IxTP's: Which is worse out of the three....

[StevenM]

Which of the three a) Hardly spark interest, b) More oblivious to, and c) have hardest time understanding?

ExTJ
ISxJ
IxFP

Not meant for a type-hate thread. I'm 'playing' around with some ideas regarding cognitive functions, and loosely put together a system which breaks the 16 types further into sub-types.

It's just for fun. Though I hope to get honest answers.

The answer should correspond to the same question regarding these three functions, and how you utilize them:

Te
Si
Fi

Even though I realize Fi is supposed to be at the bottom of the stack, I'm wondering if it's less frivolous to some than others.

EDIT: After Yellow's question, I'll add,

which of these seem more right:

Te-weak - (stronger functions: Ne, Fe, Se) (weaker functions: Si, Fi, Ni) (weakest: Te)
Si-weak - (stronger functions: Ne, Ni, Se) (weaker functions: Te, Fi, Fe) (weakest: Si)
Fi-weak - (stronger functions: Ne, Ni, Fe) (weaker functions: Te, Si, Se) (weakest: Fi)

Ti being the strongest for all 3.

 

[Black Rose]

If introversion is absorbing and extroversion is expending then:

EJ takes control of the external then observes the internal
IP takes control of the internal then observes the external
EP observes the external then takes control of the internal
IJ observes the internal then takes control of the external

 

[Yellow]

Si - hardly sparks interest - though seeing Si-doms respond to change is a little funny sometimes.
Fi - have hardest time understanding - they irritate me faster than anyone.
Te- more oblivious to - I irritate others with my apparent lack.

Which should I pick in this case?
Edit: I'm not trying to be difficult or anything, I just don' t want to throw off your poll with an answer I can't take back.

 

[StevenM]

Si - hardly sparks interest - though seeing Si-doms respond to change is a little funny sometimes.
Fi - have hardest time understanding - they irritate me faster than anyone.
Te- more oblivious to - I irritate others with my apparent lack.

Which should I pick in this case?
Edit: I'm not trying to be difficult or anything, I just don' t want to throw off your poll with an answer I can't take back.

I can agree. Perhaps, one of these seem more right and is easier for deduction:

Te-weak - (stronger functions: Ne, Fe, Se) (weaker functions: Si, Fi, Ni) (weakest: Te)
Si-weak - (stronger functions: Ne, Ni, Se) (weaker functions: Te, Fi, Fe) (weakest: Si)
Fi-weak - (stronger functions: Ne, Ni, Fe) (weaker functions: Te, Si, Se) (weakest: Fi)
?
Ti being the strongest for all 3.

*picking one of the first two doesn't necessarily mean a sensor type.

 

[Yellow]

They still seem almost neck-a-neck, but I guess with that definition, Fi would be weakest.

 

[Jennywocky]

This seems like the more nerdy anti-version of "Kill, Marry, or Fuck." Or maybe not.

For me personally, I understand Si the best... but then again, I also grew up in an environment where much of my family was Si-based, the religious circles I was in had a strong Si component, and my ex was Si primary. What I share is the sense of connection to the past and strong nostalgic leanings, but it's never an excuse to just follow the past; I feel smothered and trapped rather than secure if I get stuck in a static cloistured Si existence.

Fi can irritate the crap out of me IF the Fi person isn't flexible. Then again, I've had some close friends who were flexible and Fi. But i don't understand it, because I don't know where they're getting their values from; I guess I just get along well with the ones who I happen to share values (freedom, equality, knowledge, equanimity, inclusiveness, etc.) and the ones I don't, I can't get along with easily at all.

Te, I can mentally understand, but i can't do Te stuff for long... or if I do, while I feel good about being productive, I feel compartmentalized and non-alive. Te seems so focused on closure that it loses the nuances -- it's a procrustean bed that lops off limbs just to check off the Completed Box. I have the least amount of friends in the Te box, out of these three types. The closest (a female ESTJ) was raised by INTP and INFJ parents; I have a good time with her, and then every so often she starts Te'ing shit without concern for nuance and I get annoyed with her.

As far as how these fall into the stereotypical INTP profile:
1. Si is the tertiary, and ISFJ is are our "complementary" type in that we share common pairs but just swap their order in our function lineup (TiNe <-> SiFe).
2. Fi is our "demonic" function, the 8th in the Beebe lineup.
3. Te is our anti-hero so to speak, the 5th in the Beebe lineup and the lead for the "shadow side" according to Beebe.

 

[StevenM]

This seems like the more nerdy anti-version of "Kill, Marry, or Fuck." Or maybe not.

For me personally, I understand Si the best... but then again, I also grew up in an environment where much of my family was Si-based, the religious circles I was in had a strong Si component, and my ex was Si primary. What I share is the sense of connection to the past and strong nostalgic leanings, but it's never an excuse to just follow the past; I feel smothered and trapped rather than secure if I get stuck in a static cloistured Si existence.

Fi can irritate the crap out of me IF the Fi person isn't flexible. Then again, I've had some close friends who were flexible and Fi. But i don't understand it, because I don't know where they're getting their values from; I guess I just get along well with the ones who I happen to share values (freedom, equality, knowledge, equanimity, inclusiveness, etc.) and the ones I don't, I can't get along with easily at all.

Te, I can mentally understand, but i can't do Te stuff for long... or if I do, while I feel good about being productive, I feel compartmentalized and non-alive. Te seems so focused on closure that it loses the nuances -- it's a procrustean bed that lops off limbs just to check off the Completed Box. I have the least amount of friends in the Te box, out of these three types. The closest (a female ESTJ) was raised by INTP and INFJ parents; I have a good time with her, and then every so often she starts Te'ing shit without concern for nuance and I get annoyed with her.

As far as how these fall into the stereotypical INTP profile:
1. Si is the tertiary, and ISFJ is are our "complementary" type in that we share common pairs but just swap their order in our function lineup (TiNe <-> SiFe).
2. Fi is our "demonic" function, the 8th in the Beebe lineup.
3. Te is our anti-hero so to speak, the 5th in the Beebe lineup and the lead for the "shadow side" according to Beebe.

Thank you for your answer to the poll

I know what I'm doing is weird, but essentially, the old system is too simple for me. I mean, the dom, aux, tert... etc.... . I realize simple is good, and usually the simplest is the most likeliest, even with personality types. But I hit the end of the road, and I want more. So for fun, I've devised another personality categorization system (with the same cognitive functions), but instead of 16 types, there is now 144 nuanced ways of expressing personality types.

I know I'm setting myself up for a pitchfork attack. Is the simple system better, or more right than mine? Perhaps. Though in my opinion, if this is all just a procedure of categorization, then just as long as each category share certain properties, neither is more better than the other, they are just different ways of categorizing.

As an analogy, imagine a junk drawer, full of random things (pencil, fork, rubber band, a ball, a nail clipper, a coin, flashlight, etc), and I give you containers to organize them. There is more than one way of organizing these objects, and there may be some ways that are neither more right or wrong than others.

So in this insane thread, there is no auxiliary, demonic, or tertiary, etc. Instead, I've devised all IxTP's into three major groups (outlined here). However, I'm not really letting on fully how my system operates, as I think I would commit blasphemy to the die-hard personality type fans.

And it's just for fun, and I don't mean to say I'm more right than the old system. I'm just looking for something more interesting and complex. To me, it's all legos.

 

[Black Rose]

So for fun, I've devised another personality categorization system (with the same cognitive functions), but instead of 16 types, there is now 144 nuanced ways of expressing personality types.

However, I'm not really letting on fully how my system operates, as I think I would commit blasphemy to the die-hard personality type fans.

And it's just for fun, and I don't mean to say I'm more right than the old system. I'm just looking for something more interesting and complex. To me, it's all legos.

may i ask which type of INFP i am?
jenny apparently likes flexible INFP's

 

[onesteptwostep]

I voted Te.. because it's something I think I'm the weakest at. I think Si just comes with age and maturity. Fi... to some degree I think all INTPs have a sense of Fi. It doesn't verbalise or come up often, but it's there. It's sort of like our conscious. (or I could be misunderstanding Fi)

I sort of get that other's Fi could be a little hard to understand sometimes, but our Fi, it's in there somewhere, deeply rooted.

And this would describe me well I think: Te-weak - (stronger functions: Ne, Fe, Se) (weaker functions: Si, Fi, Ni) (weakest: Te)

I wouldn't say that my Si is weak though, like the above suggests: I sort of dwell it in more than often.

But... are we talking about functions exhibited from someone else or our own usage of them? (objective perception of said functions or subjective experiences of said function?)

 

[StevenM]

may i ask which type of INFP i am?
jenny apparently likes flexible INFP's

In old system, there are intuitive Fi's, and sensor Fi's. (ISFP, and INFP).

In my crazy, whacky, circus there are:

Major category A:
Leading: Fi
Helpers: Se, Te, Ne
Amateur: Si, Ti, Ni
Dead: Fe

Major category B:
Leading: Fi
Helpers: Se, Ne, Si
Amateur: Te, Fe, Ti
Dead: Ni

Major category C:
Leading: Fi
Helpers: Se, Si, Te
Amateur: Ne, Ni, Fe
Dead: Ti


Using the dead, or score 0 function would probably be the best way to tell them apart. Ideally, that category is all together
a) averse to that function
b) Mostly ignorant and oblivious to it's existence, and
c) Weak with it's utilization and effects.

With the amateur functions, only 2 of those conditions are true, with each variety balanced out to the three functions.

Helper functions contain only 1 of those conditions for each function.

Leading function does not hold any of those conditions.

 

[Jungle]

Te, I can mentally understand, but i can't do Te stuff for long... or if I do, while I feel good about being productive, I feel compartmentalized and non-alive. Te seems so focused on closure that it loses the nuances -- it's a procrustean bed that lops off limbs just to check off the Completed Box.

There is a school of thought that INTPs actually have a high capability for using Te, but a distinct lack of preference for it because using it cuts us off from our natural habitat of Ti. That is the case for me and it sounds like it's the same for you.

I have had jobs where I would effortlessly do some project management work (set up some processes, schedules and spreadsheets, etc) and then hand it on to someone else at the earliest opportunity. It is not enjoyable but we might have a tendency to underestimate our abilities in this area. No other type is able to flick the Te switch on and off so easily as the INTP or ISTP.

 

[Yellow]

I have had jobs where I would effortlessly do some project management work (set up some processes, schedules and spreadsheets, etc) and then hand it on to someone else at the earliest opportunity. It is not enjoyable but we might have a tendency to underestimate our abilities in this area. No other type is able to flick the Te switch on and off so easily as the INTP or ISTP.

I see what you're saying there, but sometimes, you know you need to use Te, and you can't because deep down, you just don't give a damn. It's like the spirit is willing, but the mind is busy doing something more important.

 

[Jungle]

I see what you're saying there, but sometimes, you know you need to use Te, and you can't because deep down, you just don't give a damn. It's like the spirit is willing, but the mind is busy doing something more important.

Yeah, that's a fair point come to think of it. Sometimes I really can't turn the Te switch on at all due to lack of motivation, even though I know I need to. That's especially a problem if I am working for myself rather than a project that other people are involved in.

 

[Seteleechete]

Would it be rights to say Fi weakness is lack of understanding of internal feelings and Te weakness lack of understanding for conformity?

 

[Jennywocky]

There is a school of thought that INTPs actually have a high capability for using Te, but a distinct lack of preference for it because using it cuts us off from our natural habitat of Ti. That is the case for me and it sounds like it's the same for you.

I have had jobs where I would effortlessly do some project management work (set up some processes, schedules and spreadsheets, etc) and then hand it on to someone else at the earliest opportunity. It is not enjoyable but we might have a tendency to underestimate our abilities in this area. No other type is able to flick the Te switch on and off so easily as the INTP or ISTP.

yeah, that sounds like my experience. For example, the few times I've badly needed to create a budget, I actually do a bang-up job -- create the excel sheet, I have working columns automating the tallying of various monthly costs, even credit card interest/payments and accessing other parts of the spreadsheet, etc. I just have to be focused on it and see it as important... but once I get it done, I lose interest. I will keep up with it long enough to get back on track.

Same thing with work in that vein. I'll get it on track, but my first inclination is then to hand it off. Handing me maintenance tasks that involve keeping detail consistent is a bad idea and/or hell for me, it gets old and unsatisfying quickly; but ask me to develop the procedure itself, for someone else to maintain? Or to analyze how something has been implemented and improve it in some way? Sure. That's interesting, or at least moreso.

My favorite parts of my current job are (1) writing software requirements in the most elegant, succinct way possible, distilling down the collected data, and (2) troubleshooting system problems.

 

[StevenM]

Would it be rights to say Fi weakness is lack of understanding of internal feelings and Te weakness lack of understanding for conformity?

Can't say with total assuredness. But here is my train of thought.

Stealing is bad, and wrong. An Fe would explain it more objectively, as universal. It effects everyone, no-one should ever steal.

However Fi would take a more subjective approach. It's much more personal, and would probably describe and characterize it by imagining themselves as the victim, or empathize with a victim more personally.

With thinkers, it being bad and wrong by itself is not good enough as also it's not good enough that a clock just keeps time. It must be taken apart. It must undergo a step-by-step process, and fully rationalized. Once rationalized, it can be implemented, and this is where the difference between Ti, and Te comes in.

A Ti, will be more intrinsic and subjective with it's implementation. The system is applied for his own personal gains. In fact, the logic of the system will seem very unique only to himself, his reasoning bonded to his own affect.

The Te takes a more extrinsic approach. Similar to law, it must be implemented regardless of personal resistance. He'll hold himself up to it's duty as much as he'll hold everyone else to it. But contrary to the extroverted feeler, he's removed from the empathic theme, and instead broken it all apart into an irrefutable, persuasive analysis. Unlike the Ti, it didn't come from him, it came from the universal rules that are bound to everything. It's just the way it is.

 

[Seteleechete]

That Fi description sounds awfully like I would imagine Fe and the Fe description like I would imagine a T description.

 

[Desu]

The worst type is ESxx

 

[EvilBlitz]

I am voting Si.

The reasoning being that with Te types I typically find they believe there should be rules everyone should abide by, and I have successfully convinced them of their hypocrisy of those rules. Te dominant types I find to be inconsistent in reasoning but at least I can reason with them on purpose and not mindlessly set on rules like Si dominants. They are more pragmatic. (I could be bias as I have 1 ESTJ friend and 3 ENTJ friends and 1 ENTJ acquaintance)

With Fi types, I find their reasoning to be absolute garbage in general, but being a "compass" type like Ti they are more likely to have good intentions at heart at least. Also more consistent in reasoning(even if it is shit) and application of rules. Once I learn their expectations and get over the initial clashes, they are much easier to get on with. Share my dislike of subjugation of others.

I dislike Si types the most as they show the most propensity for me to violate my rule of binding others by rules they do not bind themselves by. They also typically show a lack of purpose and follow rules over looking what the rules were meant to achieve. Completely willing to follow a system even if it means to the detriment of others, absolutely abhorrent. They also have this annoying undercurrent of "If everyone was like me there would be no errors".

 

[EvilBlitz]

"A Ti, will be more intrinsic and subjective with it's implementation. The system is applied for his own personal gains. In fact, the logic of the system will seem very unique only to himself, his reasoning bonded to his own affect.

The Te takes a more extrinsic approach. Similar to law, it must be implemented regardless of personal resistance. He'll hold himself up to it's duty as much as he'll hold everyone else to it. But contrary to the extroverted feeler, he's removed from the empathic theme, and instead broken it all apart into an irrefutable, persuasive analysis. Unlike the Ti, it didn't come from him, it came from the universal rules that are bound to everything. It's just the way it is "


Completely and utterly disagree. Most of my friends are ISTP and I identify as being a Ti dominant at least. Ti dominants bind themselves by the same rules as everyone else. Te/Fi axis shows the greatest propensity for hypocrisy. They place themselves at the center of things and are completely unable to see they are doing the same thing as they are judging others by. Ti/Fe is just the way it is. Ti dominants are more observer types, not Te. INTP look for laws of "nature", or do you think it is coincidence that Charles Darwin, Albert Einstein and other theorists are typed as INTPs?. Te are laws of authority/humans.
You must not have many Te dominant friends, they revel in when you can point out holes in a system that can be exploited for personal gain.

 

[StevenM]

That Fi description sounds awfully like I would imagine Fe and the Fe description like I would imagine a T description.

Completely and utterly disagree. Most of my friends are ISTP and I identify as being a Ti dominant at least. Ti dominants bind themselves by the same rules as everyone else. Te/Fi axis shows the greatest propensity for hypocrisy. They place themselves at the center of things and are completely unable to see they are doing the same thing as they are judging others by. Ti/Fe is just the way it is. Ti dominants are more observer types, not Te. INTP look for laws of "nature", or do you think it is coincidence that Charles Darwin, Albert Einstein and other theorists are typed as INTPs?. Te are laws of authority/humans.
You must not have many Te dominant friends, they revel in when you can point out holes in a system that can be exploited for personal gain.

I apologize for being vague in this whole thread. I'll see if I can clarify my thoughts pertaining to these judging functions.

The functions have two known dichotomous parts to them. Introverted contrasted with extroverted, and the opposing differences of the feeling and thinking.

Starting with introversion and extroversion. I see introverted behaviour as a frustration to the external world, and an aim to divide themselves from it. Introverts may be more averse to stimulus then extroverts; the guards at the castle gate are stringent. They prefer segregating themselves from the outside, where they have more enthusiasm for what happens within their castle walls, or otherwise, the self.

With extroverted motivations, the guards are more lenient, the gate is almost always open, there may as well be no walls at all. The aim is for globalization, where everyone and everything is part of the same. The enthusiasm is for the outside, where no door should be locked, and everything being shared.

The differences between feeling and thinking may be even trickier to define. I propose that those differences are very similar to the differences of the sensor and intuitive. The intuitive always aiming to create abstract perception; to take the pieces and synthesize something from them. The sensors contrasting this, they prefer working with what already is, and getting to the more concrete detail of it; for the wild ideas of the intuitives are not real or tangible, and thus incomprehendable.

Very similar to the battle of the thinkers and feelers, only on the rationalization side. Thinkers having less tolerance for judging justly on abstract creations of reason. Their aim is again analytically working through what rules are concrete and tangible, while the feelers are going beyond synthesizing in-the-clouds creations of justifications.

Peculiarly with INTPs, there is a good strong mixture of elements in the dominant, and the sidekick auxillary. One is introverted, and the other extroverted. One is judging, and the other perceiving, and one is concrete and analytical, while the other is synthesizing and abstract. You could say INTP's have a somewhat blended gradient particularly of my new created dimension.

So going back to my original comment, I can see where I went wrong. Putting the elements together:

Extroverted Feeling - Sharing, and unrestricting stimulation of synthesized, abstract justifications.

Introverted Feeling - Segregating and a guarding cautiousness of internally abstract creations of rationalization.

Introverted Thinking - Again, cautious and reserved with their own hoarding of internal analytical reason.

Extroverted Thinking - Open, public and outspoken of objective rationale.

 

[OmoInisa]

Very similar to the battle of the thinkers and feelers, only on the rationalization side. Thinkers having less tolerance for judging justly on abstract creations of reason. Their aim is again analytically working through what rules are concrete and tangible, while the feelers are going beyond synthesizing in-the-clouds creations of justifications.

Extroverted Feeling - Sharing, and unrestricting stimulation of synthesized, abstract justifications.

Your analysis of introversion vs extroversion is very interesting and useful. Intuition vs sensing is also pretty recognisable. However I think you have thinking and feeling the wrong way round, as far as abstraction is concerned.
If I read Jung correctly, he describes feeling as more primordial, more sensual, more 'concrete' than thinking. Thinking is an abstraction away from the 'primitive', unadulterated level at which feeling operates.

So the way I envision the functions:

Introversion is more abstract and extroversion more concrete.

Intuition is more abstract and sensing more concrete.

Thinking is more abstract and feeling more concrete.

This may of course depend on how one defines 'concrete' and 'abstract'. I think the above follows from Jung's definitions (assuming I am not the one that misunderstood the treatment of thinking and feeling).

 

[Sir Eus Lee]

Thinking is more abstract and feeling more concrete.

Can you explain that further?

 

[StevenM]

Your analysis of introversion vs extroversion is very interesting and useful. Intuition vs sensing is also pretty recognisable. However I think you have thinking and feeling the wrong way round, as far as abstraction is concerned.

That's an argument I keep running into, even beyond this topic. At first, I was wondering if it had something to do with the bias of how INTP's think. But, now I'm going to think about it more with an open mind to the possibility.

There is something I would argue with though:

Introversion is more abstract and extroversion more concrete.

I can imagine how that idea played out, as introversion is associated with subjectivity and the personal, while extroversion - objectivity. It also insinuates that Si doms are very abstract.

In my model, it's akin to saying introversion is perception, while extroversion is judging. The abstract/concrete is just an added element I created with the other two binary dimensions, introversion/extroversion and judging/perceiving.

 

[onesteptwostep]

Ti for ISTPs and Ti for INTPs differ a little because of how the Ti reacts or molds with the aux of the said type. Ti-Ne and Ti-Se is a bit different I'd think.

Also,

Extroverted Feeling - Sharing, and unrestricting stimulation of synthesized, abstract justifications.

Introverted Feeling - Segregating and a guarding cautiousness of internally abstract creations of rationalization.

This seems more like Ti thinking about feeling, not Feeling itself. All these rationalizations of Fi/Fe I think are Ti themselves. Feeling is more of that instinctual emotional that just arises without thought. It's more intuitive(?). I don't think they're necessarily abstracts or rationalizations.

Your descriptions on Ti and Te are right on the spot though, I think.

 

[OmoInisa]

Can you explain that further?

I take abstraction to mean a removal from the bare, unfiltered details of an experience. It allows a generalisation based on an apprehension of the essential aspects. Concreteness embraces the actuality of the experience, with less interest in extrapolation.
Concreteness is synonymous with sensuality, unadulterarion, directness, etc. Abstraction is synonymous with summary, inference, tangent, etc.

Feeling deals sensuously with reality, while thinking formulates a more general principle, removed from the elemental aspects of the thing.

 

[OmoInisa]

It also insinuates that Si doms are very abstract.

In my model, it's akin to saying introversion is perception, while extroversion is judging. The abstract/concrete is just an added element I created with the other two binary dimensions, introversion/extroversion and judging/perceiving.

As compared to Se, yes you could say Si is more abstract.

Saying judging is more extroverted could simply be a different way of stating the canonical definition of the dichotomy. Perceivers are regarded as so because the introvert their primary mode of judgement and judgers are so because they extrovert it.

I think of judging/perceiving as a mere pointer to function orientation, rather than a meaningful dichotomy in itself. Judging and perceiving are not cognitive functions.

 

[StevenM]

As compared to Se, yes you could say Si is more abstract.

Saying judging is more extroverted could simply be a different way of stating the canonical definition of the dichotomy. Perceivers are regarded as so because the introvert their primary mode of judgement and judgers are so because they extrovert it.

I think of judging/perceiving as a mere pointer to function orientation, rather than a meaningful dichotomy in itself. Judging and perceiving are not cognitive functions.

Abstract = non-tangible, existing in the mind = introversion.
Concrete = tangible, existing in the world = extroversion.

I apologize for my ignorance. I now agree, the terms abstract is suited for introversion. I was using the word without complete knowledge of it's definition.

 

[TheManBeyond]

I can be hateful about Fe but i understand it and even play by its rules once a while because if not i couldn't live in this world
Ti is also difficult yet so funny. So i'm here curious about it.

 

[ENTP lurker]

This is me:
Ni: I hate when people feed me too obvious or too simplistic grand visions with Se materialism and power attached to it. I don't roll like that.
Si: cool, I'm so handicapped in this
Fi: I'm blind to it. I hope I could learn some and overcome my aspieness
Te: too busy/business, relax and use your brain like it supposed to be used: deep thinking
Fe: Yes, please
Se: bite my hairy ass... and I sue you and be too scared to appear in court
Ti: such a cool way to be autistic
Ne: what a wonderful way to be extroverted and totally oblivious towards external real world realities

When it comes to Ti dominant people: Te and Fi tandem probably makes you insane.