Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: Keirsey's INFP - do IEIs identify with it?

  1. #1
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Keirsey's INFP - do IEIs identify with it?

    I was wondering if anyone who is IEI or strongly considers IEI as a type could give me their view on this profile.


    Profile by David Keirsey

    INFPs present a calm, pleasant face to the world and are seen as reticent and even shy. Although they demonstrate a cool reserve toward others, inside they are anything but distant. They have a capacity for caring which is not always found in other types. They care deeply-indeed, passionately-about a few special persons or a cause. One word that captures this type is idealistic. At times, this characteristic leaves them feeling isolated, especially since INFPs are found in only 1 percent of the general population. INFPs have a profound sense of honor derived from internal values. The INFP is the Prince or Princess of mythology, the King's Champion, Defender of the Faith, and guardian of the castle. Sir Galahad and Joan of Arc are male and female prototypes of an INFP. To understand INFPs their cause must be understood, for they are willing to make unusual sacrifices for someone or something believed in.

    INFPs seek unity in their lives, unity of body and mind, emotions and intellect. They often have a subtle tragic motif running through their lives, but others seldom detect this inner minor key. The deep commitment of INFPs to the positive and the good causes them to be alert to the negative and the evil, which can take the form of a fascination with the profane. Thus INFPs may live a paradox, drawn toward purity and unity but looking over the shoulder toward the sullied and desecrated. When INFPs believe that they have yielded to an impure temptation, they may be given to acts of self-sacrifice in atonement. The atonement, however, is within the INFP, who does not feel compelled to make public the issue.

    INFPs prefer the valuing process over the purely logical. They respond to the beautiful versus the ugly, the good versus the bad, and the moral versus the immoral. Impressions are gained in a fluid, global, diffused way. Metaphors and similes come naturally but may be strained. INFPs have a gift for interpreting symbols, as well as creating them, and thus often write in lyric fashion. They may demonstrate a tendency to take deliberate liberties with logic. Unlike the NT, they see logic as something optional. INFPs also may, at times, assume an unwarranted familiarity with a domain, because their global, impressionistic way of dealing with reality may have failed to register a sufficient number of details for mastery. INFPs may have difficulty thinking in terms of a conditional framework; they see things as either real or fancied, and are impatient with the hypothetical.



    Career

    At work, INFPs are adaptable, welcome new ideas and new information, are well aware of people and their feelings, and relate well to most, albeit with some psychological distance. INFPs dislike telephone interruptions and work well alone, as well as with others. They are patient with complicated situations, but impatient with routine details. They can make errors of fact, but seldom of values. Their career choices may be toward the ministry, missionary work, college teaching, psychiatry, architecture, psychology-and away from business. They seem willing and usually are able to apply themselves scholastically to gain the necessary training for professional work, often doing better in college than in high school. They have a natural interest in scholarly activities and demonstrate, as do the other NF's, a remarkable facility for languages. Often they hear a calling to go forth into the world to help others; they seem willing to make the necessary personal sacrifices involved in responding to that call, even if it means asking others to do likewise. INFPs can make outstanding novelists and character actors, for they are able to efface their own personalities in their portrayal of a character in a way other types cannot.



    Home

    As mates, INFPs have a deep commitment to their pledges. They like to live in harmony and may go to great lengths to avoid constant conflict. They are sensitive to the feelings of others and enjoy pleasing those they care for. They may find it difficult to reconcile a romantic, idealized concept of conjugal life with the realities of everyday living with another person. At times, in fact, INFPs may seem fearful of exuberant attainment, afraid that current advances may have to be paid for with later sacrifices. The devil is sure to get his due if the INFP experiences too freely of success, or beauty, or health, or wealth, or knowledge. And thus, INFPs guard against giving way to relaxing in the happiness of mating. They may have difficulty in expressing affection directly, but communicate interest and affection indirectly.

    For INFPs, their home is their castle. As parents, they are fierce in protection of home and family and are devoted to the welfare of family members. They have a strong capacity for devotion, sympathy, and adaptability in their relationships, and thus are easy to live with. They are loyal to their family and, although they may dream of greener pastures, if they stray into those pastures they soon locate the nettles. The almost preconscious conviction that pleasure must be paid for with pain can cause a sense of uneasiness in the family system of an INFP, who may transmit an air of being ever-vigilant against invasion. In the routine rituals of daily living, INFPs tend to be compliant and may even prefer having decisions made on their behalf, until their value system is violated! Then INFPs dig in their heels and will not budge from ideals. Life with an INFP will go gently along for long periods, until an ideal is struck and violated. Then an INFP will resist and insist.



    Midlife

    At midlife INFPs may want to increase mastery of intellectual interests, perhaps taking advanced degrees in a chosen profession. They also may want to explore the sensual side of their natures, expanding their aesthetic appreciations to include physical sensory appreciations. Extending social activities and contacts may offer new horizons for INFPs, but they will have to guard against overextension psychologically, for before, during, and after midlife the vulnerability and sensitivity of the INFP will continue, and he or she can easily become emotionally drained.



    Mates

    The INFP questor probably has more problems in mating than any other type. Let us be mindful of the relative infrequency: about 1 1/4 percent, say two and a half million people in the USA. Their problem lies in their primary outlook on life. "Life," says the INFP, "is a very serious matter." Now when a person makes his life a kind of crusade or a series of crusades, then there's bound to be some taxing of the spouse. If the INFP takes the other tack, the "monastic" (and the same person can tack back and forth-now a crusader, now a monastic), the spouse will find himself again taxed, trying to draw the monastic out of his dark meditative cave.

    The opposites of our crusading monastic seem well equipped for this alternating-phase taxation: ENTJ and ESTJ. Both are anchored in the real world with a vengeance. The ENTJ marshaling his or her forces toward distant objectives, the ESTJ administrating in a solid, dependable, and traditional way whatever is his or hers to administer. Both provide anchorage to a person who might otherwise get lost in meditation or in crusade. Selection of a mate of irrelevant form (e.g., an ISTP artisan or an ESTP promoter) would not be the wisest of tactics in so serious a business as life.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  2. #2
    snegledmaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,900
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Here are my comments. It's a bit long.

    INFPs present a calm, pleasant face to the world and are seen as reticent and even shy.

    Ok

    Although they demonstrate a cool reserve toward others, inside they are anything but distant.

    Inside I'm even more distant.

    They have a capacity for caring which is not always found in other types.

    I'm characterized by a lack of concern.

    They care deeply-indeed, passionately-about a few special persons or a cause.

    No. I have no passions.

    One word that captures this type is idealistic. At times, this characteristic leaves them feeling isolated, especially since INFPs are found in only 1 percent of the general population.

    Could pass. I don't see myself as an idealistic individual though. That was one of the problems with INFJ as well. I'm an analysts.

    INFPs have a profound sense of honor derived from internal values. The INFP is the Prince or Princess of mythology, the King's Champion, Defender of the Faith, and guardian of the castle. Sir Galahad and Joan of Arc are male and female prototypes of an INFP. To understand INFPs their cause must be understood, for they are willing to make unusual sacrifices for someone or something believed in.

    True but not conscious. I've gotten then incredible feeling of justification from being prudent and I will never sacrifice my integrity. But this happens suddenly, in an explosion. I enter a moral tirade mode and my passion just plows me forward.

    INFPs seek unity in their lives, unity of body and mind, emotions and intellect.

    Doesn't everybody seek that? Passively or actively.

    They often have a subtle tragic motif running through their lives, but others seldom detect this inner minor key.

    I think this is mostly for appealing to the audience. And it's really convenient that it's so subtle nobody, except me, can really pick up on it. And it's only true if I say it's true.

    This may or may not be true, depending on my mood. I think that if I were melancholic I'd say true, but currently I'd say not.

    The deep commitment of INFPs to the positive and the good causes them to be alert to the negative and the evil, which can take the form of a fascination with the profane.

    Everybody is essentially committed to what they call "the positive and the good" be this , , , and so on. But if it's religion they are referring to I'm not religious.


    Thus INFPs may live a paradox, drawn toward purity and unity but looking over the shoulder toward the sullied and desecrated.

    I am interested in both sides of divisions.

    When INFPs believe that they have yielded to an impure temptation, they may be given to acts of self-sacrifice in atonement. The atonement, however, is within the INFP, who does not feel compelled to make public the issue.

    True. I do posses guilt. As do most of people. And I think most prefer to deal with it privatly.

    INFPs prefer the valuing process over the purely logical.

    Rationality is better then irrationality. But pure logic in unappealing as it is inhuman. So I say a mix of rationality with humanness. No preference.

    They respond to the beautiful versus the ugly, the good versus the bad, and the moral versus the immoral.

    I think it's pretty hard to do otherwise.

    Impressions are gained in a fluid, global, diffused way. Metaphors and similes come naturally but may be strained. INFPs have a gift for interpreting symbols, as well as creating them, and thus often write in lyric fashion. They may demonstrate a tendency to take deliberate liberties with logic. Unlike the NT, they see logic as something optional.

    Ok.

    INFPs also may, at times, assume an unwarranted familiarity with a domain, because their global, impressionistic way of dealing with reality may have failed to register a sufficient number of details for mastery.

    I'd never purposely talk out of my ass. Unintentionally, possible, as I have no control over it.

    INFPs may have difficulty thinking in terms of a conditional framework; they see things as either real or fancied, and are impatient with the hypothetical.

    Don't identify.

    Career

    At work, INFPs are adaptable, welcome new ideas and new information, are well aware of people and their feelings, and relate well to most, albeit with some psychological distance.


    Ok

    INFPs dislike telephone interruptions and work well alone, as well as with others.

    Depends on who is on the other side and how much I'm immersed in what I'm doing at the moment. The second part is relative as well.

    They are patient with complicated situations, but impatient with routine details.

    Ok.

    They can make errors of fact, but seldom of values.

    I seldom if ever make errors of fact. I don't even know what an error of value would be.

    Their career choices may be toward the ministry, missionary work, college teaching, psychiatry, architecture, psychology-and away from business.

    Don't identify. I have no desire to "serve" in any way. I *must* be independent in what ever I do.

    They seem willing and usually are able to apply themselves scholastically to gain the necessary training for professional work, often doing better in college than in high school.

    Ok to the first part and I just want to pass college as nobody will ever care about how I passed it for the second part.

    They have a natural interest in scholarly activities and demonstrate, as do the other NF's, a remarkable facility for languages.

    Ok to the first part, no to the second. Languages are not my domain, math is.

    Often they hear a calling to go forth into the world to help others; they seem willing to make the necessary personal sacrifices involved in responding to that call, even if it means asking others to do likewise.

    I serve no one. And I don't impose my views/beliefs on others. Nor could I imagine doing otherwise.

    INFPs can make outstanding novelists and character actors, for they are able to efface their own personalities in their portrayal of a character in a way other types cannot.

    Have no idea. I'm not a writer nor have I ever attempted to be one.



    Home

    As mates, INFPs have a deep commitment to their pledges.


    Perhaps.

    They like to live in harmony and may go to great lengths to avoid constant conflict.

    Ok.

    They are sensitive to the feelings of others and enjoy pleasing those they care for. They may find it difficult to reconcile a romantic, idealized concept of conjugal life with the realities of everyday living with another person. At times, in fact, INFPs may seem fearful of exuberant attainment, afraid that current advances may have to be paid for with later sacrifices. The devil is sure to get his due if the INFP experiences too freely of success, or beauty, or health, or wealth, or knowledge. And thus, INFPs guard against giving way to relaxing in the happiness of mating.

    Perhaps.


    They may have difficulty in expressing affection directly, but communicate interest and affection indirectly.

    Hmm, this seems like a typical introvert trait. Ok.

    For INFPs, their home is their castle.

    Again seems like an introvert trait. Ok.

    As parents, they are fierce in protection of home and family and are devoted to the welfare of family members. They have a strong capacity for devotion, sympathy, and adaptability in their relationships, and thus are easy to live with.

    Perhaps.

    They are loyal to their family and, although they may dream of greener pastures, if they stray into those pastures they soon locate the nettles.

    Rofl. I couldn't wait to get away from my parents. It's true what they say, you don't pick your family. No to this one.

    The almost preconscious conviction that pleasure must be paid for with pain can cause a sense of uneasiness in the family system of an INFP, who may transmit an air of being ever-vigilant against invasion. In the routine rituals of daily living, INFPs tend to be compliant and may even prefer having decisions made on their behalf, until their value system is violated! Then INFPs dig in their heels and will not budge from ideals. Life with an INFP will go gently along for long periods, until an ideal is struck and violated. Then an INFP will resist and insist.

    Ok.



    Midlife

    At midlife INFPs may want to increase mastery of intellectual interests, perhaps taking advanced degrees in a chosen profession. They also may want to explore the sensual side of their natures, expanding their aesthetic appreciations to include physical sensory appreciations. Extending social activities and contacts may offer new horizons for INFPs, but they will have to guard against overextension psychologically, for before, during, and after midlife the vulnerability and sensitivity of the INFP will continue, and he or she can easily become emotionally drained.


    Perhaps.



    Mates

    The INFP questor probably has more problems in mating than any other type. Let us be mindful of the relative infrequency: about 1 1/4 percent, say two and a half million people in the USA. Their problem lies in their primary outlook on life. "Life," says the INFP, "is a very serious matter." Now when a person makes his life a kind of crusade or a series of crusades, then there's bound to be some taxing of the spouse.


    My life is no crusade. I have no causes.


    If the INFP takes the other tack, the "monastic" (and the same person can tack back and forth-now a crusader, now a monastic), the spouse will find himself again taxed, trying to draw the monastic out of his dark meditative cave.

    Ok.

  3. #3
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    5,989
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Keirsey
    They often have a subtle tragic motif running through their lives, but others seldom detect this inner minor key.
    This fits me... and is one thing that might be more inherent to IEI (than to the other types) to get to the essence of IEI (as compared to other types). But even that has its issues... I don't know that all/most IEI's would look at that and say "oh, that is so me."

    Most of that description seems so generalized, or at times overly-fanciful... that I imagine a lot of people (non-IEIs included) would feel like about half of it pertains to them. About half of it fits me more or less. Maybe less than half.

    There is again that emphasis on causes and crusades... doesn't seem very IEI.

  4. #4
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Thank you everyone, for the very detailed responses.

    I have read all your comments, and I think Loki summarized it well:

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki
    Most of that description seems so generalized, or at times overly-fanciful... that I imagine a lot of people (non-IEIs included) would feel like about half of it pertains to them. About half of it fits me more or less. Maybe less than half.
    Yes. And a lot of what fits you all are general intuitive traits, general IP traits, or just general traits that might fit anyone, some of which snegledmaca pointed out.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki
    There is again that emphasis on causes and crusades... doesn't seem very IEI.
    Indeed.

    As I already indicated in my thread about typelogic's and personalitypage's INFP and INFJ profiles, I think it is clear that the available online INFP descriptions - whether by MBTT or Keirsey - simply do not fit those who see themselves as IEI. Those who do identify with them - like Danielle - see themselves as EII. It's perhaps even more straightforward than in the old INTP or INTJ story.

    Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but not only snegledmaca but also Kioshi see themselves as "analysts", as some of Kioshi's post indicate.

    People who insist that INFP = IEI should stop burying their heads in the sand, or going for the easy answer that "those descriptions are awful" or that all of these IEIs are not really IEIs, or the like.

    I would like to see the opposite: someone who does understand the socionics IEI, to the point of clearly seeing the SLE as their duals, and at the same time who says that the Keirsey or MBTT INFP profiles do describe them best.

    I very much doubt you will find anyone like that. But I'm ready to be proven wrong.

    And if the easy answer is that what matters is the 4 dichotomies -- well, then there is no point in even talking about descriptions anymore, is there? Especially Keirsey's or MBTT's?

    EDIT: My point is not that that will happen to all types. I think that, for instance, ESEs will probably identify best with Keirsey's and MBTT's ESFJ descriptions. My point is that there is no consistent correlation.

    Another remark on Keirsey. In his ESFJ description, he wrote the following:

    Quote Originally Posted by Keirsey
    There is a mutual attraction of ESFJ and INTP.
    Soooooo -- could he really be thinking of Socionics ESFJs and/or INTPs?
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    Here are my comments. It's a bit long.

    INFPs present a calm, pleasant face to the world and are seen as reticent and even shy.

    Ok
    Perfectly consistent with both IEI and ILI -- and some other types as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    Although they demonstrate a cool reserve toward others, inside they are anything but distant.

    Inside I'm even more distant.
    Much more consistent with ILI than IEI.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    They have a capacity for caring which is not always found in other types.

    I'm characterized by a lack of concern.
    Almost a falsification in itself that you are not an IEI. Strong indication of ILI in your case.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    They care deeply-indeed, passionately-about a few special persons or a cause.

    No. I have no passions.
    Another clear ILI>IEI indication.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    One word that captures this type is idealistic. At times, this characteristic leaves them feeling isolated, especially since INFPs are found in only 1 percent of the general population.

    Could pass. I don't see myself as an idealistic individual though. That was one of the problems with INFJ as well. I'm an analysts.
    What you say here is inconsistent with being an IEI. Period. Very strong indication of logical type.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    INFPs have a profound sense of honor derived from internal values. The INFP is the Prince or Princess of mythology, the King's Champion, Defender of the Faith, and guardian of the castle. Sir Galahad and Joan of Arc are male and female prototypes of an INFP. To understand INFPs their cause must be understood, for they are willing to make unusual sacrifices for someone or something believed in.

    True but not conscious. I've gotten then incredible feeling of justification from being prudent and I will never sacrifice my integrity. But this happens suddenly, in an explosion. I enter a moral tirade mode and my passion just plows me forward.
    You identify with the part in IEIs. The attidue and reaction you describe sounds very much like the typical PoLR behaviour of ILIs.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    INFPs seek unity in their lives, unity of body and mind, emotions and intellect.

    Doesn't everybody seek that? Passively or actively.
    Maybe. But not to the same extent. It's very important to leading types.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    They often have a subtle tragic motif running through their lives, but others seldom detect this inner minor key.

    I think this is mostly for appealing to the audience. And it's really convenient that it's so subtle nobody, except me, can really pick up on it. And it's only true if I say it's true.

    This may or may not be true, depending on my mood. I think that if I were melancholic I'd say true, but currently I'd say not.
    Perfectly consistent with both leading types.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    The deep commitment of INFPs to the positive and the good causes them to be alert to the negative and the evil, which can take the form of a fascination with the profane.

    Everybody is essentially committed to what they call "the positive and the good" be this , , , and so on. But if it's religion they are referring to I'm not religious.
    A typical IEI would not answer like that. Slight indication of ILI>IEI.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    Thus INFPs may live a paradox, drawn toward purity and unity but looking over the shoulder toward the sullied and desecrated.

    I am interested in both sides of divisions.
    Doesn't tell us much. I would agree with that too.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    When INFPs believe that they have yielded to an impure temptation, they may be given to acts of self-sacrifice in atonement. The atonement, however, is within the INFP, who does not feel compelled to make public the issue.

    True. I do posses guilt. As do most of people. And I think most prefer to deal with it privatly.
    Doesn't tell us much. Clear acts of self-sacrifice would suggest IEI>ILI, but you don't say whether you act like that or not.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    INFPs prefer the valuing process over the purely logical.

    Rationality is better then irrationality. But pure logic in unappealing as it is inhuman. So I say a mix of rationality with humanness. No preference.
    Probably a slight IEI>ILI indication. Hard to tell for sure.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    They respond to the

    beautiful versus the ugly, the good versus the bad, and the moral versus the immoral.


    I think it's pretty hard to do otherwise.
    Not for some other types. Both IEIs and ILIs have an esthetic sense. The least esthetic types in general are the ones that accentuate the practical uility aspects of things above all other aspects.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    Impressions are gained in a fluid, global, diffused way. Metaphors and similes come naturally but may be strained. INFPs have a gift for interpreting symbols, as well as creating them, and thus often write in lyric fashion. They may demonstrate a tendency to take deliberate liberties with logic. Unlike the NT, they see logic as something optional.

    Ok.
    ILIs don't take like to take liberties with logic, and if you really think that logic is something optional, then that is a clear IEI>ILI indication.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    INFPs also may, at times, assume an unwarranted familiarity with a domain, because their global, impressionistic way of dealing with reality may have failed to register a sufficient number of details for mastery.

    I'd never purposely talk out of my ass. Unintentionally, possible, as I have no control over it
    .
    Doesn't tell us much.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    INFPs may have difficulty thinking in terms of a conditional framework; they see things as either real or fancied, and are impatient with the hypothetical.

    Don't identify.
    Doesn't tell us much.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    Career

    At work, INFPs are adaptable, welcome new ideas and new information, are well aware of people and their feelings, and relate well to most, albeit with some psychological distance.


    Ok
    If you are truly aware of people and their feelings, that is a clear IEI>ILI indication. Otherwise it is consistent with ILI too.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    INFPs dislike telephone interruptions and work well alone, as well as with others.

    Depends on who is on the other side and how much I'm immersed in what I'm doing at the moment. The second part is relative as well.
    Doesn't tell us much.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    They are patient with complicated situations, but impatient with routine details.

    Ok.
    Perfectly consistent with both ILIs and IEIs, and other intuitive types.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    They can make errors of fact, but seldom of values.

    I seldom if ever make errors of fact. I don't even know what an error of value would be.
    Strong ILI>IEI indication.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    Their career choices may be toward the ministry, missionary work, college teaching, psychiatry, architecture, psychology-and away from business.

    Don't identify. I have no desire to "serve" in any way. I *must* be independent in what ever I do.
    Strong ILI>IEI indication.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    They seem willing and usually are able to apply themselves scholastically to gain the necessary training for professional work, often doing better in college than in high school.

    Ok to the first part and I just want to pass college as nobody will ever care about how I passed it for the second part.
    Doesn't tell us much.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    They have a natural interest in scholarly activities and demonstrate, as do the other NF's, a remarkable facility for languages.

    Ok to the first part, no to the second. Languages are not my domain, math is.
    Doesn't tell us much. IEIs can be good at math. But a slight ILI>IEI indication anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    Often they hear a calling to go forth into the world to help others; they seem willing to make the necessary personal sacrifices involved in responding to that call, even if it means asking others to do likewise.

    I serve no one. And I don't impose my views/beliefs on others. Nor could I imagine doing otherwise.
    Rather strong ILI>IEI indication, but not conclusive.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    INFPs can make outstanding novelists and character actors, for they are able to efface their own personalities in their portrayal of a character in a way other types cannot.

    Have no idea. I'm not a writer nor have I ever attempted to be one.
    Most IEIs have at least some inclination towards writing in some form. But it doesn't tell us much here.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    Home

    As mates, INFPs have a deep commitment to their pledges.


    Perhaps.
    Seems to be said about every type. Uninformative.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    They like to live in harmony and may go to great lengths to avoid constant conflict.

    Ok.
    It depends on how you do it. Uninformative.

    They are sensitive to the feelings of others and enjoy pleasing those they care for. They may find it difficult to reconcile a romantic, idealized concept of conjugal life with the realities of everyday living with another person. At times, in fact, INFPs may seem fearful of exuberant attainment, afraid that current advances may have to be paid for with later sacrifices. The devil is sure to get his due if the INFP experiences too freely of success, or beauty, or health, or wealth, or knowledge. And thus, INFPs guard against giving way to relaxing in the happiness of mating.

    Perhaps.
    Uninformative.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    They may have difficulty in expressing affection directly, but communicate interest and affection indirectly.

    Hmm, this seems like a typical introvert trait. Ok.
    Correct.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    For INFPs, their home is their castle.

    Again seems like an introvert trait. Ok.
    Correct.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    As parents, they are fierce in protection of home and family and are devoted to the welfare of family members. They have a strong capacity for devotion, sympathy, and adaptability in their relationships, and thus are easy to live with.

    Perhaps.
    Uninformative.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    They are loyal to their family and, although they may dream of greener pastures, if they stray into those pastures they soon locate the nettles.

    Rofl. I couldn't wait to get away from my parents. It's true what they say, you don't pick your family. No to this one.
    Uninformative.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    The almost preconscious conviction that pleasure must be paid for with pain can cause a sense of uneasiness in the family system of an INFP, who may transmit an air of being ever-vigilant against invasion. In the routine rituals of daily living, INFPs tend to be compliant and may even prefer having decisions made on their behalf, until their value system is violated! Then INFPs dig in their heels and will not budge from ideals. Life with an INFP will go gently along for long periods, until an ideal is struck and violated. Then an INFP will resist and insist.

    Ok.
    IP temperament.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    Midlife

    At midlife INFPs may want to increase mastery of intellectual interests, perhaps taking advanced degrees in a chosen profession. They also may want to explore the sensual side of their natures, expanding their aesthetic appreciations to include physical sensory appreciations. Extending social activities and contacts may offer new horizons for INFPs, but they will have to guard against overextension psychologically, for before, during, and after midlife the vulnerability and sensitivity of the INFP will continue, and he or she can easily become emotionally drained.


    Perhaps.
    Uninformative.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    Mates

    The INFP questor probably has more problems in mating than any other type. Let us be mindful of the relative infrequency: about 1 1/4 percent, say two and a half million people in the USA. Their problem lies in their primary outlook on life. "Life," says the INFP, "is a very serious matter." Now when a person makes his life a kind of crusade or a series of crusades, then there's bound to be some taxing of the spouse.


    My life is no crusade. I have no causes.
    Uninformative.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    If the INFP takes the other tack, the "monastic" (and the same person can tack back and forth-now a crusader, now a monastic), the spouse will find himself again taxed, trying to draw the monastic out of his dark meditative cave.

    Ok.
    Consistent with IP temperament. Perhaps most typical of leading types.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but not only snegledmaca but also Kioshi see themselves as "analysts", as some of Kioshi's post indicate.
    I will now correct you, because snegledmaca should not be used as a typical example of an IEI. He is most likely not an IEI but an ILI, and even if he really is an IEI he is a very untypical form of IEI in that case. Whether Kioshi is correctly typed or not I don't know, but I have no reason to doubt the correctness of Kioshi's self-typing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    People who insist that INFP = IEI should stop burying their heads in the sand, or going for the easy answer that "those descriptions are awful" or that all of these IEIs are not really IEIs, or the like.
    I am not burying my head in the sand, and I am not saying that the descriptions are awful. They are descriptions of IEIs, but not as good as the best IEI descriptions in Socionics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    And if the easy answer is that what matters is the 4 dichotomies -- well, then there is no point in even talking about descriptions anymore, is there? Especially Keirsey's or MBTT's?
    Wrong. Sometimes you say things that are so utterly stupid, Expat. Type descriptions are very important, because they are descriptions of general patterns of behaviours and attitudes in the types. The four dichotomies are most of all relevant as a typing method and a possible way to define the types.

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    EDIT: My point is not that that will happen to all types. I think that, for instance, ESEs will probably identify best with Keirsey's and MBTT's ESFJ descriptions. My point is that there is no consistent correlation.
    And you are so wrong. The correlation is there for everyone to see, but it is even more obvious for every S type.

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Another remark on Keirsey. In his ESFJ description, he wrote the following:

    Quote Originally Posted by Keirsey
    There is a mutual attraction of ESFJ and INTP.
    Soooooo -- could he really be thinking of Socionics ESFJs and/or INTPs?
    Yes, of course he is. He is just wrong about it. His ideas on intertype relations are incorrect. He is just speculating.

  7. #7
    aka-kitsune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    966
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Keirsey's INFP - do IEIs identify with it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    I was wondering if anyone who is IEI or strongly considers IEI as a type could give me their view on this profile.
    Before I answer this question, I should qualify that Keirsey was the first psychological typology I studied. The first time I took the test in the book "Please Understand Me", I came out slightly INFJ (I was right on the J/P border). If I take it now, I always come out INFx or INFP.


    Profile by David Keirsey

    INFPs present a calm, pleasant face to the world and are seen as reticent and even shy. Although they demonstrate a cool reserve (sometimes) toward others, inside they are anything but distant. They have a capacity for caring which is not always found in other types. They care deeply-indeed, passionately-about a few special persons or a cause. One word that captures this type is idealistic. At times, this characteristic leaves them feeling isolated, especially since INFPs are found in only 1 percent of the general population. INFPs have a profound sense of honor derived from internal values. The INFP is the Prince or Princess of mythology, the King's Champion, Defender of the Faith, and guardian of the castle. Sir Galahad and Joan of Arc are male and female prototypes of an INFP. To understand INFPs their cause must be understood, for they are willing to make unusual sacrifices for someone or something believed in.

    INFPs seek unity in their lives, unity of body and mind, emotions and intellect. They often have a subtle tragic motif running through their lives, but others seldom detect this inner minor key. The deep commitment of INFPs to the positive and the good causes them to be alert to the negative and the evil, which can take the form of a fascination with the profane. Thus INFPs may live a paradox, drawn toward purity and unity but looking over the shoulder toward the sullied and desecrated. When INFPs believe that they have yielded to an impure temptation, they may be given to acts of self-sacrifice in atonement. The atonement, however, is within the INFP, who does not feel compelled to make public the issue.
    (I definitely demonstrate a very internalized self-immolation streak)

    INFPs prefer the valuing process over the purely logical. They respond to the beautiful versus the ugly, the good versus the bad, and the moral versus the immoral. Impressions are gained in a fluid, global, diffused way. Metaphors and similes come naturally but may be strained. INFPs have a gift for interpreting symbols, as well as creating them, and thus often write in lyric fashion. They may demonstrate a tendency to take deliberate liberties with logic. Unlike the NT, they see logic as something optional. INFPs also may, at times, assume an unwarranted familiarity with a domain, because their global, impressionistic way of dealing with reality may have failed to register a sufficient number of details for mastery. INFPs may have difficulty thinking in terms of a conditional framework; they see things as either real or fancied, and are impatient with the hypothetical.


    Career

    At work, INFPs are adaptable, welcome new ideas and new information, are well aware of people and their feelings, and relate well to most, albeit with some psychological distance. INFPs dislike telephone interruptions and work well alone, as well as with others. They are patient with complicated situations, but impatient with routine details. They can make errors of fact, but seldom of values. Their career choices may be toward the ministry, missionary work, college teaching, psychiatry, architecture, psychology-and away from business. They seem willing and usually are able to apply themselves scholastically to gain the necessary training for professional work, often doing better in college than in high school. They have a natural interest in scholarly activities and demonstrate, as do the other NF's, a remarkable facility for languages. Often they hear a calling to go forth into the world to help others; they seem willing to make the necessary personal sacrifices involved in responding to that call, even if it means asking others to do likewise. INFPs can make outstanding novelists and character actors, for they are able to efface their own personalities in their portrayal of a character in a way other types cannot.


    Home

    As mates, INFPs have a deep commitment to their pledges. They like to live in harmony and may go to great lengths to avoid constant conflict. They are sensitive to the feelings of others and enjoy pleasing those they care for. They may find it difficult to reconcile a romantic, idealized concept of conjugal life with the realities of everyday living with another person. At times, in fact, INFPs may seem fearful of exuberant attainment, afraid that current advances may have to be paid for with later sacrifices. The devil is sure to get his due if the INFP experiences too freely of success, or beauty, or health, or wealth, or knowledge. And thus, INFPs guard against giving way to relaxing in the happiness of mating. They may have difficulty in expressing affection directly, but communicate interest and affection indirectly.

    For INFPs, their home is their castle. As parents, they are fierce in protection of home and family and are devoted to the welfare of family members. They have a strong capacity for devotion, sympathy, and adaptability in their relationships, and thus are easy to live with. They are loyal to their family and, although they may dream of greener pastures, if they stray into those pastures they soon locate the nettles. The almost preconscious conviction that pleasure must be paid for with pain can cause a sense of uneasiness in the family system of an INFP, who may transmit an air of being ever-vigilant against invasion. In the routine rituals of daily living, INFPs tend to be compliant and may even prefer having decisions made on their behalf, until their value system is violated! Then INFPs dig in their heels and will not budge from ideals. Life with an INFP will go gently along for long periods, until an ideal is struck and violated. Then an INFP will resist and insist.


    Midlife

    At midlife INFPs may want to increase mastery of intellectual interests, perhaps taking advanced degrees in a chosen profession. They also may want to explore the sensual side of their natures, expanding their aesthetic appreciations to include physical sensory appreciations. Extending social activities and contacts may offer new horizons for INFPs, but they will have to guard against overextension psychologically, for before, during, and after midlife the vulnerability and sensitivity of the INFP will continue, and he or she can easily become emotionally drained.
    Tending this way right now -- still finding myself drained with too much "overextension"


    Mates

    The INFP questor probably has more problems in mating than any other type. Let us be mindful of the relative infrequency: about 1 1/4 percent, say two and a half million people in the USA. Their problem lies in their primary outlook on life. "Life," says the INFP, "is a very serious matter." Now when a person makes his life a kind of crusade or a series of crusades, then there's bound to be some taxing of the spouse. If the INFP takes the other tack, the "monastic" (and the same person can tack back and forth-now a crusader, now a monastic), the spouse will find himself again taxed, trying to draw the monastic out of his dark meditative cave.

    The opposites of our crusading monastic seem well equipped for this alternating-phase taxation: ENTJ and ESTJ. Both are anchored in the real world with a vengeance. The ENTJ marshaling his or her forces toward distant objectives, the ESTJ administrating in a solid, dependable, and traditional way whatever is his or hers to administer. Both provide anchorage to a person who might otherwise get lost in meditation or in crusade. Selection of a mate of irrelevant form (e.g., an ISTP artisan or an ESTP promoter) would not be the wisest of tactics in so serious a business as life.
    Definitely not a monastic "crusader" though. While I'm highly idealistic, this is usually frustrating, as I don't want to impose my ideals on others, yet can't let myself get away with the kind of carefree bliss that I see some people indulge in. I do need a unifying theme for myself and an ideal that directs my devotion, despite the fact that I'm really quite a truculent devotee.

    I should qualify that I really don't consider myself "serious", but I do seek life to be always meaningful. I think my Life is important enough to think carefully about most things. Sometimes I can't help but want to understand events thoroughly. Other people, though, probably consider me too serious about some things.

    Hmm... lots of BOLD here. Guess I do relate to it quite a lot after all.
    socio: INFp - IEI
    ennea: 4w5 sp/sx

    **********

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Twain
    Only kings, presidents, editors, and people with tapeworms have the right to use the editorial 'we'.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder
    So, Phaedrus, tell us about your .
    1. Why? Relevance?
    2. Can you be more specific?

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder
    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder
    So, Phaedrus, tell us about your .
    1. Why? Relevance?
    You seem to (in general) describe ILIs as a creature that doesn't value , so I thought I would give you the opportunity to elaborate in case you just haven't mentioned the other bits.
    Do you disagree with that? They might value over , but of course they don't care very much about any of those functions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder
    2. Can you be more specific?
    How do you see your Fi-valuing manifest in yourself?
    I haven't bothered to study it. Why would that be interesting? It sounds like a rather trivial problem.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder
    So why would they care about SEEs?
    Because SEEs make them feel comfortable and understood. You know the theory, so why do you ask?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder
    Well, if you demonstrated that you valued Fi, no-one would be asserting that you're IEI, LII or LSI. It's hardly trivial.
    No one should be asserting that I am an IEI, a LII or a LSI no matter how much or how little I demonstrate that I value or not value Fi. They don't have enough information to be in a position to question my self-typing, because my self-typing is perfectly consistent with all the information I have provided to the members of this forum on what kind of person I am. And no other type in Socionics is consistent with the information I have provided.

    No one has any reason to doubt that I am an ILI, and yet people insist on doing exactly that. That is very irritating, because I don't like do discuss things with idiots who don't know anything and show no interest in accepting a scientific attitude.

  11. #11
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,337
    Mentioned
    210 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I once posted a couple of pics that totally reminded me of infps. I can't find them now
    ironically enough, they turned out to be pics of the same person..The arch-angel Michael.
    A few non-infps nodded their heads yes...the pics were good infp pics.
    A few infps said something like 'you really see us that way?'
    One infp went on a brief crusade against me for it....until he fessed up.

    Here is one of the pics I posted:


    But I think this one of michael and joan of arc says a lot more:

    this last is filled with all sorts of symbols directing the mind to infps...both in michael as infp..and joan as infp
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

  12. #12
    snegledmaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,900
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @ phaedrus

    You know, I just though of something. You base your assertion that I'm an ILI on that I identify with INTP and you reject my claims that I have creative as untrustworthy. So why do you find my claim that I'm INTP more trustworthy then my claim that I have creative ? It doesn't make much sense, unless you were using selective judgment. In which case your conclusions are subjective and thus dismissible.

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    @ phaedrus

    You know, I just though of something. You base your assertion that I'm an ILI on that I identify with INTP
    No. I base it on:

    1. Your own claim that you don't fit the IEI type descriptions.
    2. Your claim that you strongly identify with the club of NT Researchers and Keirsey's group of Rationals.
    3. Your claim that you fit the criteria for being a logical type better than the criteria for being an ethical type in the four dichotomies.
    4. Some other details in your description of yourself that suggest ILI>IEI.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    and you reject my claims that I have creative as untrustworthy.
    Only because there is a contradiction and because you haven't been able to explain the anomalies.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    So why do you find my claim that I'm INTP more trustworthy then my claim that I have creative ?
    I don't. I just notice that there is a contradiction, and that both claims can't be true. Either you are not an INTP or you don't have creative . You don't seem to be aware of the fact (or you ignore it) that the PoLR of ILIs is clearly and accurately described in most MBTT INTP type descriptions. It is impossible to fit the INTP descriptions if you have creative . You may identify with the aspects of the INTP descriptions, but certainly not with the PoLR parts -- unless you really are an ILI.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    It doesn't make much sense, unless you were using selective judgment. In which case your conclusions are subjective and thus dismissible.
    If anyone is using selective judgment here it is you. And apparently you use it a lot.

  14. #14
    snegledmaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,900
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    @ phaedrus

    You know, I just though of something. You base your assertion that I'm an ILI on that I identify with INTP
    No. I base it on:

    1. Your own claim that you don't fit the IEI type descriptions.
    I've just read all the profiles by Filatova and I don't identify with any of them.

    2. Your claim that you strongly identify with the club of NT Researchers and Keirsey's group of Rationals.
    Not strongly. Just identify. And I said nothing regarding the NT club.

    3. Your claim that you fit the criteria for being a logical type better than the criteria for being an ethical type in the four dichotomies.
    I said nothing regarding fitting the criteria for a logical type vs. an ethical type.

    Either you are not an INTP or you don't have creative .
    I primarily, or mostly, use as an analytical function. I don't know why socionics focuses so much on the people part of it, but that's only a part of it.

    You don't seem to be aware of the fact (or you ignore it) that the PoLR of ILIs is clearly and accurately described in most MBTT INTP type descriptions.
    It isn't.

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    I've just read all the profiles by Filatova and I don't identify with any of them.
    That means that you don't know how to read and understand type descriptions. Maybe you have incorrect views on the types, maybe not. But I have reason to be suspicious of your comeptence if you can't tell which type descriptions you identify with and which you don't. You should be able to determine that if you know Socionics.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    2. Your claim that you strongly identify with the club of NT Researchers and Keirsey's group of Rationals.
    Not strongly. Just identify. And I said nothing regarding the NT club.
    I have understood this as that you identify more with Keirsey's group of Rationals (NTs) than with his group of Idealists (NFs), and you haven't said anything that would suggest that my interpretation of what you have said about this is incorrect. You have also said that you don't see yourself as an idealist and that you think that you are more of an analyst. A typical IEI would definitely identify more with the Idealists than with the Rationals. And the NT club of Researchers in Socionics is exactly the same group (essentially) as Keirsey's group of Rationals, so if you identify with the group of Rationals you necessarily must identify with the socionic group of NTs too.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    3. Your claim that you fit the criteria for being a logical type better than the criteria for being an ethical type in the four dichotomies.
    I said nothing regarding fitting the criteria for a logical type vs. an ethical type.
    Either I have misunderstood you on this point, or you have forgot what you have said in the past. We don't have to argue about it, if we now can agree that you clearly fit the socionic criteria (for example those listed on Rick's site) for being an ethical type much better than you fit the criteria for being a logical type.

    So, are you now saying that you actually fit the criteria for being an ethical type, meaning that you identify with F in the four dichotomies? (If you know anything about Socionics and yourself you must be able to determine this.)

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    I primarily, or mostly, use as an analytical function. I don't know why socionics focuses so much on the people part of it, but that's only a part of it.
    This claim of yours is highly suspect. Maybe you don't know what you are talking about.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    You don't seem to be aware of the fact (or you ignore it) that the PoLR of ILIs is clearly and accurately described in most MBTT INTP type descriptions.
    It isn't.
    Then you don't understand it. It is that simple. You don't know how PoLR manifests itself in ILIs and you don't understand the type descriptions correctly.

  16. #16
    snegledmaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,900
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    I've just read all the profiles by Filatova and I don't identify with any of them.
    That means that you don't know how to read and understand type descriptions.
    I'm sorry but what? Lol, are you seriously suggesting I don't know how to properly read a type description? I'm reminded of a little internal joke my friends and I had. AT one time we gathered to watch the LOTR at my friends house. And during the watching the dvd broke. So we concluded that we weren't watching it properly. Do you see the absurdity of your claim that the profile is "broken" because I wasn't reading it properly?

    But I have reason to be suspicious of your comeptence if you can't tell which type descriptions you identify with and which you don't.
    But I just told you which type descriptions I identify with and with which I don't. Are you ignoring it?

    I have understood this as that you identify more with Keirsey's group of Rationals (NTs) than with his group of Idealists (NFs), and you haven't said anything that would suggest that my interpretation of what you have said about this is incorrect.
    Yes, I have said that I identify more with Keirsey's group of Rationals then Idealists.

    You have also said that you don't see yourself as an idealist and that you think that you are more of an analyst.
    Yes.

    A typical IEI would definitely identify more with the Idealists than with the Rationals.
    Well then obviously I'm not typical.

    And the NT club of Researchers in Socionics is exactly the same group (essentially) as Keirsey's group of Rationals, so if you identify with the group of Rationals you necessarily must identify with the socionic group of NTs too.
    NT club of Researchers is not the same as the NT rationals. And if you claim otherwise I'd like to see you prove it.

    We don't have to argue about it, if we now can agree that you clearly fit the socionic criteria (for example those listed on Rick's site) for being an ethical type much better than you fit the criteria for being a logical type.
    But I fit the socionics criteria for being an ethical type, I have an ethical function in my ego block. But setting socionics aside, I've read the descriptions on Rick's site and I cannot claim a preference.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    I primarily, or mostly, use as an analytical function. I don't know why socionics focuses so much on the people part of it, but that's only a part of it.
    This claim of yours is highly suspect. Maybe you don't know what you are talking about.
    Is that a challenge?

    You don't know how PoLR manifests itself in ILIs and you don't understand the type descriptions correctly.
    You are wrong. And would you like to enlighten us?

  17. #17
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,337
    Mentioned
    210 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    I primarily, or mostly, use as an analytical function. I don't know why socionics focuses so much on the people part of it, but that's only a part of it.
    This claim of yours is highly suspect. Maybe you don't know what you are talking about.

    Type descriptions focus NFs as being people oriented, and conventiently ignore the sheer amount of work and problem solving that's required in order to be "good with people". People aren't closed systems in and of themselves. They contian so many variables that'd it'd be next to impossible to know 50-75% of those variables and how they'll affect other variables.

    NT's as analysts prefer to work with systems that contain limited variables and can easily be externally controlled.
    NF's as "analysts" prefer to work with more complex systems that contain unlimited variables and aren't so easily controlled. (I mean, if it's easy to control, how fucking boring is THAT?)

    So NFs have a natural method of dealing with these complex problems and juggling numerous variables, etc.
    But that doesn't mean that that natural method is limited to just people. That same method, those same skills, can be used for non-people oriented tasks as well.

    By asking the NF to define what they do, you are asking them, in essence, to T it for you. You are asking them to limit it in such a way that for communication purposes, they have to ignore much of what they do and scratch out some of the variables that are involved, etc. Basically...when an NF attempts to describe what they are doing....by default you are going to get a very cheap-ass simplistic "model". But if the NF spends time and energy to create a more accurate model, it's automatically assumed by some people that the NF is actually an NT. Well duh!! If you ask for NT info and they take the time to translate into NT language...then of course it's going to come out sounding like they are NT.
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

  18. #18

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    I'm sorry but what? Lol, are you seriously suggesting I don't know how to properly read a type description?
    Yes, of course. How stupid are you really? If you don't identify with Filatova's IEI description there are only two possible alternatives:

    1. You don't know how to read a type description.
    2. You are not an IEI.

    You claim to be an IEI. Okay, but then you MUST find a way to identify with IEI type descriptions. If you can't do that you don't understand the IEI type, and we have strong reason to suspect that you are in fact some other type than IEI. And in your case the ILI is the most likely alternative type. It is totally unacceptable that you insist on being an IEI and yet claim that you don't fit any IEI description, and that you instead claim to fit INTP type descriptions and the NT Rational temperament.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    But I just told you which type descriptions I identify with and with which I don't. Are you ignoring it?
    The only type descriptions I can recall you saying that you identify with are INTP type descriptions. Is there any IEI type description that you identify with to a reasonable extent? Is there any type description of any other type than IEI that you identify more strongly with?

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    Yes, I have said that I identify more with Keirsey's group of Rationals then Idealists.
    Which you shouldn't do if you are an IEI. The Rational group consists of logical types only.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    You have also said that you don't see yourself as an idealist and that you think that you are more of an analyst.
    Yes.
    Which you shouldn't do if you are an IEI.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    A typical IEI would definitely identify more with the Idealists than with the Rationals.
    Well then obviously I'm not typical.
    That's an understatement.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    NT club of Researchers is not the same as the NT rationals. And if you claim otherwise I'd like to see you prove it.
    Prove it!? You must be totally blind if you can't see that they are referring to the same group of people.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    But I fit the socionics criteria for being an ethical type, I have an ethical function in my ego block.
    How do you know that you have an ethical function in your ego block if you don't know whether you fit the criteria for being an ethical type more than you fit the criteria for being a logical type?

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    I primarily, or mostly, use as an analytical function. I don't know why socionics focuses so much on the people part of it, but that's only a part of it.
    This claim of yours is highly suspect. Maybe you don't know what you are talking about.
    Is that a challenge?
    No. I only want you to explain the anomalies. I don't accept contradictions.

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    You don't know how PoLR manifests itself in ILIs and you don't understand the type descriptions correctly.
    You are wrong. And would you like to enlighten us?
    I am right. And if you don't see that the PoLR of ILIs is described in INTP type descriptions you are either blind or incompetent. I don't know how to explain that to you since it is so obvious. Have you actually read any of them? How can you have misunderstood them so completely?

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kioshi
    He didn't say that he can't tell which type descriptions he identifies with and which he didn't. In fact, he made a point of stating that he didn't identify with any of them. I don't find them all that useful either. What is the basis for these descriptions?
    Observations of real life people of the same type.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kioshi
    Keirsey distinguishes between NT and NF based on "cooperative vs. utilitarian tool usage". Cooperators he says get where they want to go by getting along with others. Utilitarians he says tend to go after what they want in the most effective way possible.
    Yes, but that is not a definition of the differences. You have to look at the whole picture -- all aspects of each temperament.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kioshi
    I tend to go after what I want in the most efficient way possible. Does this make me INTP? No.
    Correct. That in itself is clearly not enough to establish your type or your temperament.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kioshi
    I am essentially an exploratory researcher. The INTP I work with is essentially an empirical researcher.
    What's the difference between an "exploratory" and an "empirical" researcher? Of course not every INTP is an empirical researcher, and of course not every IEI is an "exploratory" researcher -- whatever that means.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kioshi
    I am good at determining potentials. He is good at determining probabilities.
    Maybe. So what?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kioshi
    My models tend to be organic. His models tend to be mechanistic.
    What do you mean by an "organic" model?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kioshi
    My methods reflect an innovation strategy, which is very good for controlling new undertakings. His methods reflect a cost minimizing strategy, which is very good for controlling ongoing activities.
    What is your point?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kioshi
    What Keirsey did was evaluate the strategies in a context in which his "utilitarians" were more effective. These sorts of biases creep into most descriptions. This is one of the reasons descriptions are not reliable indicators of type.
    Only if you don't see the whole picture.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kioshi
    The fact that people want to associate F types with people oriented does not make it true. There is no basis for the association of F types with people oriented.
    Yes, there definitely is. But that doesn't mean that every F type has to work with people or that a T type can't work with people.

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by anndelise
    Type descriptions focus NFs as being people oriented, and conventiently ignore the sheer amount of work and problem solving that's required in order to be "good with people".
    They don't ignore anything of the sort. There is no contradiction here.

    Quote Originally Posted by anndelise
    People aren't closed systems in and of themselves. They contain so many variables that'd it'd be next to impossible to know 50-75% of those variables and how they'll affect other variables.

    NT's as analysts prefer to work with systems that contain limited variables and can easily be externally controlled.
    NF's as "analysts" prefer to work with more complex systems that contain unlimited variables and aren't so easily controlled. (I mean, if it's easy to control, how fucking boring is THAT?)
    What you say here is no objection to my point. In fact you are proving it.

    Quote Originally Posted by anndelise
    So NFs have a natural method of dealing with these complex problems and juggling numerous variables, etc. But that doesn't mean that that natural method is limited to just people. That same method, those same skills, can be used for non-people oriented tasks as well.
    Who has ever suggeste otherwise?

    Quote Originally Posted by anndelise
    By asking the NF to define what they do, you are asking them, in essence, to T it for you. You are asking them to limit it in such a way that for communication purposes, they have to ignore much of what they do and scratch out some of the variables that are involved, etc. Basically...when an NF attempts to describe what they are doing....by default you are going to get a very cheap-ass simplistic "model". But if the NF spends time and energy to create a more accurate model, it's automatically assumed by some people that the NF is actually an NT. Well duh!! If you ask for NT info and they take the time to translate into NT language...then of course it's going to come out sounding like they are NT.
    No. You are totally wrong, and what you say here is irrelevant. If you really understand the differences between logical and ethical types, you would also understand why no ethical type should identify with being an NT. I am not claiming that snegledmaca is an NT. He does that. And that leads to a logical contradiction. The fact that he don't care about logical contradictions can of course be seen as some sort of screwed argument for him being an IEI, but it is certainly no praise to his intelligence.

  21. #21
    Let's go to fairyland Minde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Amongst the stars
    TIM
    EII/INFj E9w1sp
    Posts
    4,078
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by anndelise

    Type descriptions focus NFs as being people oriented, and conventiently ignore the sheer amount of work and problem solving that's required in order to be "good with people". People aren't closed systems in and of themselves. They contian so many variables that'd it'd be next to impossible to know 50-75% of those variables and how they'll affect other variables.

    NT's as analysts prefer to work with systems that contain limited variables and can easily be externally controlled.
    NF's as "analysts" prefer to work with more complex systems that contain unlimited variables and aren't so easily controlled. (I mean, if it's easy to control, how fucking boring is THAT?)

    So NFs have a natural method of dealing with these complex problems and juggling numerous variables, etc.
    But that doesn't mean that that natural method is limited to just people. That same method, those same skills, can be used for non-people oriented tasks as well.

    By asking the NF to define what they do, you are asking them, in essence, to T it for you. You are asking them to limit it in such a way that for communication purposes, they have to ignore much of what they do and scratch out some of the variables that are involved, etc. Basically...when an NF attempts to describe what they are doing....by default you are going to get a very cheap-ass simplistic "model". But if the NF spends time and energy to create a more accurate model, it's automatically assumed by some people that the NF is actually an NT. Well duh!! If you ask for NT info and they take the time to translate into NT language...then of course it's going to come out sounding like they are NT.
    Yes, especially the last paragraph. When you define something, when you make it concrete, you lose part of it.

    Eh, this really doesn't help toward the main topic, but that struck a note in me, so I thought I'd resonate with you.


    And, Phaedrus, you're not being very palatable, here or elsewhere. Not a smart move.
    INFj / EII / FiNe
    ()


    "Fairy Tales are more than true; not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten." - G.K. Chesterton

    "Have courage and be kind." - Cinderella's mom

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Minde
    And, Phaedrus, you're not being very palatable, here or elsewhere. Not a smart move.
    That is irrelevant. I am still right.

  23. #23
    Let's go to fairyland Minde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Amongst the stars
    TIM
    EII/INFj E9w1sp
    Posts
    4,078
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    Quote Originally Posted by Minde
    And, Phaedrus, you're not being very palatable, here or elsewhere. Not a smart move.
    That is irrelevant. I am still right.
    What does it matter that you're right?

    Or (trying another approach) - If you're not trying to convince people, then why are you still here? Why are you talking if you don't care if people listen?


    Ah, why am I doing this? Must be instinct. "The poor child is running toward the street..." Hopeless, more likely than not, so I'll stop here for now, barring glimmers of hope.
    INFj / EII / FiNe
    ()


    "Fairy Tales are more than true; not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten." - G.K. Chesterton

    "Have courage and be kind." - Cinderella's mom

  24. #24

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Minde
    What does it matter that you're right?
    It is irrelevant that I am right. Persons are irrelevant. The only thing that is relevant here is the objective truth of the matter. I am correcting people's mistake because I am interested in getting to know the truth. I wan't to know snegledmaca's correct type if possible, but I can't accept blatant anomalies and contradictions. Nobody should accept them, including snegledmaca himself.

    Quote Originally Posted by Minde
    Or (trying another approach) - If you're not trying to convince people, then why are you still here?
    I am almost totally uninterested in convincing people. I am interested in getting things right. I hate false beliefs, both my own and others. I want to correct incorrect beliefs, eliminating them from the planet if possible. (I know that it will never happen but you can always try ...)

    Quote Originally Posted by Minde
    Why are you talking if you don't care if people listen?
    I would prefer that people listened to what I am trying to say, and I am of the opinion that they should listen to everyone that is trying to tell what he or she is convinced is the truth and is arguing for it. If people choose not to listen to me, they ignore the objective truth, and that is an almost immoral thing to do, in my opinion. No one should have a strong opinion on any matter if they don't have any objectively good reasons for having that opinion. You always have to scrutinize the grounds for your own beliefs.

  25. #25

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kioshi
    More NF traits fit me than NT traits, but not significantly so.
    If more NF traits fit you than NT traits, you are an NF type. That doesn't seem to be the case with snegledmaca, however. He hasn't admitted it yet, anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kioshi
    If it doesn't fit, then it doesn't fit. I don't know what else to say.
    But at least you fit socionic IEI type descriptions (including Filatova's) better than you fit socionic ILI type descriptions, don't you?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •