was saying that the proposed Type 2 necessarily had any of the function dominance of an INFP (leading to an assumption of Fi and Ne leaning), but rather that their Ni (P) experience was so much stronger than their Fe (J) that they had a strong general perceiving (P) vibe vs. J vibe.
I was debating over the Si and Ne for a while, but in the end I chose Si because I actually get a little irritated at the world's adoration of creativity and I find some comfort in routine tasks. I'm not great at details, but if I focus on them and give them a decent amount of energy, I can manage them OK.
I chose Te because the description he gave just fit me so much more closely than the Fi description, but I did have to read it several times and think about why a Te lean would manifest that way. Te seems drill sergeant to me and not so benevolent. But I did eventually see what I think he was getting at and ultimately chose that.
I'd be very curious to see if there is a conflict in the theory between different leans and certain proposed INFJ types. I'm open to having grabbed the wrong identifier, but it's just what independently seemed to fit me best overall.
edit: I generally type right on the borderline between INFP and INFJ and Te and Si are among my lowest cognitive scores. Don't know if that's important or not. Nobleheart...I need a reading.
I know I am gonna get poked for saying all this, and it can all be chalked up to Si. Si likes to think inside the box. I like my boxes, there purrrrrrrrdy . Could just be a case of me not wanting things to deviate from the system/pattern, cause then they no longer fit in the box.
I'll leave Nobel to it then
The reason I made these assumptions with each type, is because of the functions involved with each type an INFJ is resembling. As an example, type 2 resembles an INFP. An INFP has Fi>Ne as their first two functions. As such if someone is a type 2, in theory they should lean on Fi and Ne, since they are strongly contained within an INFP. Type 2's tend to have low J scores, and that is because one, Fi>Ne would lower the J score, and since INFP, is, well a P type, it would damper the J.
I'm sticking with the Si lean.
Ne really has begun to bug me. Why fix what isn't broken? Figure out what the existing situation is, where it's working and where it's not and then evaluate what change makes sense. I'm just saying...
OK, I know that there is real value in throwing everything out and starting over so you're not trapped in old frameworks and real originality can blossom. That's just not really how I work. I get a little stressed working around people who just randomly throw everything out and start over.