Humor me :) What's my type?

Gaze

Gaze

Donor
MBTI
INFPishy
So haven't done this in a while but I'm curious about how someone would type me today based on observations, especially newer members.

I've identified as INFP for a while, but when I was typed in MBTI expert, they were certain I was INTP. How someone comes across in person vs. online can make a huge difference in how they're typed. There's someone here on the forum who I've been chatting with by phone, and this person said they didn't see me as an INFP, and this is someone who has been a long time forum member.

So, just curious about your thoughts, and if you could give examples of how you came up with your answer if you see me as a particular type.

Disclaimer: People in the past have gotten annoyed about me questioning my type since I was supposed to not care anymore or just "accept" that I'm INFP. Please don't go there. It's fun to question type once in a while, and I see it as a chance for learning and discovery, not to paint myself in a box. So, please don't respond negatively to this thread. It's also not a cry for attention, just curiosity about my type.
 
Alright, alright, I'll take the test . . . again :D
 
I guess you might have seen my posts on this subject, but in summary, since I think this is super important:

- the functions and the ordinary MBTI test don't convert easily between each other -- they're best treated as separate theories
- there are many models of the functions, and the functions are based more in philosophy/less data-analysis based than the Big 5--hence why there's multiple models without anything close to consensus (simple eg being in Jung, stuff like Ni+Ti is perfectly admissible, and even normal, but he defines what that means in a particular way)
- all too often, Nardi keys2cognition test results don't fall into any particular "function stacking" model, and again, without some philosophical assumptions, there's no meaning to asserting they will. For instance, by default, what you identify with is what the ego identifies with, whereas any stacking model involves assumptions about how compensation/complementing both work, how the ego relates to the unconscious, and so on. This means that, in practice, one has to explain how conscious-X and unconscious-Y will look as one single variable (so eg Ne-Si has to be treated as a single variable -- not 2 separate ones that fall in a particular order) if we're to make any speculative sense of functions theory. This is inherently speculative, because what (say) conscious Ne and unconscious Si even *means* isn't a wholly empirical concept. Without stipulating some assumptions, you're better off assuming any of the function-attitudes may be "deployed" in any order.

So if I help out, I'll probably want to treat these models separately. The MBTI test is related closely to the Big 5. Whereas functions theory (even if with Myers' new assumptions) is rooted in Jung.
 
Also, just to emphasize -- 'expert opinion' means little in terms of establishing consensus in philosophical matters. 3 philosophers in a room might not agree there are 3 in the room. Much of the Beebe community says Jung is NiTe, while Jung never would agree to this in his own typology. If you explain the reasoning for INTP, INFP both, I can try to tease apart the underlying assumptions
 
Gist said:
There's someone here on the forum who I've been chatting with by phone, and this person said they didn't see me as an INFP, and this is someone who has been a long time forum member.
Click to expand...

If I may conjecture, the question is *why*. Is it based on other self-identifying INFPs, is it based on a generalized impression of the INFP stereotype, etc.?

The reason I mention that, having battled a similar issue that I still ponder when my brain has spare cycles, is that there seems to be too much group-think and type-stereotype-inertia going on in the community as a whole. From these eyes at least.

I am assuming that you are male. If not, this is still relevant, but much less so.

This is what I suspect is going on:
1. The INFP profile is heavily slanted female.
2. INFP are supposed to be pretty damn smart as intuitives, but they are often maligned as otherwise online based on my perception, but it could be just me.
3. Just like everyone wants to be INFJ, everyone wants to be an intuitive (N).
4. Because of that, just how many of those identifying as INFPs are actually INFPs. How many are ISFPs or ISFJs, emo S's of all kinds, etc?
5. Because of *that*, how slanted is the stereotype among those identifying as INFP, especially males.
6. Because of THAT, how many particularly intelligent INFP males (as N types generally are) choose to identify as INFJ or INTP because they've been tired of being treated like they are an emo-girl, further slanting the stereotype.
7. Go back to step 4 and continue.

This is a bit of speculation, but one look at celebritytypes.com reveals quite a depth of INFP. Heck, even Kiersey identified Fyodor Doestoevsky as INFP, the great psychologist and genius himself (yet celebrity types has him INFJ, perhaps wrongly I fear, hmmm).

But many remain on celebrity types that I bet would all get typed as INFJ or INTP if they went to MBTI forums.

Now that would be a hilarious experiment. Decompose those INFP into fictional personas and have them typed on forums and see what people do to them. I bet the results would be quite enlightening for those quirky and thorough enough to pull off such an experiment.

My point is that we really need to look beyond the community-driven stereotypes if at all possible because I believe that there are a lot of reasons that support that the commonly held INFP stereotype is unreliable for many INFP.

Hence, why someone thinks that you *must* be INTP because you don't fit the INFP stereotype that someone else has always seen and knows and that keeps getting perpetuated further and further without end.

Just my two uneducated and speculative yet possibly correct and most certainly offensive-to-someone cents.

I might just be a creep and a jerk for thinking all this though.
 
Last edited:
The way that you write and the way that you are unafraid to go on the offensive if you are offended reminds me of a friend of mine who is an INFP. Very sweet, questions herself a lot, at least when we are sharing with each other about our lives, and yet she is swift to stand up for herself and others and animals. (This is often an INFJ trait also) Do you like cats and dogs too? INFP are not as sweet and innocent as they are made out to be. She comes up with some amazing thoughts, not always light and fluffy and sometimes quite deep and dark. From what I've read here of your writing, INFP seems quite probable.
 
Last edited:
CosmicINFJ said:
The way that you write and the way that you are unafraid to go on the offensive if you are offended reminds me of a friend of mine who is an INFP. Very sweet, questions herself a lot, at least when we are sharing with each other about our lives, and yet she is swift to stand up for herself and others and animals. (This is often an INFJ trait also) Do you like cats and dogs too? INFP are not as sweet and innocent as they are made out to be. She comes up with some amazing thoughts, not always light and fluffy and sometimes quite deep and dark. From what I've read here of your writing, INFP seems quite probable.
Click to expand...

Thanks! I used to like cats but I've never really had pets. My friend has two dogs, and I've known them for a few years and grew to like being around them because we didn't have dogs in our homes growing up.

My online behavior is different from my offline behavior. I'm far more outspoken online than I am in person. I am never quick to stand up for myself irl. I am morely likely to appear passive and reserved with those I don't know well. I am only really open about my feelings with close friends or family or online here. I keep quite a bit to the vest. I'm more likely to defend others than myself irl, but I'm not the first one to jump up and stand out. Very low key. I do have a high sensitivities but I try to keep it under wraps irl.
 
Gist said:
Thanks! I used to like cats but I've never really had pets. My friend has two dogs, and I've known them for a few years and grew to like being around them because we didn't have dogs in our homes growing up.

My online behavior is different from my offline behavior. I'm far more outspoken online than I am in person. I am never quick to stand up for myself irl. I am morely likely to appear passive and reserved with those I don't know well. I am only really open about my feelings with close friends or family or online here. I keep quite a bit to the vest. I'm more likely to defend others than myself irl, but I'm not the first one to jump up and stand out. Very low key. I do have a high sensitivities but I try to keep it under wraps irl.
Click to expand...
This all makes sense to me. It fits with INFP.
INTP or INTJ doesn't seem right. INFJ could be possible. One of the biggest differences between INFJ and INFP is that INFPeople seem to be more open and fluid.
 
Actual said:
If I may conjecture, the question is *why*. Is it based on other self-identifying INFPs, is it based on a generalized impression of the INFP stereotype, etc.?

The reason I mention that, having battled a similar issue that I still ponder when my brain has spare cycles, is that there seems to be too much group-think and type-stereotype-inertia going on in the community as a whole. From these eyes at least.

I am assuming that you are male. If not, this is still relevant, but much less so.

This is what I suspect is going on:
1. The INFP profile is heavily slanted female.
2. INFP are supposed to be pretty damn smart as intuitives, but they are often maligned as otherwise online based on my perception, but it could be just me.
3. Just like everyone wants to be INFJ, everyone wants to be an intuitive (N).
4. Because of that, just how many of those identifying as INFPs are actually INFPs. How many are ISFPs or ISFJs, emo S's of all kinds, etc?
5. Because of *that*, how slanted is the stereotype among those identifying as INFP, especially males.
6. Because of THAT, how many particularly intelligent INFP males (as N types generally are) choose to identify as INFJ or INTP because they've been tired of being treated like they are an emo-girl, further slanting the stereotype.
7. Go back to step 4 and continue.

This is a bit of speculation, but one look at celebritytypes.com reveals quite a depth of INFP. Heck, even Kiersey identified Fyodor Doestoevsky as INFP, the great psychologist and genius himself (yet celebrity types has him INFJ, perhaps wrongly I fear, hmmm).

But many remain on celebrity types that I bet would all get typed as INFJ or INTP if they went to MBTI forums.

Now that would be a hilarious experiment. Decompose those INFP into fictional personas and have them typed on forums and see what people do to them. I bet the results would be quite enlightening for those quirky and thorough enough to pull off such an experiment.

My point is that we really need to look beyond the community-driven stereotypes if at all possible because I believe that there are a lot of reasons that support that the commonly held INFP stereotype is unreliable for many INFP.

Hence, why someone thinks that you *must* be INTP because you don't fit the INFP stereotype that someone else has always seen and knows and that keeps getting perpetuated further and further without end.

Just my two uneducated and speculative yet possibly correct and most certainly offensive-to-someone cents.

I might just be a creep and a jerk for thinking all this though.
Click to expand...

Thank you Actual. I do agree with your point that online communities can fall into the habit of buying into stereotypes about types and fixing the type identity. It can be very easy to cater to the idea that you are a particular type because that's what the community thinks.

But discovering type shouldn't be about a community imposing an identity on the individual, but allowing that person to explore different aspects of the self, learn, and grow. One of the great things about life is self discovery. You can learn a lot from self and others if people are open enough to the experience.

This is why it's nice to go back and question once in a while because maybe you learn something new and want to know if it fits into a particular personality, or you want to find out if what someone thinks you are is based on their stereotype of the type or whether you demonstrate real qualities of the type consistently.

I've also tested as different types on various tests, mostly INFJ or INFP, and few times INTP. So, that always add some curiosity, leaving the door open to why results vary.

I've always enjoyed the process of exploring type differences. It was never truly about just being certain of my type, but how these differences between types affect our understanding of the world and how we relate to each other. That's always been the most interesting part of the theory for me, not fixing identity.
 
INFP's do not like to deal with hard facts and logic. Their focus on their feelings and the Human Condition makes it difficult for them to deal with impersonal judgment. They don't understand or believe in the validity of impersonal judgement, which makes them naturally rather ineffective at using it. Most INFP's will avoid impersonal analysis, although some have developed this ability and are able to be quite logical. Under stress, it's not uncommon for INFP's to mis-use hard logic in the heat of anger, throwing out fact after (often inaccurate) fact in an emotional outburst.
Click to expand...
http://star.goddess.tripod.com/INFP.html

Here's an example of INFP type description, very stereotypical, that's never clicked with me. This idea that INFPs are so feeling centered that they can't see logic or reason. Too often, people will disregard what you say because they think you're being a typical feeler, too emotional or illogical, only to have someone return later on to acknowledge that what you told them was right, and not just your feeling. I've often been the one to say to someone, that's not going to work because of ABCD, and was ignored because of being seen as too feeling oriented, only to later have someone realize what you told them was true. "Feelers" sense is too often dismissed because of common misconceptions that what they think is just based on individual perceptions and not reality. For example, impersonal judgment. People would often say at work they don't know how I feel about something, and even if I disagree, no one will know it. I'm pretty good at being diplomatic, so that fits with the type results.

I think there's a tendency to confuse expression of personal feeling with understanding of reality.
 
Last edited:
I get what you are saying about people assuming INFP's dont use as much logic as they do feelings and can be wrongly judged.

Im an INFP and i get what you are trying to say...i often feel ignored and people dont take me seriously because i wont shoot statistics and percentages at them to support my opinions. How do you explain to someone that you just understand and dont need to go into so much detailed data in order to get an opinion taken seriously by others. We may be in tune with our feelings and emotions, but our logic and thought process is usually something we keep to ourselves hidden from others.
 
However, I enjoy looking at things from various angles. I like seeing things from multiple frames. I am sensitive to the idea that there is one right answer or one way to see the world. Too often it seems thinker logic dictates that there is only one right answer, while there may be many. On the other hand, there's also the problem of entertaining too many possibilities or thinking of too many options.

On the other hand, I'm good at connecting seemingly unrelated ideas or concepts in unique ways. I've always enjoyed seeing shades of gray where others see only black and white.

The issue I have with impersonal judgment is when someone expresses something as a fact, when it's really just an one opinion or perspective, or assumes they are naturally right in their critique or criticism. I think this is why INFPs could be said to not take personal criticism well, especially when it's expressed as a fact or objective assessment rather than a personal judgment or opinion. People often tend to express feelings as irrefutable laws, without considering they could be wrong. And if someone doesn't accept their judgment, then they're seen as not accepting the truth.

People are often not aware or quick to realize and acknowledge the biases in their judgments. This is often why I think the Feeler/Thinker dichotomy is the most poorly theorized and understood.
 
The core problem is that INFP tend to work much with hintdropping and talking playfully around problems to make the situation as comfortable as possible while someone like an ENFP is able to make the direct approach while still thinking the same way. Other Personality Types sometimes have problems understanding those hints we spread out or they get mixed with positivity and loose their weight. That is mainly why it happens that people dont take us serious or maybe dont even get what we suggest ^^
 
Agree. I think INFPs are more likely to nudge people towards the truth or subtly suggest things rather than be direct. They prefer the person to pick up on things. I think INFPs are not expressive or specific about their wants and needs, maybe hoping the other person will notice based on those indirect suggestions to avoid directly saying it. They don't want to be seen to be pushy, so they may not get what they want for fear that if they ask, they will be denied or those feelings will be ignored, misunderstood, or dismissed.
 
Gist said:
View attachment 31724
Click to expand...
Sometimes one wonders...

I score INFP similar as yours on that test but with even more Prospecting (P). I see myself as logical, but I wonder if I really am in the end despite my sincere efforts to be logical when I can.

Even academically I like to brag, but honestly I've just been really damn good at pattern matching and recognition and then add charisma to that and one can get far in life with a little luck.

Anyways, taking the thread back to its purpose: For all I know we're both really INFP and examples that defy the stereotype a bit yet still remain true to the core, ultimately.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top