Differentiating Introverted and Extroverted Types

[Hugo]

If you are xNTj, which word describes you best:
Energetic (ENTj)
Comfort (INTj)

If you are xNTp, which word describes you best:
Energetic (INTp)
Comfort (ENTp)

If you are xSFj, which word describes you best:
Energetic (ISFj)
Comfort (ESFj)

If you are xSFp, which word describes you best:
Energetic (ESFp)
Comfort (ISFp)

If you are xNFp, which word describes you best:
Energetic (INFp)
Comfort (ENFp)

If you are xNFj, which word describes you best:
Energetic (ENFj)
Comfort (INFj)

If you are xSTp, which word describes you best:
Energetic (ESTp)
Comfort (ISTp)

If you are xSTj, which word describes you best:
Energetic (ISTj)
Comfort (ESTj)

[Koneko]

I think in my case is correct... Dunno what an ENFj would say tho. I prefer the gentle trait.

What's the idea, exactly? That Alpha and Delta members prefer gentleness besides Betta and Gamma ones who prefer strictness?

Appealing to the difference of the quadra spirit to decide among separating contraries that is?

Sounds a good idea... I hope it actually reflects a truth.

[Hugo]

I think an ENFj prefers firmness because their dual is ISTj.

As a summary:

Alpha and Delta go for gentleness.

Beta and Gamma go for firmness.

[Creepy-infp]

"Alpha and Delta go for gentleness.

Beta and Gamma go for firmness."

Why?

[Hugo]

It's in their nature.

is absent in the ego block and superid block for Alpha and Delta. However, is present in the ego block and superid block for Beta and Gamma.

[MysticSonic]

Alphas and Deltas have introverted sensing as one of their quadrable values, whereas Betas and Gamms have extraverted sensing as one of their quadrable values.

[Waddlesworth]

Hugo, yet another innovative idea.

[The Exception]

I prefer to be gentle with people and be treated gently by them.

Laura
INTj

[Cone]

Interesting idea. I like to be firm with people and be treated firmly by others. You can't learn to be independent if you're given too much freedom, and you can't get anything done, either.

[Angel von Himmel]

It works, but it still does not account for the correct ordering of functions.

[Hugo]

I am very happy about the breakthrough.

[Hugo]

If you don't know (for example) if you are INTp or INTj, then the breakthrough will make things certain. The breakthrough is also helpful in avoiding conflicting relations.

[Rocky]

Hugo, what makes you think people will be able to identify/admit their weaker functions? If you are a thinker, then maybe you won't be able to ttell the diffrence between the two and know which one you really want. Why not describe the dominant functions to seperate between E/I? For example, xSTP:

ISTP

I observe my surrrondings and am curios to discover my enviorment, I can easily interpret others non-verbal communication, I enjoy pastimes and think more about happenings in the past then the present, I enjoy relaxing with good friends, etc...

ESTP

I can easily will myself and am persistant, I live in the moment, just do it, I can be aggressive, I don't mind taking risks, I am fully aware of my surrondings, I can be a hot head at times, ect...

[Hugo]

I think Introversion (I) and Extroversion (E) should be replaced by Gentleness (G) and Firmness (F).

It is much more helpful and useful.

If we merge identical and mirror relations together, we would have the following duals:

G/F:
NT + SF
ST + NF

[Rocky]

I think Introversion (I) and Extroversion (E) should be replaced by Gentleness (G) and Firmness (F).

Then in that case I'm going to have to disagree and honestly think you are way off and dead wrong.

[Hugo]

Why not describe the dominant functions to seperate between E/I?

What I am presenting is much more easier and simpler.

Rocky: Also, in another topic you said that self-perception is problematic when typing.

[Eidos]

I don't think so.

If ever, gentleness is F and firmness T

Or you've never dealt with an ISTJ

[HarryBottom]

Would be interesting to see how INFps respond to it.

Hi. Uh... not to be the bubble burster or anything, but this definately doesn't work for me. I do not treat people firmly, and I certainly do not like to be treated firmly by people. I don't think introversion and extroversion corespond to how firm or gentle you treat others or like to be treated. I think this corresponds more to T/F then it does I/E. But even that doesn't particularly work. Just because an Introvert is less social doesn't mean they treat people more firmly. It means then are less comfortable and less at ease meeting people. And even if they APPEAR to treat others firmly, maybe as a self defence mechanism, most likey, they don't like to be treated firmly by others. Thats a large assumption. Just becuase I'm more of a introverted person I like firm treatement? Now that doesn't make sence to me. I have a feeling this will conflict for other introverted feeling types. It may work for INFJs, this is most likely because of the INxx generalizations that say that INFJs are "cold" on the outside, and "warm and fuzzy on the inside". So, Hugo, your generalization would work for them. It would probly work for many thinking types. THe other main person it is going to conflict for is the ISFP. They, just like I, for the most part, treat others gentle and like to be treated gentle by others. I mean, just because we may be difficult to get to know, you get to know us and were gentle people. We might playfully joke around with you, but nothing more. We are nothing close to FIRM people. Also, theres not a lot on this form to prove this wrong so I'll say it for them... There's also a lot of Extroverted Thinking types that BY FAR treat others firm, and perhaps like to e treated firm. Don't go telling me that an ESTJ is gentle. Gentle? C'mon... they can be outright cruel without even knowing it. In sum.... I don't think I/E corresponds to Gentle or Firm people.

[Hugo]

I, for the most part, treat others gentle and like to be treated gentle by others.

HarryBottom:

Then why are you most attracted to ESTps, who are firm? They definately are not gentle.

[XcaliburGirl]

What about those of us who treat others firmly, but like to be treated gently? :wink:

[Creepy-]

What about those of us who treat others firmly, but like to be treated gently? :wink:

They're INTjs

[Angel von Himmel]

What about those of us who treat others firmly, but like to be treated gently? :wink:

Ohhh oh ohhh ... Play nice ... :wink:

[MysticSonic]

I like to treat others gently, though I rarely do. >.>

[HarryBottom]

HarryBottom:

Then why are you most attracted to ESTps, who are firm? They definately are not gentle.

How does who I'm attracted to take toll on weather I treat others gentlely or like to be treated gentely? I'm not attracted to ESTPs BECAUSE they treat others firmly, I'm attracted to them for other reasons. And, because it is a relationship of duality, I, the more "gentle" INFP, help ESTPs to treat others with less "firmness" when I see it emerging. And they help me in other ways, bringing me out of my shell more, and things like that. It would make more sence to me, that in a duality relationship, one of the partners treats others with a more gentle touch and one does so more firmly. Thats the thing about duality. In many ways, you SHOULD be opposites, not the same... you fulfill eachothers weak points.

Infact, THAT would be true. ONE of the 2 partners in each duality relationship would treat the world more gently. The feeling type I'd think.

In the INFP-ESTP relationship, it would be I, the INFP, because I have FEELING as my dominent function. The one will treat others more gentely than the other... because they are, in a sence, opposites.

For example...
INTJ(more firmly), ESFJ(more gently)
ENTP(more firmly), ISFP(more gently)

even with J types.... INFJ and ESTJ, FOR EXAMPLE... the INFJ, although they can be firm, will still treat others more gently then the ESTJ.

Im not saying all feeling types are "gentler" then all Thinking types. What I'm saying is that, in a relationship of duality, the feeling type will most likely treat others more gentley then their thinking type partner.

Nurture obviously takes a tole in this type of thing too, how you learned to deal with the world, etc. And on rare occasions there are just some things that can cause more gentle types to act very firm. I'm by no means saying this is a 100% thing... what I'm saying is, if your going to make a relitievely true generization about gentle and firm socionics types, THAT is the one to make.

So, in sum, In a relationship of duality, the feeling type in the relationship will, in almost all occurences, treat others with a more gentle touch then their Thinking type partner.

Have you ever met an INFP? Firm? I dunno... I've been called a teddy bear by people who get to know me, I don't think so. I/E = F/G... false.
Though Hugo, you were close, because there is a large minority of types on this form that conflict with this. Keep digging, you'll strike gold eventually.

[HarryBottom]

They're INTjs

What some INTJs would concider gentle treatment, would by some others, be concidered "firm"... such as some critisisms, etc.

[Rocky]

Hugo, I think people have pointed out some reasons why this doesn't work. Most ISTPs aren't gentle. ISTPs sre the most likley to end up in prison. I'm not proud to say it, but it's true. I don't know how many ISTPs would actually admit that they are gentle. You can't redfine I/E with G/F, they don't work together. There is a reason Jung coined the words "Introversion" and "Extraversion".

[The Exception]

What about those of us who treat others firmly, but like to be treated gently? :wink:

They're INTjs

Actually that's closer to the truth. I chose treating others gently and being treated gently option because I really don't like being treated firmly. I'll sometimes treat others more firmly than I wish to be treated myself.

Laura
INTj, intuitive subtype?

[Hugo]

HarryBottom:

On the one hand you say that you don't like to be treated firmly, but that is exactly what your dual (ESTp) will do. Won't this cause serious problems, considering that you don't like being treated firmly?

Harry: I'm not trying to be patronizing but I think you might be INFj.

[Hugo]

What about those of us who treat others firmly, but like to be treated gently? :wink:

They're INTjs

Actually that's closer to the truth. I chose treating others gently and being treated gently option because I really don't like being treated firmly. I'll sometimes treat others more firmly than I wish to be treated myself.

Laura
INTj, intuitive subtype?

I am INTj and see my self as being gentle. You say that you sometimes treat others firmly, but how do you treat people most of the time?

[Hugo]

What about those of us who treat others firmly, but like to be treated gently? :wink:

So do you prefer to be firm or gentle to people yourself?

[Hugo]

Hugo, I think people have pointed out some reasons why this doesn't work. Most ISTPs aren't gentle. ISTPs sre the most likley to end up in prison. I'm not proud to say it, but it's true. I don't know how many ISTPs would actually admit that they are gentle. You can't redfine I/E with G/F, they don't work together. There is a reason Jung coined the words "Introversion" and "Extraversion".

The best thing to do is ask an ISTp.

[The Exception]

I am INTj and see my self as being gentle. You say that you sometimes treat others firmly, but how do you treat people most of the time?

--> I prefer to treat people gently but can be firm when needed. I guess I treat people gently most of the time.

Laura
INTj, intuitive subtype?

[HarryBottom]

Harry: I'm not trying to be patronizing but I think you might be INFj.

TRUST ME. I am in no way or form a J. I get along very well with ESTPs who would be my conflicting relation if I was so as well. Trust me, please don't make me explain it. I've wondered constantly if I'm really an INFP ever since the day I found out, and I've speculated just about everything close... but at the end of the day I truely am an INFP down to the core. I also couldn't give a crap about my health really, and any arguments that arise between me and my INTJ father are always based on my lazyness, my procrastination, and the fact that I consistantly start things without finishing them. "I'll do it later" is basicly my motto. Please, Please, Please, trust me. I am NOT an INFJ. And, Hugo, THOUGH this was a good idea, IF you had read my entire posts you would see why this doesn't fully work... please read them if you have not. All in all, in the end, this conflicts with certain types. Though your idea was good, I don't believe this is fully functional.

On the one hand you say that you don't like to be treated firmly, but that is exactly what your dual (ESTp) will do. Won't this cause serious problems, considering that you don't like being treated firmly?

Even if I was an INFJ SUPPOSIVELY, whom didn't like to be treated firmly, then my SUPPOSED duel, the ESTJ would ALSO treat me very firmly.

You cant look at the word FIRM as such a solid thing. It's such a relitive word. What the ESTP does, I don't particularly see it as cruel. They joke around with others.... but in the end... they're good people. When they say things, they are not TRYING to be cruel. They are unaware of the possible damage they can cause to others. Their intentions are good. They are not cruel people. You use the word firm as if they were unloving rocks or something. The ESTP WANTS to be loved. Therefor, they never really go too far. This causes them to not go past a certain point in their so cald "firmness". I find that in my relations with ESTPs they have always been rather nice people to me. Not always to others, but to me, they are never cruel.

I am POSITIVE I am an INFP.


Also, as one last little side note... Hugo, did you say you were an INTJ?
I though I remembered that from somewhere. You don't seem INTJ to me. I've been thinking this for a while, and as much as I HATE doing this to people, because I hate when they do it to me, I thought it may be good just to mention it.


I'm not out to get you here or anything with your ideas, I'm just here to help out and give my perspective. I think I said before, I hate to be the one to burst the bubble when someones onto something... but noone else seemed to be doing it so I gave my input. I hope I've helped here. Also, I'm not sure if I seem a little hostle here or not, but incase I do, I apologize, I simply don't really like when people question my type. Once again, if I do seem hostile, I apologize.

[Hugo]

HarryBottom:

Do you relate better to ENFj or to ENFp?

What do you think my type is?

I don't think ESTj's think of themselves to be firm. They think of themselves to be gentle. It comes down to self-perception, not my or your perception.

[Koneko]

Well... Hugo -has- a point actually, just that in a way he rediscovered and pointed out something Gulenko did on his own and used it as an indicator between E/I for possible contraries.

Remember Alpha/Delta are among Caring and Childish and Beta/Gamma are Victims and Agressors And it's not by chance that he made this distinction.

It's considered secondary I may imagince, since I/E as a dichotomy is easier to figure out than one's erotic attitude. But... I can't help accepting Hugo -does- read the quadra spirit well in this questionnaire's attempt.

A good INFp/ESTp couple regardless if they notice they're firm or not the should be somewhat into S&M no offending ^^;;;

[HarryBottom]

HarryBottom:

Do you relate better to ENFj or to ENFp?

What do you think my type is?

I don't think ESTj's think of themselves to be firm. They think of themselves to be gentle.

Between those two I am much more like the ENFP, but this is completely irrelevent because I am by no means an extrovert. I have also seen the way the ENFP acts, I know two of them, and I am not an ENFP. I could never act socially as they do. I could never "love everyone" quite like they do. And also, my best friend is one of theose ENFPs... and our INFP-ENFP relationship describes Contrary relations quite well. Please, please DONT doubt me. I am an INFP.

As for the ESTJs. It doesn't matter what they THINK of themselves as. It matters what they are. What they think of themselves as isn't part of the matter. They've got an ego and they think of themselves to be pretty much perfect. Doesn't matter what they think. It matters how they act towards others... and if I was an INFJ who didn't want to be treated firmly, they would still be ACTING firm towards me. DID I NOT GIVE YOU ENOUGH REASONING? Please don't continue to question it. I am an INFP. I see reason for your speculation, and I understand that I'd be just grand for you if you were to strike gold with this one, but it doesn't work. Trying to prove me to be a different type isn't going to change that.

I get the feeling that your not even reading all of my posts, and if you are, your missing very important details. I say this because you seem to come back to me with little unimportant things, ignore the reasoning I've just gave you and picking out small petty details that, even if you did happen to prove me wrong on a couple, there would still be the majority against your accusations.

You don't seem INTJ because you seem to say things without thinking them through fully. You also show other characteristics often contrary to the actions of the INTJ. I may be completely off... But this is my own bit of speculation.

[Hugo]

HarryBottom:

I was not suggesting that you are ENFp or ENFj. The fact that you have picked ENFp over ENFj strongly suggests that you belong to the Delta Quadra. INFjs have a mirror relation with ENFps. Notice that both have the same two functions in the Ego Block: and .

I am INTj and have much more similarity with ENTp than with ENTj because we both share and .

Therefore I have good reason to beleive that you belong to the Delta quadra and furthermore are an INFj.

My second guess is that you are ISFp, and that your dual is the gentle ENTp rather than the firm ESTp.

[Hugo]

I don't think it is right to make 'firm' synonymous with 'cruel'. Also just because ESTps are easy going does not mean they are gentle.

[MysticSonic]

I actually think Hugo might be correct on the matter: if what they believe theirselves to be is what the test is basing its conclusions on, then the test would suceed wonderfully if the ESTj responded as they, from what it seems, believe theirselves to be; though, I have my doubts that ESTjs whom are interested in this subject matter would retain such an illusory perspective of theirselves, or even that they would maintain the perspective even if they did not encounter or, at least, have not read a great amount of literature on Socionics.

Thus, like I said earlier, the error that Hugo's made is keeping the statements together; I say get rid of the question that attempts to ascertain how they "treat others", as this requires an objective observer to verify, and since the test is aimed at a subjective observer it would be more sensible to ask only subjective questions, such as how one would like to be treated. Besides, I think it would work just as well without the objective question.

[MysticSonic]

The issue is that it attempts to ascertain how the subjective observer is acting by using an objective question WHILE using semantically messy wording.