INFJ or INTJ?

[Ren]

I am glad to know you're at least partially human

"You are like a machine with very specific functions" @neko a few weeks ago.

However, I'm pretty sure she included "being a lovey-dovey INFJ" as one of the functions.

 

[Impact Character]

on a sidenote.. I can see how this (as a pulse or breath) is what a really fun "core of a creative flow" (with the help of other functions following of course) might be to me (and the same when talking with my brother).​

 

[Impact Character]

..I think the word is balance.. Fe can be overused or misused (even with good intentions) and Fe can be ignored to a painful limit (also with good intentions towards self-protection)..

I don't want to bother anyone with shadow functions and I don't want anyone to think it's about trying to be someone else or something...
but I believe Fe and Fi can actually go hand in hand to be healthy.. is like Fe is the big brother taking Fi by the hand leading..

But to be healthy..not ending up as a robot or doormat.. you need some Fe for yourself. Agape and Philautia..

If you need an image.. you're sitting in a plane.. and when the oxygen mask drops.. put it on you first to be able to really help others.
(of course you deeply want to put the mask on the children.. the old.. the sick.. of course of course of course... ...)

(sorry for the perspective switch switch to wrap around one's head.. but I think it contains the basic trouble..I also didn't sleep so well..sorry)

Any suggestions by the way on how to consciously try out Fe?

Tandem Fe-Se.. the typical go out and feel the grass between your feet as an inspiration to harmony (or however you want to call it *smiles to @John K * ^^)
finding this in yourself reciprocrates with sharing it all around. It goes both ways.. saying yes to Fe is for an INFJ like working on Fi, too ... (but again... that's me switching and toying with terms again.. sorry..)

 

[neko]

"You are like a machine with very specific functions" @neko a few weeks ago.

However, I'm pretty sure she included "being a lovey-dovey INFJ" as one of the functions.

Yesssss! That’s one of your functions!

 

[Zola]

The first is an essentially introverted experience and the second takes place in the outer world. Ti evaluates within, using our personal principles as the yardstick. Te is focused on making things happen logically in the outside world.

Ding, ding. I was overthinking it. (Hint: Ti) If you mull over a process until you understand it, you are a Ti user. If you trust established processes, you are a Te user. Got it.

What do you mean by it starting at Chapter 9?

The written entries on your Personality Cafe blog page start with numbers in the 1,700s. I was looking for the beginning of the written comments here. Lacking those, I watched your YouTube videos I - V and got the gist of your theory that way.

I thought you did a good job of explaining something that is "so simple it's unbelievably complex." I do wish you could put it in fewer words for people like me to bring it up in conversation to others. That would be useful for us.

Now that I think about it, your approach is Ni because you are trying to converge all possibilities. It seemed like an outward movement at first impression because you must identify the possibilities and explain them first. Ne baffles (and somewhat frightens) me due to the fact that ends in dissolution. An Ne dominant person must be bold, indeed. However, I have heard it theorized that the function stack that begins with "e" ends with "i," therefore, extroverted people end by closing up. It makes sense; otherwise, such an open-minded person would never settle on anything.

..I think the word is balance.

Groan. How often must I be reminded of that? Answer: Out of sheer necessity, constantly!

I don't want to bother anyone with shadow functions...

Oh. Please do. Blake at Stellarmaze.com calls the opposite orientation of the auxiliary function the "id" function, proposing that it is the strongest function we possess because it is the most primitive. As such, we are most apt to misuse it to dangerous ends. For example, Fe turns into Fi, which we abuse by becoming egocentric -- a disaster for an INFJ. For an INTJ, Te turns into Ti, preventing them from making decisions and putting plans into action. It works for all types.

 

[Headstorm]

Interesting discussion regarding Ti and Te. I have a question regarding that.
I had to make a long cardrive today and as usual my mind goes from subject 1 to subject 2 to subject 3, back to 1, forth to 4 etc. You probably know what I mean. Then suddenly a voice inside of me screams: STOP! This sucks. Let's stick to one subject. Make up your mind. Prioritize. What is most important now and stick to that. Now, is that voice Ti or Te or do I have a personality disorder?

Same question for this one:
When someone tries to explain something to me and starts by telling small details I usually interrupt (nicely...) and take the lead by asking questions. With the answers I try to make a model and as sson as I have a model I test the model with a few questions. That is the 'point of understanding'. I do this a lot. So, Ti or Te or something else?

 

[Ginny]

Interesting discussion regarding Ti and Te. I have a question regarding that.
I had to make a long cardrive today and as usual my mind goes from subject 1 to subject 2 to subject 3, back to 1, forth to 4 etc. You probably know what I mean. Then suddenly a voice inside of me screams: STOP! This sucks. Let's stick to one subject. Make up your mind. Prioritize. What is most important now and stick to that. Now, is that voice Ti or Te or do I have a personality disorder?

Same question for this one:
When someone tries to explain something to me and starts by telling small details I usually interrupt (nicely...) and take the lead by asking questions. With the answers I try to make a model and as sson as I have a model I test the model with a few questions. That is the 'point of understanding'. I do this a lot. So, Ti or Te or something else?

Intuition is the culprit in both cases. Ne insists on seeing all at once, whereas Ni can focus randomly on details (not to mention that because of Ni we'd like to know the point of something before going into it - it's the goal focus aspect of it). Ti would be the function to put it in order (like, when you think about wording) before saying it out loud. Usually though we feel to rushed to bring it out at all before thinking about any order. The order would still make sense for us, being intuitively intimate with our thoughts, though perhaps not others.


The starting with details approach can often be attributed to a preference of Si. Therefore, it's most likely a conflict of preferred perceiving functions.

 

[Headstorm]

I

Intuition is the culprit in both cases. Ne insists on seeing all at once, whereas Ni can focus randomly on details (not to mention that because of Ni we'd like to know the point of something before going into it - it's the goal focus aspect of it). Ti would be the function to put it in order (like, when you think about wording) before saying it out loud. Usually though we feel to rushed to bring it out at all before thinking about any order. The order would still make sense for us, being intuitively intimate with our thoughts, though perhaps not others.


The starting with details approach can often be attributed to a preference of Si. Therefore, it's most likely a conflict of preferred perceiving functions.

Ok, I had to read this a few times. Ok, maybe like 5 times
Do I understand it correctly if I say that Ni is responsible for the disorder in my head and Ti is trying to create order out of that chaos?

 

[Ginny]

I


Ok, I had to read this a few times. Ok, maybe like 5 times
Do I understand it correctly if I say that Ni is responsible for the disorder in my head and Ti is trying to create order out of that chaos?

Yes, mostly. You could think of Ni as your conceptual database, the thoughts and associations randomly trailing around, while Ti would try to put it into a logically coherent form.

 

[Headstorm]

Ok, I think I am starting to understand. Thanks!

 

[Zola]

And since your choice was, "Am I INFJ or INTJ," neither of those is strong in Si, so there's your culprit.

 

[Impact Character]

Groan. How often must I be reminded of that?

To clear that up: I wasn't referring to you nor addressing you in particular.
Have a good night.

 

[John K]

Yes, mostly. You could think of Ni as your conceptual database, the thoughts and associations randomly trailing around, while Ti would try to put it into a logically coherent form.

This works for me OK Ginny.

It's useful to remember that the S and N functions are perceptive - they take in information and structure it but they don't assess it. The T and F functions do the assessing. Ni is particularly odd because it's the main way an inxj takes in information - but it's inwards focused so a lot of the way it works is by assembling connections between things behind the scenes where we are not fully aware of what is going on.

This video is quite a nice metaphor for how my Ni works some of the time:

I end up with a lot of hard to stop narrative running in my head, because the resulting picture is not actually visible except to me - and the main way I have of extraverting it is by narrative, so I end up describing it in text like this. It's never satisfactory because the narrative is linear but the picture is 3-dimensional and complex - what's more the pictures I have are always growing and changing. If I try and explain to myself what's going on I can get into perpetual ball tossing between narrative thinking and insight that goes nowhere and stresses me out. If I try and extravert the narrative like I'm doing in this post, that's a lot better, but it's hard work and never really represents the inner picture completely well. It certainly short-circuits a lot of nonsense that can easily go on indefinitely inside my head. I think a lot of art is inspired by people finding a better way of expressing their insights.

 

[Ginny]

This works for me OK Ginny.

It's useful to remember that the S and N functions are perceptive - they take in information and structure it but they don't assess it. The T and F functions do the assessing. Ni is particularly odd because it's the main way an inxj takes in information - but it's inwards focused so a lot of the way it works is by assembling connections between things behind the scenes where we are not fully aware of what is going on.

This video is quite a nice metaphor for how my Ni works some of the time:

I end up with a lot of hard to stop narrative running in my head, because the resulting picture is not actually visible except to me - and the main way I have of extraverting it is by narrative, so I end up describing it in text like this. It's never satisfactory because the narrative is linear but the picture is 3-dimensional and complex - what's more the pictures I have are always growing and changing. If I try and explain to myself what's going on I can get into perpetual ball tossing between narrative thinking and insight that goes nowhere and stresses me out. If I try and extravert the narrative like I'm doing in this post, that's a lot better, but it's hard work and never really represents the inner picture completely well. It certainly short-circuits a lot of nonsense that can easily go on indefinitely inside my head. I think a lot of art is inspired by people finding a better way of expressing their insights.

I see what you mean, also with the video. The seemingly random move to other points in the picture is a perfect analogy for the associative jumps of Ni.

I have thought of the N and S functions working (ideally) in tandem, in our case Se (although Fe also to some degree) takes in information from the outside (Se strictly sensational, Fe adding some information by judging how to interpret what is perceived), Ni is tracking the input conceptually and creates these jumpy associations. I cannot be sure if that is how it is, but it seems to me that the extraverted functions are somehow the only functions interacting with the outside while the introverted functions remain strictly internal; there is definitely this sort of interaction that is always involved whether it is conscious or not (in some cases, I believe it is so automated that it is too fast to track unless you consciously slowed down to actively track your cognitive activity - conceptually speaking).
For the other perceiving functions, it would be equivalently Si being the internal sensation keeping track of details which are put into a whole with Ne.

 

[John K]

I see what you mean, also with the video. The seemingly random move to other points in the picture is a perfect analogy for the associative jumps of Ni.

I have thought of the N and S functions working (ideally) in tandem, in our case Se (although Fe also to some degree) takes in information from the outside (Se strictly sensational, Fe adding some information by judging how to interpret what is perceived), Ni is tracking the input conceptually and creates these jumpy associations. I cannot be sure if that is how it is, but it seems to me that the extraverted functions are somehow the only functions interacting with the outside while the introverted functions remain strictly internal; there is definitely this sort of interaction that is always involved whether it is conscious or not (in some cases, I believe it is so automated that it is too fast to track unless you consciously slowed down to actively track your cognitive activity - conceptually speaking).
For the other perceiving functions, it would be equivalently Si being the internal sensation keeping track of details which are put into a whole with Ne.

This sounds well thought through to me Ginny. We must use Se and Fe a lot to interact with the world around us, or we would have died out millenia ago because our infj "genes" would have all been eaten by Sabre Tooth tigers lol. Like you imply, we must be less consciously in control of Se than other types, but still get as much input from it as any other person. It would be interesting to compare inxjs with esxps on reaction tests to see if there is any difference - it may be that when we need to think before reacting we are slower, but when we need to avoid sudden danger we are no different from them.

 

[Headstorm]

So Se and Ni are working together to retrieving information from the outside world through the senses (verbal, images) and from the inside of the brain and together theh make up a representation. This representation is then judged by Fe (what are the current emotions, what is the athmosphere, does it feel right or not?) and Ti (does this model, this representation make sense, is it in accordance with what I already know?).

Am I getting close?

 

[Headstorm]

And INTJ:

Si retrieves internal input (from memory?) and Ne external patterns (?). Then they apply logic to it (Te) and they pass it through their internal value system?

Shit, I don't understand INTJ. I must be an INFJ

 

[John K]

Shit, I don't understand INTJ. I must be an INFJ

Well if that’s right - wellcome to the mad-house best type going

 

[Ginny]

This sounds well thought through to me Ginny. We must use Se and Fe a lot to interact with the world around us, or we would have died out millenia ago because our infj "genes" would have all been eaten by Sabre Tooth tigers lol. Like you imply, we must be less consciously in control of Se than other types, but still get as much input from it as any other person. It would be interesting to compare inxjs with esxps on reaction tests to see if there is any difference - it may be that when we need to think before reacting we are slower, but when we need to avoid sudden danger we are no different from them.

Indeed. (It's been on my mind every now and then.) But I didn't quite think that far ahead. So you think the aptitude (or dare I say potential?) for each function to be developed just as well as in a Fx-dominant person is there all the time? Ready to be developed in spite of our developed preferences? Or do you think there is a limit to it?

So Se and Ni are working together to retrieving information from the outside world through the senses (verbal, images) and from the inside of the brain and together theh make up a representation. This representation is then judged by Fe (what are the current emotions, what is the athmosphere, does it feel right or not?) and Ti (does this model, this representation make sense, is it in accordance with what I already know?).

Am I getting close?

Perhaps not a whole representation, at least most likely not an accurate one, perhaps more focussed on a single area of what is perceived as a whole. I think you got most of it, although I would say that "does it feel right or not" is part of the introverted judging functions (Ti or Fi, my bet being on the latter).

And INTJ:

Si retrieves internal input (from memory?) and Ne external patterns (?). Then they apply logic to it (Te) and they pass it through their internal value system?

Shit, I don't understand INTJ. I must be an INFJ

Damn, that came faster than I write

Si and Ne are not in the conscious stack of the INxJ, so neither that of INTJ nor INFJ. But yes, the functions as stated are roughly interpreted like that.

The INTJ has Ni and Se just like the INFJ. They also have the same conceptual thinking, but they have the option to express it "more logically" right away because of Te. It organises the information as they perceive it, instead of receiving emotional input like the INFJ would. They (INTJ again) impose their own value system to it, yes, perhaps to sort their information further according to internal criteria. It certainly seems more authoritative when they express themselves, because the lack of emotional output (I don't mean to make it sound negatively) gives them a more serious and sure demeanor. The INFJ is almost always somewhat emotional, whatever they say.

 

[Headstorm]

I think you got most of it, although I would say that "does it feel right or not" is part of the introverted judging functions (Ti or Fi, my bet being on the latter).

Ok, maybe feel right or not is not the best way to put it, but Fe is a judging function, so it would be applied on the information received. Meaning that it would judge that someone is angry, or judge that the general athmosphere is tense.

Where in this model do I find the action that follows judgement ? I mean, if someone is feeling sad, I might put my arm around her (or not).