Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: War: INTp vs INFp vs INxp (yes the crosstype)

  1. #1
    XoX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    4,407
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default War: INTp vs INFp vs INxp (yes the crosstype)

    One more thread about INTp vs INFp. We had one loooong time ago but it is probably gone now. And anyways now I want to concentrate on the intuitive subtypes as they are puzzling me.

    So how do you know between INTp(Ni) and INFp(Ni)? What are the core features that still keep these too types different. And where are they similar? What kind of things to observe in others and in self? Do you have any theoretical explanations or perhaps even real world observations?

    If you want you can bring ENTj(Ni) and ENFj(Ni) in the discussion too but my main focus here is INTp(Ni) vs INFp(Ni).

    And if tcaud is reading this how do you describe INxp crosstype in your system?

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,969
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: War: INTp vs INFp vs INxp (yes the crosstype)

    Quote Originally Posted by XoX
    One more thread about INTp vs INFp. We had one loooong time ago but it is probably gone now. And anyways now I want to concentrate on the intuitive subtypes as they are puzzling me.

    So how do you know between INTp(Ni) and INFp(Ni)? What are the core features that still keep these too types different. And where are they similar? What kind of things to observe in others and in self? Do you have any theoretical explanations or perhaps even real world observations?

    If you want you can bring ENTj(Ni) and ENFj(Ni) in the discussion too but my main focus here is INTp(Ni) vs INFp(Ni).

    And if tcaud is reading this how do you describe INxp crosstype in your system?
    I'll try to tackle the question about Ni subtypes. I think you're right that it can sometimes be hard to tell, because I think INTp(Ni) uses a sort of Fe, and INFp(Ni) may appear to use Te....both more than one would expect regarding use of the PofLR.

    The different, I think, is that the INTp(Ni)'s use of Fe is very individual and never gets to a point where INTp feels at home in a group-Fe situation. The INTp(Ni) must always analyze; everything must be logical; but emotions may be used. The INTp(Ni) accepts emotional expression as something that is logical and useful in certain circumstances, but never wants it to get in the way of objectivity.

    The INFp(Ni) brings up topics that may lead to philosophical discussion. However, the INFp(Ni) never really wants to debate. While the INTp(Ni) enjoys the game of a debate, INFp(Ni) loses interest at a certain point.

    Anyhow, that's my perspective on it. I'm sure it may not apply in all cases.

  3. #3
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,826
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    derrrrr...... one has Fe as a creative function and the other does not.
    You know how ILI's love Fe? They don't. Beta NFs do.

    Don't tell tcau, but I honestly don't see room for crosstypes. (At this present moment, anyway)
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,969
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP
    derrrrr...... one has Fe as a creative function and the other does not.
    You know how ILI's love Fe? They don't. Beta NFs do.

    Don't tell tcau, but I honestly don't see room for crosstypes. (At this present moment, anyway)
    In theory, yes. But some people, such as Smilex and others, have postulated that some people are sort of in-between or might move back and forth. Tcaud's of course is another such theory.

    I think the question is based on the idea of this possibility.

    The standard answer...that ILIs hate Fe and EIEs hate Te, end of story....is correct according to the classical theory, but it misses the central issue...that is, are there border types, or crosstypes, or whatever one wants to call them.

  5. #5
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,626
    Mentioned
    156 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ILIs don't really *hate* Fe.

    But place a Ni IEI in a crowd of people that he/she knows well. You'll still see, very very clearly, the Fe. He/She will talk to everybody, be a bit of a showoff, tell stories. This does not happen to ILIs that, yes, can be talkative, but usually on one-on-one situations more than when given attention by a group. I have less experience with Ni-ILIs though, so I'll refrain from further comments.

    Now for the comparison between Ni-INFp and Fe-INFp. Fe-INFp are usually more concerned about status, Ni-INFp are slightly more nerdy and naive. Fe-INFps tend to be fashion-conscious and dress with much less restraint than Ni-INFps. They are also much more approachable, they tend to be loud, as opposed to Ni-INFps that can get talkative in the situation I described but, as a general rule, they still very much look like introverts. Ni-INFp girls can be confused for ISFjs-Fi.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  6. #6
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG
    But place a Ni IEI in a crowd of people that he/she knows well. You'll still see, very very clearly, the Fe. He/She will talk to everybody, be a bit of a showoff, tell stories. This does not happen to ILIs that, yes, can be talkative, but usually on one-on-one situations more than when given attention by a group. I have less experience with Ni-ILIs though, so I'll refrain from further comments.
    I think that in terms of behavior, it may be tricky to differentiate a Ni-IEI from a Ni-ILI when observing them. I think FDG's observations are good. But also, a Ni-ILI will still be more likely to make points using facts or supposed facts, where a Ni-IEI will use more ideas and convictions than facts in their arguments.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Crosstype INTp-INXp:

    1st to last...

    1)
    2)
    3)
    4)
    5)
    6)
    7)
    8)


    is the ability to perceive the influence of others feelings in the meaningfulness of collectively accepted data. Producing creates a collective initiative which accomplishes a response to others' feelings. "feeling tone logic" as I interpret it. PoLR perceives the relationship of what society/others are feeling as related to what they are trying to accomplish. For example, says definitively that the frustration with government in the U.S. is tied specifically to the problems in Iraq and the failure to catch Osama bin Laden.

    without , in contrast, doesn't try to ask why others are feeling the way they do. There could be infinitely many reasons so why bother? They feel that way and that's the situation which must be responded to. Big difference. One has a narrow interpretation of why things are the way they are, the other has a much wider and varied view.

    The success of the two in objective terms can be seen in the election results: those who predicted that the war in Iraq/terror situation was the reason for the discontent in America were vindicated; those who tried to ignore the correlation proved incorrect. (and in some cases, defeated)


    Crosstype INFp-INXp:

    1)
    2)
    3)
    4)
    5)
    6)
    7)
    8)

    Producing creates feelings which are relevant to others' prioritiies. For example, creating a sort of furor over a band with friends. People have an interest in music, so it makes sense to create feelings which will intensify this interest.

    (in regard to the above paragraph, I'm thinking of a specific character in a movie which starred KISS. Now what was that movie called?)

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Belgium
    TIM
    9w1
    Posts
    2,775
    Mentioned
    153 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    detroit rock city?
    unholy water sanguine addiction

  9. #9
    I'm a Ti-Te! Skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    US
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    522
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    What the hell is a crosstype

  10. #10
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  11. #11
    Theta's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    52
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    No experience at all with crosstyping.

    Following the observations of my brother against myself (he happens to be IEI, although i'm inclined to believe Ni subtype, this is not definite).
    I will go and use Ti as the distinctive indicator distinguishing ILI an IEI.
    Exposing a particular situation concerning a LII good friend (no known subtype yet) of both of us.

    IEI and ILI start chatting.
    As Ni primarily domains personality, philosophy of I-Ching and Evolution are main topics of discussion.
    Perception of I-ching mutations are welcomed as well as ideas relevant to the manifestation of i chings symbols. The development of consciouness as a result of the use of i-ching is main concern.
    No argument yet, judgment of usefulness and synthesis are accepted, as well as following plausible causaiton of internal processes.

    LII friend arrives.
    The argument turns around the logical consistency of the system.
    Me argues about holistic perspective and synthetic reality, but LII friend fails to come to agreement. Instead it mocks concept of coincidence as understood by confucius.
    My brother instead of arguing listens to both points of view and starts to appreciate LII friend's perspective of the cultural dependace of the system.
    Soon he starts to argue in favor of analysis. Logical parts are seen as building the symbol and giving it meaning.
    I start scorning about reducing the plausible meaning by oversymplifying the definitions.

    Soon a pattern emerges:
    LII keeps on analysis without understanding synthetic plausibility. Every new approach to structure seems to leave holistic perspective behind.
    My brother instead, starts collecting multiple approach of the consitent analysis of LII, he says it's helpful for understanding.
    Me starts using analysis for it to backfire; logical consistent but irrelevant considerations.

    After 5-10 minutes i-ching has been left behind.
    LII still laughs and brings up comments about the incoherent but logical inferences i sardonicaly arrived at.
    Brother is pissed because argument became unhelpful and he didn't came to understand, feels confused.
    I am dissapointed of having to end the argument's "fun" in favor of stisfying brother need for rest.

    As i see it the main difference is that way of using formal logic. ILI uses formal logic as a joke to mock the lack of usefulness it has without a practical concern. Without an algorithm, formal logics make no sense; it sees how anything could be proved and pushes itself to show others so.
    IEI reacts differently to formal logic, it listens to analysis trying to see how it fits in reasoning. Hidden agenda is understanding, thus needs to use any information available; when faced with consistency it looks for a way for grounding the self to consider his imagination is not at all that unpractical.
    But ILI can easily keep on arguing about consistency, it doesn't like doing so, because it seems like it makes no sense; nevertheless it can effectively keep on arguing and the argument can bring interesting imagery to feed Ni with more ideas.
    IEI on the other side, rapidly becomes exhausted with the argument. It can keep on arguing but will stop at the time it isn't helping its understanding of the situation any longer.

  12. #12
    I'm a Ti-Te! Skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    US
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    522
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Theta View Post
    No experience at all with crosstyping.

    Following the observations of my brother against myself (he happens to be IEI, although i'm inclined to believe Ni subtype, this is not definite).
    I will go and use Ti as the distinctive indicator distinguishing ILI an IEI.
    Exposing a particular situation concerning a LII good friend (no known subtype yet) of both of us.

    IEI and ILI start chatting.
    As Ni primarily domains personality, philosophy of I-Ching and Evolution are main topics of discussion.
    Perception of I-ching mutations are welcomed as well as ideas relevant to the manifestation of i chings symbols. The development of consciouness as a result of the use of i-ching is main concern.
    No argument yet, judgment of usefulness and synthesis are accepted, as well as following plausible causaiton of internal processes.

    LII friend arrives.
    The argument turns around the logical consistency of the system.
    Me argues about holistic perspective and synthetic reality, but LII friend fails to come to agreement. Instead it mocks concept of coincidence as understood by confucius.
    My brother instead of arguing listens to both points of view and starts to appreciate LII friend's perspective of the cultural dependace of the system.
    Soon he starts to argue in favor of analysis. Logical parts are seen as building the symbol and giving it meaning.
    I start scorning about reducing the plausible meaning by oversymplifying the definitions.

    Soon a pattern emerges:
    LII keeps on analysis without understanding synthetic plausibility. Every new approach to structure seems to leave holistic perspective behind.
    My brother instead, starts collecting multiple approach of the consitent analysis of LII, he says it's helpful for understanding.
    Me starts using analysis for it to backfire; logical consistent but irrelevant considerations.

    After 5-10 minutes i-ching has been left behind.
    LII still laughs and brings up comments about the incoherent but logical inferences i sardonicaly arrived at.
    Brother is pissed because argument became unhelpful and he didn't came to understand, feels confused.
    I am dissapointed of having to end the argument's "fun" in favor of stisfying brother need for rest.

    As i see it the main difference is that way of using formal logic. ILI uses formal logic as a joke to mock the lack of usefulness it has without a practical concern. Without an algorithm, formal logics make no sense; it sees how anything could be proved and pushes itself to show others so.
    IEI reacts differently to formal logic, it listens to analysis trying to see how it fits in reasoning. Hidden agenda is understanding, thus needs to use any information available; when faced with consistency it looks for a way for grounding the self to consider his imagination is not at all that unpractical.
    But ILI can easily keep on arguing about consistency, it doesn't like doing so, because it seems like it makes no sense; nevertheless it can effectively keep on arguing and the argument can bring interesting imagery to feed Ni with more ideas.
    IEI on the other side, rapidly becomes exhausted with the argument. It can keep on arguing but will stop at the time it isn't helping its understanding of the situation any longer.
    Wikipedia and I are going to have a go at your post because that sounds really fucking interesting but I don't know the belief systems being argued about.

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    No one reads wikipedia for socionics information. At least, nobody in their right mind.

    I don't use crosstype theory anymore, but for your information INXP refers to sociopathic ILIs and IEIs.

  14. #14
    Theta's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    52
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    No one reads wikipedia for socionics information. At least, nobody in their right mind.
    I think he was rather reffering to not understanding I Ching

    I don't use crosstype theory anymore, but for your information INXP refers to sociopathic ILIs and IEIs.
    is there a discussion about this somewhere? i would like to get informed

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Better not to get involved... but yeah there is a discussion on my website.

  16. #16

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Belgium
    TIM
    9w1
    Posts
    2,775
    Mentioned
    153 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    could you give us a link?
    unholy water sanguine addiction

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timewaster View Post
    could you give us a link?
    Can you not see it in my sig?

  18. #18
    JohnDo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    LII-IEI
    Posts
    638
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Tcaudillg is certainly on the right track:
    - some years ago he proposed crosstype theory which he doesn't support anymore...
    - today he claims that dual-type theory is the future of socionics...
    - in some years he will realize that complete subtype theory is what socionics really needs...

  19. #19
    jughead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NC
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    883
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Infp: that which does not exist still will be developed if it means something to people in the effect it will have
    intp: that which does not exist will only be developed efficiently (market forces)


    Facts: that which exist only in reality, obstacles logically
    This is dumb as shit if you know quadra progression. ILI comes after IEI and makes an algorithm. IEI actually envisions what will become reality and SLE pushes it to become real.
    ILIs are very concerned with efficiency
    IEI's are concerned with the fucking effect/energy. The IEI comes before the ILI. The ILI is the curmudgeon "thats not efficient blah blah I'm a whiny bitch who needs everything efficient thus i cant make anything new unless its to make it efficient and don't understand social effect one bit nor how im being an ass to the people around me by being 'efficient'", the IEI the idealist/dreamer who doesn't give a shit about efficiency beyond basic parameters.
    For example
    IEI:socionics should be developed
    ILI: thats not efficient, its unproven
    IEI: your an idiot it is because it works, everything unproven that works will be proven, how does anything uproven become real if not tested, its promising, eat my asshole
    ILI: im a curmudgeon, your an idiot, i can only be efficient, borg style , lick my parameters.
    IEI: is this a joke? this fits perfectly with the Ti system known as socionics, farts green flame out its fucking eyeballs and asshole.
    IXI crosstype:im stoned and hungry, lets find a hot beyotch. What was that? Explodes into rainbow flames because of non existence and utter ridiculosness and inefficiency resonances.

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Belgium
    TIM
    9w1
    Posts
    2,775
    Mentioned
    153 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    Can you not see it in my sig?
    i was talking about a link that leads directly to the specific discussion
    unholy water sanguine addiction

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timewaster View Post
    i was talking about a link that leads directly to the specific discussion
    Can't see it unless you register on the site.

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Belgium
    TIM
    9w1
    Posts
    2,775
    Mentioned
    153 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    i w...willl
    unholy water sanguine addiction

  23. #23
    Creepy-cinq

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Theta View Post
    No experience at all with crosstyping.

    Following the observations of my brother against myself (he happens to be IEI, although i'm inclined to believe Ni subtype, this is not definite).
    I will go and use Ti as the distinctive indicator distinguishing ILI an IEI.
    Exposing a particular situation concerning a LII good friend (no known subtype yet) of both of us.

    IEI and ILI start chatting.
    As Ni primarily domains personality, philosophy of I-Ching and Evolution are main topics of discussion.
    Perception of I-ching mutations are welcomed as well as ideas relevant to the manifestation of i chings symbols. The development of consciouness as a result of the use of i-ching is main concern.
    No argument yet, judgment of usefulness and synthesis are accepted, as well as following plausible causaiton of internal processes.

    LII friend arrives.
    The argument turns around the logical consistency of the system.
    Me argues about holistic perspective and synthetic reality, but LII friend fails to come to agreement. Instead it mocks concept of coincidence as understood by confucius.
    My brother instead of arguing listens to both points of view and starts to appreciate LII friend's perspective of the cultural dependace of the system.
    Soon he starts to argue in favor of analysis. Logical parts are seen as building the symbol and giving it meaning.
    I start scorning about reducing the plausible meaning by oversymplifying the definitions.

    Soon a pattern emerges:
    LII keeps on analysis without understanding synthetic plausibility. Every new approach to structure seems to leave holistic perspective behind.
    My brother instead, starts collecting multiple approach of the consitent analysis of LII, he says it's helpful for understanding.
    Me starts using analysis for it to backfire; logical consistent but irrelevant considerations.

    After 5-10 minutes i-ching has been left behind.
    LII still laughs and brings up comments about the incoherent but logical inferences i sardonicaly arrived at.
    Brother is pissed because argument became unhelpful and he didn't came to understand, feels confused.
    I am dissapointed of having to end the argument's "fun" in favor of stisfying brother need for rest.

    As i see it the main difference is that way of using formal logic. ILI uses formal logic as a joke to mock the lack of usefulness it has without a practical concern. Without an algorithm, formal logics make no sense; it sees how anything could be proved and pushes itself to show others so.
    IEI reacts differently to formal logic, it listens to analysis trying to see how it fits in reasoning. Hidden agenda is understanding, thus needs to use any information available; when faced with consistency it looks for a way for grounding the self to consider his imagination is not at all that unpractical.
    But ILI can easily keep on arguing about consistency, it doesn't like doing so, because it seems like it makes no sense; nevertheless it can effectively keep on arguing and the argument can bring interesting imagery to feed Ni with more ideas.
    IEI on the other side, rapidly becomes exhausted with the argument. It can keep on arguing but will stop at the time it isn't helping its understanding of the situation any longer.
    Quote Originally Posted by jughead View Post
    Infp: that which does not exist still will be developed if it means something to people in the effect it will have
    intp: that which does not exist will only be developed efficiently (market forces)


    Facts: that which exist only in reality, obstacles logically
    This is dumb as shit if you know quadra progression. ILI comes after IEI and makes an algorithm. IEI actually envisions what will become reality and SLE pushes it to become real.
    ILIs are very concerned with efficiency
    IEI's are concerned with the fucking effect/energy. The IEI comes before the ILI. The ILI is the curmudgeon "thats not efficient blah blah I'm a whiny bitch who needs everything efficient thus i cant make anything new unless its to make it efficient and don't understand social effect one bit nor how im being an ass to the people around me by being 'efficient'", the IEI the idealist/dreamer who doesn't give a shit about efficiency beyond basic parameters.
    For example
    IEI:socionics should be developed
    ILI: thats not efficient, its unproven
    IEI: your an idiot it is because it works, everything unproven that works will be proven, how does anything uproven become real if not tested, its promising, eat my asshole
    ILI: im a curmudgeon, your an idiot, i can only be efficient, borg style , lick my parameters.
    IEI: is this a joke? this fits perfectly with the Ti system known as socionics, farts green flame out its fucking eyeballs and asshole.
    IXI crosstype:im stoned and hungry, lets find a hot beyotch. What was that? Explodes into rainbow flames because of non existence and utter ridiculosness and inefficiency resonances.
    Excellent posts.

Posting Permissions

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