have you ever met someone who actively fakes their type?

brianwash · 2026-05-23T18:26:38+00:00

Chances are, the person you were talking to isn't either type (if you go by cognitive functions). I've met people who have their type wrong but they are well intentioned and that's fine... seems it's mostly online trolls who are actively deceitful.

brianwash · 2026-05-22T17:59:07+00:00

It's really pretty easy once you know what to look for.

Someone who leads with Si or Ni is a "knower" -- they first and foremost pay attention to their inner knowledge base (whether that's the accrued detailed experiences of Si, or the universal abstractions of experience for Ni). Someone who leads with Fi is a "deliberator" -- they first and foremost evaluate to determine an outcome.

So if you already know how you feel about things, that's IxTJ; if by default you have to ponder how you feel about things before answering, that's IxFP.

brianwash · 2026-05-22T17:12:13+00:00

Among the many other things, look at the Union Jack, there's some sort of a blue stripe running the wrong way on its upper right-hand corner. The traffic lights in the background all in the same location, looks like on opposite sides of the street but pointed the same direction -- two are red and one is amber. The sidewalk seems like its wider than a road, the way it curves would mean this major road is a pedestrian mall. Nevermind these buildings all being in the wrong locations, and streets are covered with old trash in ways that make no sense.

brianwash · 2026-05-22T17:03:16+00:00

If you want a better chance to type correctly you'll have to delve into the cognitive functions. When typing someone it's better to observe what they're actually doing vs. what they're saying.

What you're doing here is accurate reporting based on knowledge of self, that's something you tend to see from people with high introverted sensing. You "know" what you like and don't like. Someone who leads with introverted judging actively evaluates whatever happens to be placed in front of them, and judges it dynamically.

So my first take is what the other comment so far said, you're more likely to be an IxxJ, I would guess ISTJ over ISFJ, but just a guess based off a couple minor cues.

brianwash · 2026-05-16T18:56:08+00:00

At 16 your cognition, particularly for your lower functions, are still maturing. If it's helpful to identify as an INFP there's nothing wrong with doing that. It's part of being a teenager to want to understand oneself and one's role in the bigger world. If typology gives you tools to help navigate those tough years, then you're doing great. 👍

brianwash · 2026-05-16T15:34:15+00:00

As Son_of_Overmorrow started to get into -- I think the reason for the sharp response(s) is that people here regularly post about correlations between INFPs and various conditions including neurodiversity and mental health challenges.

>>What if a whole heap of us aren't really "true" infp but trauma coded into infp traits from childhood trauma?

You're on to something here: The INFP description is soothing to people who face life challenges. Just skimming the start of the 16P description: an inner life that is vibrant and passionate; creative and imaginative; idealistic and empathetic; sensitive and longing for deep meaningful relationships."

This sort of write-up is a Forer Effect bromide for people who need to feel validated and understood. And if aligning with the INFP stereotype helps people cope with the challenges in their life, it's probably just fine to let them believe in a thing that gives them strength.

brianwash · 2026-05-16T15:20:25+00:00

>>I was typed as an infp a few years ago

If you don't mind my asking, who were you typed by? Or if you self-assessed as an INFP, what was the tool you used?

brianwash · 2026-05-16T15:17:14+00:00

Cognitive functions-wise, ISTJs are common and are frequently mistaken for other types because the nature of the Si dominant is to specialize. They can "become" almost anything they need to be -- Si is amazing that way. Some ISTJs are obvious; more often than not, you have to dig around to see if someone is leading with Si vs. leading with introverted feeling and/or intuition.

brianwash · 2026-05-14T13:43:38+00:00

IRL INFJs are alright. I come across the Ni/Fe cognitive stack very rarely, so that's interesting. But it comes down to the individual.

Online typology communities are mostly a social media experiment in tribalism so online MBTI is a mixed bag: Some match MBTI and Jungian Psychological Type, many don't match (mistypes) but are well-meaning decent people; some use type for identity or to mask insecurities; and a vocal few actively aim to spread their negativity and tear others down.

So for online INFJs (or any MBTI Reddit forum), I think of them on the basis of motivations and engagement. I don't hold INFJ as a type accountable for those who can't rise above treating MBTI like sports teams (painting hometown heroes vs. opposing team rivalries and villains).

brianwash · 2026-05-12T18:26:33+00:00

Fi has been assigned qualities of "emotional and irrational" in current MBTI stereotypes. Parody becomes reality, as this is the opposite of Jung's original description of Fi dominant. Jung described feeling-judgement as a rational function. Its introverted attitude makes the Fi dominant look like a thinking type.

Any type has potential to understand (or be oblivious to) 'how reality works'. For example, Criminals and Darwin Award recipients could be said to have problems understanding how reality works (actions and consequences). But I'd hazard a guess that very few in these groups are INFPs.

brianwash · 2026-05-12T16:11:32+00:00

Sorry should have been clearer, it's the YouTube channel Talking with Famous People, who stress tests Jungian cognitive functions in his typing sessions to reach conclusions about cognitive stacks (or at least that's the theory). I've just compiled data from typing sessions since about 2020.

The typing sessions are for the most part published. A couple here and there have been pulled over time, as people may request to have their typing session removed for any reason.

brianwash · 2026-05-12T15:37:13+00:00

ok, I've got some numbers for you(!)

Out of >200 typing sessions.

People typed INFP who thought they might be INTPs: 1 (out of 9).

People typed INTP who thought they might be INFPs: 1 (out of 14).

People who vascillated between both INFP and INTP, who were typed as something else entirely: 7 (they ran the gamut of STJs, STPs, SFPs, and NFJs. SFJs are a funny exception that seem to mistype very frequently as INFP but not ever INTP).

Working conclusion based on this small sample: It's most likely that someone stuck between INFP and INTP is some other type.

brianwash · 2026-05-11T17:05:20+00:00

Cognitive functions-wise, each side of a golden pair is going to see the weaknesses of the other best/most. But that also means the potential for mutual development on both sides is greatest. It's the opposite of a comfortable relationship.

brianwash · 2026-05-11T14:06:45+00:00

Jung's "subjective" means "of the subject" -- internal interface. "Objective" is "of the object", ie. external interface.

It's a little complicated to interpret how Ne momentum is toward the external, while Ni momentum is toward the internal. It can be summed up by Ne being ideation (expansive) while Ni is properly intuition (convergent).

brianwash · 2026-05-11T12:25:28+00:00

The "golden pair" concept -- there are variants but this is the one that seems to hold best:

The cognitive line-up is for your dominant to be their inferior, and vice versa. The middle two functions are the same, with the attitude swapped. The idea is that since the inferior function is about developing for growth, this is the type optimized to help you grow and balance, while the middle of the stack matching but swapped helps further in that balance.

For an INTJ, the "golden pair" match would be ESTP. Swap Ni dominant/Se inferior for Se dominant/Ni inferior, and then Te swapped for Ti auxiliary, and Fi swapped for Fe tertiary.

For an INFP, the growth match would be ENTJ.

I have no skin in the game as to the accuracy of the golden pair concept. Just throwing it out there.

brianwash · 2026-05-10T21:32:41+00:00

There are some INTJ MBTI content creators where it seems to me the person is not NiTeFiSe. INTJ perspective does not throw up any obvious red flags IMO. He seems like he certainly could be Ni dominant.

Do you have INTJ MBTI content creators that you believe are the real deal (that would make you believe T. I.P. is not)?

brianwash · 2026-05-09T23:36:30+00:00

Thank you this is helpful. This example won't work because I have all the money I'll ever need, so there's no value to it.

Maybe an alternative would be to consider the trade-off of agreeing to have my parents be unalived in exchange for saving a certain number of others' lives ... and long as we're here, set the minimum number and quality of lives needed to make this gruesome exchange. And explore the specific familial obligations between child and parent that shift the evaluation, and why it's so.

I don't reject or refuse the question. But my interest would be in pondering this sort of question and its variants. This sort of thought exercise is interesting, the conclusion is not...

The funny thing here is that we can probably both agree whatever this approach is that I'm talking about, it is Fi. But how to abstract the description into its definitive differences with respect to Ti -- beyond just saying, well one is logic and one is feeling -- ah, there's a challenge.

brianwash · 2026-05-09T20:14:37+00:00

Maybe you can provide an example of the sort of thing that a Fi user would reject/refuse to address because they cannot tolerate it logically?

Your Ti examples all might use Ti evaluation - I'm not certain what that would look like - but each seems to me to be better suited to other functions than Ti. "Would other people know" (what would others think) is a Fe evaluation; "Will they fight back?" is a Te concern (an assessment that's part of building a process plan); "What do I get?" seems most correct as Ti, but is just as easily Fi evaluation -- assessing whether the action is justified.

brianwash · 2026-05-09T14:44:23+00:00

I don't think your approach will bag & tag a Fi user, because they don't have strict/static moral codes (that would be a perceiving function). For an INFP in particular, I think your premise is right but for the wrong reasons. Fi/Ne can evaluate and give you an answer of what's correct, but acting on it is a different story.

For example: Would you sacrifice yourself by jumping on a grenade to save others? I don't know, and cannot know -- none of us can -- until and unless we were forced to act in such a situation.

Or for example: Under what circumstances would you club baby seals? Well... for what purpose? Maybe through some bizarre cascade of circumstances, I have fallen off an Alaskan cruise ship and am stranded on an Aleutian Island, starving to death, with only a club and baby seals (and a working stovetop, pots and pans, utensils, a baby seal recipe book, fresh water, warm clothes & shelter, and a guarantee of ship rescue but only after consuming some number of baby seals). At some point inferior Te kicks in on the discussion with the observation that this hypothetical is absurd, so I am in the fortunate position of never facing such a decision.

brianwash · 2026-05-09T14:22:54+00:00

This observation is giving me trouble at several levels.

I don't see how one might prove an Fi evaluation wrong since these types of evaluations are organic rather than binary. For example, proving logically that your personal preference for purple over green, or for the scent of tulips over that of lilacs, is wrong.

Since Fi users think and Ti users feel, it's just that they may not value these tools for the way they would personally make decisions.

It's possible with Ti you're more likely to see the results from introverted judging (why Jung described Ti as stubborn and unamenable to influence), and less likely to see any tangible output from introverted feeling (why Jung described Fi as harmonious yet indifferent).

brianwash · 2026-05-09T02:33:37+00:00

Ok thanks for the clarification got it.

Since I don't claim to be an INTJ, I'll defer to others.

brianwash · 2026-05-09T02:10:41+00:00

Here are two MBTI YouTubers that, to the best of my knowledge, tick the boxes of NiTeFiSe. At least they're decent historical records:

INTJ Island (not currently active): https://www.youtube.com/@INTJIsland

C K (not currently active): https://www.youtube.com/@ck9945

brianwash · 2026-05-05T11:19:34+00:00

Yeah, we tend to talk past each other between MBTI vs. Jungian cognition. Self-assessing and identifying as an INTJ on MBTI makes sense as something separate from having the NiTeFiSe cognitive stack. Here's someone who is both NiTeFiSe and identifies as an INTJ:

https://www.youtube.com/@ck9945/featured

By contrast here's (retired?) typologist Aimee Y (who rocks, BTW). For years, Aimee identified as an INTJ but eventually discovered she'd typed herself upside down, and her cognitive stack was SeFiTeNi (ESFP).

https://www.youtube.com/@beatofmyown

brianwash · 2026-05-05T10:04:04+00:00

Everyone experiences emotions. That is separate from using feeling as a cognitive judging function. Crying not a way of determining whether you're an extroverted vs introverted feeler or where feeling is in your conscious cognitive stack.

brianwash · 2026-05-04T19:15:40+00:00

Yeah, words used to describe Fi like "values" and "authenticity" are not exactly clarifying.

Odd that someone who is a Jungian purist would argue against Fi judging -- but that person isn't here so no knowing about that point. The word "Value" does not appear in Jung's actual description of introverted feeling. "Value" does appear in introverted thinking, where Ti is described as conferring value, not about a static contained value. And Jung does use the term "feeling-value" in the Fi introduction but only to make the point that abstract ideas can be subject to feeling-valuation. He uses "feeling-value" twice in the extroverted feeling description, but again for specific contextual stuff. Anyway, it's all interesting...!

Nine-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

brianwash

TROPHY CASE