4 Types of INFP 

The longer hair is definitely here to stay!

I agree!

@@CognitivePersonality Looks sexy.

Not just the hair, he looks better with a stubble or shaved too. The longer beard look doesn't suit you as well (opinion). He looks great now.

@@stonerawks9882 I agree!

You've outdone yourself again

That's some serious axial flipping!

@@CognitivePersonality Is that abnormal?

@@socratesandstorybooks1109 Not at all, axial flips are most compulsive under stressful conditions :)

​@@CognitivePersonality I'm an INTJ and I act like an ISTP when I'm mad o_o

This is me (INFP) and my husband (INTP) exactly!!!

Thanks David! I love those loops!! 100%. The more we can break down these boundaries the better :) Likewise my friend!

​@@CognitivePersonalitywhy would you want to break down boundaries and dismantle? If you have boundaries, aren't they there because of those who cross into your energy and cause harm and leave you to deal with the implications?

I feel like I'm the complete opposite. I've sort of been having this weird grip on Si for the sake of comfort but it's not working. And I've always naturally been sentimental. So I wonder if I would be the first type. But one thing that is for sure is that I've always been naturally competitive. Maybe not a hard or even an efficient worker but I've always had this weird competitivity as fuel to keep going. If I am not the best, I am shit.

What made you think that you are not INFP and not INTP? I think you are analytical like INTP and perhaps rational, but what made you call yourself INFP and not INTP?

More to come my friend!

Convergent subtypes can definitely relate less to Ne! Thanks for the kind words :)

@@CognitivePersonality This is fascinating to me because I relate in parts to each of them in some ways but not so much in others. Like for example I relate to the convergent description for every other function except I feel like my Si is actually less developed than all other introverted functions and certainly less developed than my Ne, and my Te is something that’s kind of hit or miss not because im ineffective at it when I do use it but I just often neglect it due to the stress it causes me. Fe is something I also try to use but I give a lot of pushback on but not as much as Te, I find More that all it takes to use Fe is just revaluating how I feel about a situation and recentering myself and as long as I can come to a resolution between my values and the group I am fine, I do usually have some initial pushback against group politics though. And. Se is just a complete disaster, it is so bad that im not even stressed out by my abysmal use of Se I just have such blindness to my environment most of the time that people need to point out to me when There is something that needs to be addressed and then my Te begins to get worked up trying to get me to do something about it and that’s when I feel stressed again. Overall though Fi is my strongest along with Ne and Ni both feeling decently close behind and then Ti next in line after. I mentioned in a comment on one of your other videos about my curiosity on neurodivergence and its potential impact on type and function use, I myself have been officially diagnosed with ADHD both as a kid and as an adult and so that could account for some of the attentional blindness in my environment and the executive dysfunction that comes with it seems like it would absolutely drive Te up a wall and cause a pretty big conflict so all that checks out for me, but its the Si use that’s really what baffles me because I would say its about on par if not slightly less well used than my Fe. Idk I know Im just spitballing information and im trying not to give my own ideas on it too much because I don’t want to seem like I don’t know what im talking about im just trying to figure out myself I guess.

⁠@@CognitivePersonality on second thought I just watched your video describing the misconception of Ni and That actually really helped to clear up a lot of misconceptions I had about how Ni operates, and Si by comparison so I suppose I do use Si a bit more often as well as everything else I described. So I suppose I might just be the convergent variant. I am still interested in your thoughts however in the correlation between ADHD and the impacts on Se and Te. I understand ADHD might not be part of your particular expertise but I think it is an interesting topic to open dialogue on.

Happy to provide a new but exacting perspective on the whole thing :)

@@pland5057 ISFP perhaps? I recently came to the conclusion I'm ISFP even if I don't feel like I have high Se. I'm highly aware of my surroundings, except when I'm... not. Back when Tesla was becoming a thing, you couldn't even pay me to recognize one. However, I do feel far more aware of my surroundings and grounded in reality than INFPs tend to be portrayed as. And you can't really sneak up on me. As for Ne, my brain might suddenly jump to random ideas, but I don't produce an abundance of them, not without a trigger. If I do produce a bunch of ideas they're always related or logically building upon each other. High Ne tends to like philosophical, theoretical, non-grounded discussions. Once, I got to witness such a discussion. At the time I believed I was an INFP and thought it would be right up my alley, but found myself bored out of my mind within seconds. It depends on the topic, but unless it's inherently interesting to me, if I can't find a way to apply that knowledge or contribute, I'll lose interest and find something else to do. Maybe it applies to high Ni too, but I've mostly seen it attributed to Ne. As for ISFJ, Fi and Se can supposedly work together in a way that resembles Fe. I've questioned having high Si because I've been credited with a good memory, but it's not as detail oriented as i.e. my sister's, and focuses more on who, where, what and the vibe/emotions, rather than names, clothes or other specific details. I used to have a deeper connection with my past, but now it feels more like a closed chapter, and recalling past events has become more difficult. Back to Se, it likes experiencing new things, but not necessarily something high thrill like base jumping. It can be as quiet as just trying a new food type. I believe in personal experience, (typically attributed to Se) and without it I feel like I won't be able to properly or believably convey that experience to someone else, like, writing about petting a dolphin when I've never felt the texture of their skin for myself. (Scaly? Smooth? Rough? Dry? Slimy? Warm? Cold?etc.) But personal experience for me may also include other people's personal experience. Se enjoys digital experiences too, so it's not uncommon for ISFPs to be gamers or like games. Enneagram can also have an effect. ISFP 4's tend to be the stereotypical artist, whereas 7's are the stereotypical thrill seekers. 9's are more laid back and resemble INFPs and the less common 5's are more about ideas and theories, even if they never leave the physical realm behind like INTPs and INFPs. Hope this can be useful in any way. Once I decided I was ISFP I literally felt my inside solidify, and have realized I actually do a lot of those ISFP things I thought I didn't do. Like using archetypes. My burning urge to explore and figure this type thing out also diminished greatly and became something more of a casual interest I can use to help others or figure them out, now that I've "helped myself" so to speak. Granted you read any of it. This was a lot. The Fi book strikes again...😅

@The V word I wouldn't rule out ISFP 5w6 as a possible combination. Mine is either 5w4 or 9. Tritype 593. Typically external structure, or structure for structure's sake, tends to be an SJ trait. INTJs are often considered structured, but their motivation behind it is to increase their effectiveness. Their structure is also often very personal, meaning it might not look practical to someone else, but it's practical to them. I don't know how much you've looked into the cognitive functions. ISFPs and INTJs share the same functions, but in different orders. Fi-Se-Ni-Te for ISFPs and Ni-Te-Fi-Se for INTJs. Looking at and figuring out the 4th (inferior) and the 7th (trickster) functions might help determine what your main stack and thus type, is. Trickster for ISFP is Ne, and for INTJ is Fe. Te in the 4th position will often make ISFPs want to be more structured, but less likely to actually get around to it. With self-discipline and effort, they absolutely can. This applies to INFPs as well. It is also something I have noticed in myself. Se in the 4th position for INTJ often makes reality feel less real to them, making them feel disconnected. Same for INFJ. They may also find themselves over stimulated without even noticing until they are suddenly overwhelmed. It also tends to make them minimalistic since they're less concerned about their external environment in general. (At least that's what's perpetuated, but I have yet to understand fully how it works.) ISTJs have Ne as their 4th function which often makes them less likely to want to try the new and untested, and prone to see all the possible negative consequences to something rather than the positive like someone with Ne 1st or 2nd might. Same goes for ISFJ. Another thing you can look at is if someone asked you to explain your workplace or closet or something else you have structured, are you more likely to talk about the layout (where everything is placed and why it's placed that way; thick sweaters at the top shelf in summer because I don't need them and they're out of the way, underwear is changed everyday so they're in the middle for ease of access, short sleeves are in front because this and that reason... and so on)? Or do you explain the individual items (this sweater was a gift from Grandma last year, I bought that hat on a market fair in xx town when visiting my cousin, I love this t-shirt because of the texture of the cloth... etc. etc.)? Or flipping it, which of these two types of explanations do you prefer to listen to? Those who prefer the layout explanation are more likely to have Ni/Se (ISFP and INTJ), whereas those who prefer the individual items explanations likely have Si/Ne (ISTJ). Of course you can do both, everyone can, but which do you gravitate more towards? (In these cases the function order don't matter that much, just which ones are present.) I prefer the layout ones. I have an INTP friend (Ne-Si) who will go on about the pecifics of each individual piece in their collection/workplace/whatever, and I will try to follow, but before long I'll tune out. Whereas I'm much more likely to go on about why I did it one way over the other. (Se-Ni)

​@@thevword8889When Fi-dominants are being more inclined towards Ti. Then yes, there is a potential for Fi-doms to be 5s. And Ti-doms to be 4s as well.

Hey Nina! Hope you enjoy it!!

Thank you!

Thanks for the lovely comment! I'd love to make a video on how cognitive types can interact with each other and it sounds like a fun project to work on :)

It is my pleasure!

Thank you!! My advice would be to focus on forging a barrier between Fe and Fi in these cases, and resisting the urge to get swept away within the collective setting. Observe how *you* are being affected by the circumstances, and use Fi-Si to anchor yourself into somatic sensations.

Thanks Amy! I suspected you might be :)

Thanks Saddie! :)

:D

I'm admittedly very fond of this subtype!

It's been too long! All is well here, looking forward to finally getting back into content creation! Thank you as always :)

@@CognitivePersonality great to hear (on both accounts 😉) Thank you, for all you bring!

Not long at all! I am thankfully almost recovered but I'm lowering myself in gradually to be on the safe side :)

@@CognitivePersonality I can relate to this on some level, I had burnt myself out in school, did not have a break, therapists, doctors told me to slow down, but I was reluctant, here I am now. live and learn.

I truly appreciate these words. To be entirely honest, real life application of the theory towards self-growth and fluid understanding of human personality is practically a requisite for my own motivation. I would say it is those very ideas that led to the creation of CPT, as my brain was demanding something that was not supplied. Discovering new theory - through research and consistent application/reassessment - was the means by which I could personally use type in a way that was satisfying and empowering to me :)

@@CognitivePersonality Oh wow. So you have found something that gives you pleasure and also benefits others. That's a great combination. I hope you enjoy it more so you can produce more output😅. A lot of us enjoy and benefit from it

Thank you! Love a bit of fingerstyle guitar; you'd need a fluid dominant axis to ensure steady progress but also s degree of Si to ensure focus, so the convergent or default may be better suited, but the ambivert's Ni drive may be better still

Hey David, thanks so much for kind words! I hope you're doing well man!

@@CognitivePersonality Of course, you're a nice person, so why not being nice haha Don't want to act cringy but it's how I think. I am fine. Moved to Frankfurt, advanced a little bit as a coach by myself. Now I am more into getting in touch with my green side (spiral dynamics). Meditation, mindfulness and stuff. I'm not a master yet haha I try to take it slowly.

@@davidsetka3934 Really glad to hear things are going well!

I really appreciate that! Haha the diamond had to go.. I really appreciate you leaving this comment despite your natural inclination, it means a lot and I'm grateful for the words of support :)

Haha, it's one of my denser videos isn't it? Thank you as always :)

@@CognitivePersonalityYes, quite deep. Lovely to see you in front of the screen again!

Thanks so much! It hasn't been the easiest year but I'm in a very good place right now and am already filming more content!!

@@CognitivePersonality I’m really glad to hear that. I look forward to seeing more from you and hope that the rest of this year is within alignment with you. I also wish for you to continue to be in a good place and happy. 💕

Looooong overdue

Please explain what your personality is like if you are a subtype. For example the Se's are prob the artists, I am a huge bookworm, I suspect I am one of the others.

Hey Gabriel! Hopefully as I dial up the frequency RU-vid will notify people again!

or subtitles in german or other languages would do just fine :^) Ik im asking for a lot but yeah

For sure!

My pleasure! You may be more of a default cognition in this case :)

Absolute individuation is more hypothetical than relative individuation, but from what I have seen there does seem to be a greater amount of neutrality! I do however suspect an individuated type may retain the same access points and resting state.

Thanks!!

My friend you have not went through my typing process so you don't need to prove anything to me - ENTJ is just a suspicion! Yes INTJ Subtypes is coming though I tend not to make *promises* in the comments section. Indeed, some time Ni needs some down time :)

@@CognitivePersonality Sorry if I sounded passive aggressive but there are some inconsistencies in regards to your system. For instance, you define the convergent functions as being part of the ego, but what does provide proof for this assertion? Wouldn't it make more sense that the main preferences, would make up one's ego? Hence why staying only in our preferences are what we define as being egoistic. It is the fact of abiding only by our own biological make up or copying mechanism and not extending it to incorporate all of reality. I really appreciate your work, Harry, and more so than this I appreciate your warmth that you have in your soul with which you tried to help me, but please aknowledge or at least elaborate on those things in order to either correct or eliminate them. I understand your system, but to me it seems that the rules that you make are only rationalizations of what may be real, but not what it actually is happening. I'm fine with such hypothesis as long as they have integrity and they account for all the circumstances. So far, you indeed present some characteristics that can be seen, but how do we know that their dynamic or inner workings is that which we present as being true in such a framework? The fact is that we are not objective as much as we would want to be because we will always be involved in our reality. We can't detach 100% from ourselves. I don't want to sound like a naysayer, because I embraced your findings, but I can also see flaws that are not taken into account. Also, please, could you illuminate me on your assertion that I didn't went through your typing process? Yes, your typing process is personalized, it's unique, but that doesn't mean that I don't have my criterias as well for this kind of stuff. Unlike you, I don't rely only on a framework of everything, I construct my frameworks based on the evidence that I see and from there I try to form the framework. Why? Because I need the foundation to be stable, because a framework is only a set of assertions or premises that I take them as truth. But without evidence I can't make a foolproof framework or system. For instance, my way of typing is trying to identify Ti domminant, not only by such a framework, but by the mere sequence of the language that they use. The same for Fe dom and others. I have taken as a system truth only. I had put all functions as being different representations or sections of reality and or truth, just like Ausra Augusta hypothesized. Ti-Fe is deductive logic. Ti by itself is only objective properties of objects. Since you assign it to a lens, then it would be by the form of Ti-Si which really just denotes characteristics of objects: width, latitude, durity, softness, etc. Then those things are measured by Te-Se. Ti/Te is the measurement of objective properties aka the scientific method. Which has this combination? An INTP. Because Ti-Si is convergent, as you define it, and it is part of the conscious. Then, they cross reference those concepts to the findings that they discover and measure Te-Se. So if somebody is talking to me about how archers in the Medieval period had a radius of X range to their bows, how the cavalry were equipped with a lance that had penetration value of y and could penetrate thick armor that had z value, and then they use those concepts of penetration and range to explain to me why they had those values and why it is important to know, then I know for pretty sure that I'm talking to a rational dom, INTP. If, on the other hand, someone cames to me and he talks about the cycle of prosperity, the cycle of destruction, categorical truth in relation to the cycle of prosperity, sections of truth, then that shows to me, first of all, that this person may be crazy or I'm just talking to an irrational dom. Ni-Se is 1st person/ continuity and it is dynamic whereas Ne-Si is 3rd person/ static and it is the end goal. So it is actually Ni which is the subjective function here. But wait a second. Ni-Fi convergent by itself, is indeed a subjective assessment of one's feelings. However, in relation to Ne-Fe unconscious, it is a holistic 3rd understanding of the connections between components. Those connections are based on the individual own discovery of those in it's own working mechanism, Ni-Fi. It is the self being aware of itself. When he's aware of itself, he can see the connections between him and others, and humanity at large, Ne-Fe. As such, Fe is not only exterior feelings. Those are only behavioral patters and external observations Ti/Te INTP way of thinking, but it is simply the connection between components. So reality is pretty complex, terrifying, and incredibly simple when you synthesize it and see it as a whole. Did I mention that first it is terrifying and complex and then it can became simple? Why? Because you first have to understand the things that you are working with, then you can derive conclusions from those things. If we are talking about cars, you first need to know what a car is and it's purpose, in order to make any further assertions regarding this category. So empiricism works in tandem with logic. Just like Kant concluded. I can't just say that the car is broken because there may be a lot of flaws in this assertion. Everything that I construct is based upon this primary assertion. If I say that I got to the service and they saw that the engine is broken due to some electrical circuits not connecting, and therefore the car is also, that still relies on my first premise. I could as well just say that the engine circuits are not completely destroyed, so that means that it isn't broken. So, how do I know that a car is broken? Why can't I say that there's to much dust in it that this is the reason for why it is broken, therefore relativizing reality. What stops me from saying such an seemingly absurd statement? It is the purpose of the car. The engine and wheels, if they are damaged, they are responsible for assuring that the car maintains its purpose of being a vehicle responsible for movement to a certain destination. Those are the components, that if damaged, make the car unable to maintain its purpose, and therefore, I say about it that it is broken because of it. However, why can't I say that a car purpose is not that of being a shelter? Who can contradict me on that? After all, a shelter is defined as being a place that protects against the elements of nature. The car is made out of steel and it encapsulates the whole thing, so it can protect me from it. It also has enough space to inhabit it, just like a shelter or home. What's the difference here between them? It is the fact that although the car has those properties as well, the number of layers as well as the materials used for constructing shelters or homes, are have much more durability and are harder and thicker as well as the home or shelter not only being a temporary thing like the car, but being a long lasting place of rest which has other utilities as well. So the car accomplishes better it's objective of moving, due to attaining high speeds, than due to being a shelter. So the way of comparing them is through putting them in opposition with one another. Like so, your system lacks this kind of ability to take a scrutinized approach towards it to detect the validity of those premises inside it because it lacks the evidence to take such an approach both at the theoretical level and in regards to the evidence that would support it. PS: Also, yes, you tend not to promise. But you promised me before that you would do INTJ subtypes. Also, I understand that is only on a suspicion your typing, but on what evidence is based your claim that I'm a Te rational dom instead of an irrational dom?

INTJ is next on the list for this series :)

@@CognitivePersonality Yay!!!!!!!!!!

The Ne can definitely blow up in this variant!

Thanks! 1. It operates as an extension of Jung in so far as convergence into the ego. 2. This further answers 1. While it is a contentious subject Jung seemed to indicate the dominant had an auxiliary of the same orientation and the oppositional (inferior) also had its own auxiliary. This aligned with my Ti as it wouldn't make sense for a rational function (codec) of one orientation to be auxiliary (i.e. assistive) to an irrational function (lens) of opposing orientation - rather, what MBTI coins auxiliary I coin authority, as it performs a strong antagonistic role to the dominant. The dominant pairing is egocentric and thus convergent, whereas egoistic energies divergence into the opposing pairing. Convergence is also alligned with other psychological concepts like locus of control and incentive salience :)

@@CognitivePersonality Sorry I'm new to your channel (just found it today, cool stuff), so I'm assuming you use dominant / authority / auxiliary / oppositional? Is there a specific meaning behind the word 'convergence' you use? I'm having a bit of difficulty understanding the divergence energies statement - were you using energies as a verb? English isn't my native language sorry ^^'

@@mooninmycup6954 That's right! To converge is to bring all energies into one place - think 'singular deliberation'. Ego energies refer to the cognitive processes that feel most like 'us'!

@@CognitivePersonality That's such a nice term, I'm going to start using it haha I always have a difficult time explaining how their functions may interact and how stacking doesn't always mean the weight of their function is necessarily in that order for every individual can I clarify, the dominant pairing is Fi/Ne, and the opposing pairing is Si/Te? and how would you classify/define egocentric/egoistic (or is that just up to the stacking)?

@@mooninmycup6954 For the INFP (IFS-NT), the dominant stack is Fi-Si (aka the codec and lens functions of the same orientation), and the opposing stack is Ne-Te. You might want to see his videos: Cognitive functions attitudes (convergence vs. divergence), Cognitive functions explained... etc, i'm sure it will help you to understand the terms better, he explains it very well in his videos! :))

Thanks!

Aphantasia is a tricky one but it's important to bear in mind the Introverted lenses are not just visual - the visual analogy is just the most easy one to get across. So yes absolutely, there's a lot more to introverted perception than visual imagery

Sure! The convergent has not subdued the Ne authority per se, and as such still partially values external reality (albeit on a more observant basis). The Diver takes introverted convergence to the next level, subduing Ne for an Ni preference and totally rejecting the Te oppositional. This leads to a greater Ti activation :)

@@CognitivePersonality thank you

Found it at the back of the book :)

The ENFP remains a divergent Feeler and convergent Thinker, which the Divergent INFP is not - the latter is more conceptual and remains an introvert. I know people of each and they are worlds apart!

Yep!

Aye :)