INFP vs. INFJ: A Functional Analysis

[Morgain]

So basically what you're saying is that one won't be taken seriously here unless they've personally related to members and the community and built relationships?

For gods sake Peppermint. I considered Von a good friend and someone I respected greatly. Your so off base you need to step back. So please watch what you say.

This has nothing to do with my thoughts on NTs, But your comments not helping my feelings towards any person of human race at this moment.

So stop trying to put words in my mouth. This is part of the reason I'm not posting as much anymore. Because this board is turning into something I can't stand. Something so anti what it should be its making me sick.

If you must know what I meant. Von had a lot of things going for him. He was very good looking and in great shape (especially at his age), he was very smart and had a lot of good experiences. I admired him for that and for the fact he didn't gloat about what he had and had done. He was where I wanted to be at his age. Having lived well and still doing so.

And yes he was very good at typing even if we didn't always agree. I happened to be thinking of him today when this comment came to my mind.

So why don't you just back off. And check your own bias while your at it.

so in fact you are proving her right since she has to back off while von Hase (a well established forum member) is a saint in your eyes.

Von Has was searching and learning about MBTI as all of us. He had a certain opinion and said interesting things but I wouldn't consider him a guru yet. And I am sick of the fact that certain people can say whatever about MBTI and they get an applause while others should just back off. Certainly NT's because what can an NT, with there detached views, have to say about MBTI.

if you are sick of NT's coming here why are you then reading NTs treads?

 

[Blind Bandit]

so in fact you are proving her right since she has to back off while von Hase (a well established forum member) is a saint in your eyes.

Von Has was searching and learning about MBTI as all of us. He had a certain opinion and said interesting things but I wouldn't consider him a guru yet. And I am sick of the fact that certain people can say whatever about MBTI and they get an applause while others should just back off. Certainly NT's because what can an NT, with there detached views, have to say about MBTI.

if you are sick of NT's coming here why are you then reading NTs treads?

So first I told her to back because she misnderstand everything i said as did you. And used that misunderstanding to further make points that where incorrect.

I don't care anymore, you all have fun with thread. If people refuse to realize I was giving praise to an old friend then fine. Also I never said I agreed with his typing all the time if you read what I wrote.

Whatever...

 

[Peppermint]

You know you might want to be more careful when you call people out. As I said get your own house in order before coming after me.

You know what, let me tell you something. I am both confused and frustrated with this situation. I don't really understand why you exploded like that. Do you think I'm targeting you? I'm not. I had an assumption, I wanted to verify it. How can I do so without asking? I wasn't even impolite, mean or insulting, I just posed a question. I actually take note on phrasing when I post here, but it seems to fail, either due to people here being too sensitive for me, or my own ineptitude at communication.

I have actually been extremely respectful on this forum by my standards. Yet people continue to take offense. It makes me frustrated much in the same way you might find me frustrating.

 

[Blind Bandit]

You know what, let me tell you something. I am both confused and frustrated with this situation. I don't really understand why you exploded like that. Do you think I'm targeting you? I'm not. I had an assumption, I wanted to verify it. How can I do so without asking? I wasn't even impolite, mean or insulting, I just posed a question. I actually take note on phrasing when I post here, but it seems to fail, either due to people here being too sensitive for me, or my own ineptitude at communication.

I have actually been extremely respectful on this forum by my standards. Yet people continue to take offense. It makes me frustrated much in the same way you might find me frustrating.

The problem is you didn't see that that saying that was extremely out of no where. You took my simple phrase for an old friend as as possibly something more. Trust me if I wanted to insult someone I would just do it.

I exploded because I have you and Morgen now assuming something that is not true and that has nothing to do with what I said.

 

[Peppermint]

The problem is you didn't see that that saying that was extremely out of no where. You took my simple phrase for an old friend as as possibly something more. Trust me if I wanted to insult someone I would just do it.

I exploded because I have you and Morgen now assuming something that is not true and that has nothing to do with what I said.

It was an observation I made over time. When you said he had class, I interpreted it as "he had tact" or "he was charismatic" or "he was nice", which I contrasted with the dislike you have expressed over a new and unfamiliar person coming here to "lecture" a community they don't know.

A simple "you're wrong" would have been enough.

 

[IndigoSensor]

[mods]Ok everyone, let's please keep this discussion ontopic in relation to INFP's and INFJ's. Thank you![/mods]

 

[Blind Bandit]

It was an observation I made over time. When you said he had class, I interpreted it as "he had tact" or "he was charismatic" or "he was nice", which I contrasted with the dislike you have expressed over a new and unfamiliar person coming here to "lecture" a community they don't know.

A simple "you're wrong" would have been enough.

Your right he did have all those things. But the thing you didn't understand I was talking about a friend.

Thank you for understanding.

Lets get back to the topic at hand.

 

[arbygil]

No one's speaking ill of anyone, okay? VH was great, he knew what he was talking about, but he's not here. New folks on here are equally gifted, and they should be respected for their ideas as well. We can learn from more than one individual, yes? Yes.

Carry on...

 

[Howlsthunder]

My best friend whom I've known for half my life (and with whom I was once in a long-term relationship with) is a textbook INFP where I am a textbook INFJ, no question about it on either side. Historically we used to communicate our different perceptions of the world using astrology terminology, as it was a good set of tools for describing our inner workings to one another. We know one another quite well because of our countless conversations on the subject.

I've only recently gotten back into MBTI since taking a test over 10 years ago, and am discovering many more layers to myself than ever before. I knew my friend was an INFP before she took the test but had her test anyway for confirmation. The OP's post was dead-on for me and I really appreciate the time Limit took to share it here, thank you. Though I already understood the meanings of "I-N-F-P" and "I-N-F-J", it was enlightening to further understand the differences between them via the Dominant, Auxiliary, Tertiary, and Inferior functions.

Now I finally understand why the character Wolverine has always appealed to me - if only I could be as comfortable letting go like that.

 

[VH]

I miss @VH; and his brain scans... :| He's one of the most knowledgeable person in MBTI here. I think he can explain which part of our brain is working when we use different functions.

Ya and he had class. God I miss him.

Agreed. He was one of our best gurus in typology.

I considered Von a good friend and someone I respected greatly. Your so off base you need to step back.

Von had a lot of things going for him. He was very good looking and in great shape (especially at his age), he was very smart and had a lot of good experiences. I admired him for that and for the fact he didn't gloat about what he had and had done. He was where I wanted to be at his age. Having lived well and still doing so.

And yes he was very good at typing.

VH was great, he knew what he was talking about, but he's not here. New folks on here are equally gifted, and they should be respected for their ideas as well. We can learn from more than one individual, yes?

Aww...

 

[problemz]

Stackings of the various types appear to differ from book to book even amongst the experts, right? How were the stackings originally figured out? Lenore Thompson in her book even has discrepancies between her own stackings of INFJs (I think she didn't proofread the book carefully enough). I forget what she put first and second for INFJs and for INFPs, but they aren't the same in the two different places she gives the list. And I have seen this stacking differ from expert to expert. Also, Myers claimed that INFPs have very good access to their introverted thinking, so they can be scientists quite easily, whereas she says that INTPs don't have good access to their introverted feeling, so they are quite poor in dealing with emotions. She also says she didn't know why this was the case. Still, this was a neat article. I think it's true that if I'm an INFJ, then it's true that when I'm angry I try to hold on to it while trying to translate it into something that's acceptable within the community I'm in.

I know a few INFPs who just pop their cork, and it costs them in lost champagne which just comes out as mindless froth.

 

[knight in battle]

Actually, every definite user of Fi I have ever met does not comprehend common ethics unless they do it from a theoretical standpoint. .... I am mainly talking about types like the INFP, ISFP, and even the ISTJ.

That an Fi-user's personal value system may be only a biased morality that they and very few others possess doesn't seem to register with them generally. Even if they consider it, they wont reject their core values to adopt a global way of thinking that accommodates conflicting beliefs. They either can't, or doing so would be so emotionally damaging as to cause them a mental disorder.

Fi by definition is a personal value system that focuses on what is important to the self... these things it focuses on may be great things like, honesty, integrity, and compassion. That's fine, but you're arbitrarily defining what is good and acting upon it. Fe users do the same thing, but the focus is different. It's group-level morality rather than a personal one. Fe is validated when I behave in a way that maintains group cohesion, improves the group, or receives recognition by the group.

Thanks for your distinctions. I find myself torn between Fe and Fi, because I often debate with people about group-level morality/behavior. I have my personal "ethic" about how others should or should not treat me. It seems I have taken a global value of "Treat others the way you want others to treat you" or "Treat others with kindness/nonjudgmentalism" and have used these global values to evaluate whether I or someone else has fulfilled this group-level value. I don't think I can violate group-level values, but I also have very subjective ideas of behavioral standards - what should or should not be allowed. I am uncomfortable, for example, violating the rights of others (as if these were group-level rights). I often get away from institutions when I feel that the institution's values have become unjust. Is this me imposing subjective values onto the "objective" institution? Or is it a sense of a larger, "more" global set of values that rules my judgment?

 

[knight in battle]

I think it's true that if I'm an INFJ, then it's true that when I'm angry I try to hold on to it while trying to translate it into something that's acceptable within the community I'm in.

This is an intriguing idea. I often use a community's values to justify my own anger as well. It's as if I am temporarily using those values as the standard. Oftentimes, I will judge the community based on its own stated or implied values, and when these values are violated or inconsistent, I begin to stand against it.

 

[Razare]

Thanks for your distinctions. I find myself torn between Fe and Fi, because I often debate with people about group-level morality/behavior. I have my personal "ethic" about how others should or should not treat me. It seems I have taken a global value of "Treat others the way you want others to treat you" or "Treat others with kindness/nonjudgmentalism" and have used these global values to evaluate whether I or someone else has fulfilled this group-level value. I don't think I can violate group-level values, but I also have very subjective ideas of behavioral standards - what should or should not be allowed. I am uncomfortable, for example, violating the rights of others (as if these were group-level rights). I often get away from institutions when I feel that the institution's values have become unjust. Is this me imposing subjective values onto the "objective" institution? Or is it a sense of a larger, "more" global set of values that rules my judgment?

Sorry for the late response.

After reading that, you're an INFJ. Whether you want to see yourself that way or not, is up to you.

and a cute little monkey, because I miss them so!

 

[knight in battle]

After reading that, you're an INFJ. Whether you want to see yourself that way or not, is up to you.

and a cute little monkey, because I miss them so!

Thanks for your confirmation of my INFJ type. I have noticed it more and more in the form of my cerebralness and thoughtfulness; it has now become not a barrier to my socialization but a tool for both socialization and communal enjoyment.


P.S.-
I have thoroughly enjoyed your gift of one monkey with wonderful rhythmic head movements.

 

[acd]

Thanks for your distinctions. I find myself torn between Fe and Fi, because I often debate with people about group-level morality/behavior. I have my personal "ethic" about how others should or should not treat me. It seems I have taken a global value of "Treat others the way you want others to treat you" or "Treat others with kindness/nonjudgmentalism" and have used these global values to evaluate whether I or someone else has fulfilled this group-level value. I don't think I can violate group-level values, but I also have very subjective ideas of behavioral standards - what should or should not be allowed. I am uncomfortable, for example, violating the rights of others (as if these were group-level rights). I often get away from institutions when I feel that the institution's values have become unjust. Is this me imposing subjective values onto the "objective" institution? Or is it a sense of a larger, "more" global set of values that rules my judgment?

Sorry for the late response.

After reading that, you're an INFJ. Whether you want to see yourself that way or not, is up to you.

All of what he said was super Fi!
LOL You just saw the words 'group' and 'others' and jump to it being from Fe..
Those words are also part of the Fi doms lexicon.
Fi doms value group norms so long as they promote harmony and fit their values.. otherwise, as KIB stated, they walk.

 

[knight in battle]

Fi doms value group norms so long as they promote harmony and fit their values.. otherwise, as KIB stated, they walk.

Yay.

 

[sassafras]

I was thinking about this earlier today, and I think one of the reasons so many people are having a hard time recognizing dominant or auxiliary Fi in themselves and others is because it's a truly unique function. While it is true that all of the cognitive functions are an expression of the different individuals articulating them, I think the expression of Fi is much more diverse because its comprised of a fluid construction of morals, beliefs, and raw emotional data. These elements are typically 'behind the scenes' for a lot of people, stacked much deeper below the surface personality and therefore, not as pliable or as likely to be influenced by their environment. They lay a more stabilized, steady foundation for the other functions stacked on top.

For Fi-dominants and auxiliaries, on the other hand, it's almost like they're turned inside out. Because they're so close the surface, their feelings and values are more easily acted upon and processed and therefore their environment (especially during their formative years) plays an especially important role in the way that Fi is expressed as part of the personality as a whole. Therefore, it's not difficult for a dominant or auxiliary Fi to appear like some of the other MBTI types. The things that they value will be heavily featured in the traits and motivations they demonstrate. It's for this reason that I'm now thinking the enneagram would be more beneficial to Fi-users than the MBTI system itself.

And then it struck me. Fi's are the friggin' chameleons of the system. If beliefs and motivations are the drivers of identity, than the Fi can be anything and anyone they want to be, yet, they can't decide on what that is. They're constantly second guessing and de-constructing themselves, frequently soul-searching, trying to figure out 'who' they really are when their true identity is nothing and potentially everything, all at once.

 

[knight in battle]

They're constantly second guessing and de-constructing themselves, frequently soul-searching, trying to figure out 'who' they really are when their true identity is nothing and potentially everything, all at once.

Finally someone who understands

 

[Dakris]

I've realised I'm more likely an INFP after thinking I was an INFJ for quite a long time. I like to work before playing sometimes, but I find myself procrastinating a lot. Plus, the INFP description above fits me.