Socionics Personals
Middle East
North America
Join now!

Questions & Answers
Question #1211213505Monday, 19-May-2008
Category: INFp INFj Theory
What is the difference between INFp and INFj? -- Kanerou
Your Answers: 1+
A1 Though both types have an aura of otherworldliness and sensitivity about them, the INFp will ordinarily evince a greater degree of emotional liveliness, often displaying a rich mixture of melancholy, idealism, and optimism. The emotionalism of the INFj is by contrast, not necessarily purposefully restrained, but is more notable for its subdued, mature, peaceful expression. Another point of comparison is how the two types relate to others. The INFj is identifiable by their keen discernment of others inner traits, feelings, and motives. INFjs are often able to display great wisdom and sagacity in the realm of interpersonal relationships, exuding a presence of empathy and concern. Essentially, the INFj wishes to act as a catalyst for others to release their inner tensions, turmoils, etc. With the INFp, however, the focus shifts from eliminating negative feelings to inducing positive emotions. INFps are characterized by their warmth, tact, and sincerity. They greatly value emotional authenticity and may indulge in bouts of playfulness and mischievousness with the aim of eliciting a spontaneous emotional reaction from their interlocutor. Also, INFps have inclinations to whimsy or caprice that seem incompatible with the docile, obedient, meek nature of the INFj. -- the flying ninja parade
A2 If you are looking to spot them, you will find that the INFj is far more organised that INFp..this even extends to keeping a tidy environment..wether it be their desk or their home environment. INFp's tend to smile a lot more..they look to provoke external responses in others..wether it be through playful jokes, lots of smiling, whereas INFj will be more interested in morals..whats right and wrong, and what have you. You may also find INFj's more interested in staying per their hidden agenda -- Westie
A3 What about Se-valuing versus Si-valuing? Same with Ti-valuing versus Te-valuing. -- Kanerou
A4 A3 how do we tell the difference? -- Westie
A5 Yes, that is what I meant, Westie. -- Kanerou
A6 Kanerou, what i'm getting at is your post doesn't mean anything unless you can explain the differences between the two types. As it is you've just put down some jargon that really could mean anything, so perhaps you could explain or expand in what you've posted by explaining how that manifests in actual observable differences between the two types. -- Westie
A7 IEIs are Se-valuing and Ti-valuing. EIIs are Si-valuing and Te-valuing. I'm asking about the difference between each, ie how they manifest differently. -- Kanerou
A8 All right. I'm going to make a big assumption here. You are completely confused as to what is your type. Not necessarily true, but it will touch on all that you've asked. When I use the term value, I mean function belongs in either ego or super-id. In an oversimplified way: Te - practicality, efficiency, knowledge; knowledge is the basic form, in that people who value Te tend to purposefully amass it. Ti - analysis, structure, organization; analysis is basic, people who value Ti value understanding truths and logic based systems of belief. Se - willpower, coercion, aggression; desire is basic, people who value Se either have a concrete path or goal or really want one Si - inner sensation, both physical and mental; those who value Si either like to bring about peace and comfort or like those who do. If you are trying to identify your type, read up on the theory. It is more helpful to understand the different functions and how they play into one another. This is just a short summary of ways I found to be interesting and helpful in identifying your own type. First, the functions: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1,2,7,8 are strong, but 1 & 2 you like talking and thinking about, while 7 & 8 you just like doing. You may rarely or never tell others about your 7 & 8 functions. 3,4,5,6 are weak, and one Russian article stated that one expects society to help him with these functions. The difference is 3 & 4 you like to think about and like minimal input. You're happiest when someone just silently does these functions. 5 & 6 you like to talk about, appreciate a lot of help with and like it when someone skilled in them actively gets you to use them. As for the order inside the blocks (pairs of two), the odd numbered functions are more involved with input (you do use them for output but less so) and the even numbered functions are more involved with output (you do use their input qualities.) 1,3,5,7 will be either ethical-logical or sensing-intuitive; 2,3,6,8 will be the other. Rationals, who have ethics-logic in 1,3,5,7, tend to focus on the correct influence to achieve a goal (productivity, mood, moral behavior, organization). Irrationals, who have sensing-intuituve in 1,3,5,7, tend to fit activities to achieve a goal (getting their way, inner peace and harmony, realization of potential, undertsanding cause and effect.) This is just a basic outline that I've used (but really not the only things I've used) but focusing on understanding different functions tends to be easier than focusing on information elements. -- Anonymous
Bookmark and Share

A9 I would not recommend typing oneself on the basis of quadra values. Sloppy, poorly-articulated definitions of IM elements abound and descriptions of their possible resonatory interconnections are often even worse. Also, quadra-value typing might be subjected to the same criticism as dichotomous typing: from the multiplicity of manifestations a valued or an unvalued element may take, certain general theoretical principles may be extrapolated, but the vague and indeed, somewhat "diluted" nature of these principles might potentiality limit the utility of this typing method. Consider Si-valuing, if you will. What does that mean? Why, it means that Si is either your 1st, 2nd, 5th, or 6th function... It occurs to me that such a distinction is possibly even less relevant than what a dichotomous approach might offer as the latter concerns readily observable facets of personality rather than deep, instinctual unconscious drives or whatever. Additionally, there is a substantial bulk of presumably correct information available related to the dichotomies; the paucity of such quality material related to quadra-values constitutes another advantage the dichotomous approach has over quadra-value typing. Anyway, (please excuse the somewhat tangential of this post) my inclination is to advocate a much more rigorous, stringent methodology: 1. First, find your base function. 2. Then... after that... find your second. This is the simplest and most effective method of determining type. -- glork
A10 I think the OP was probably just asking a question to get a discussion going about the differences between the two. -- Anonymous
A11 A9 - Are you kidding me? Do you even know the point of Socionics, because it seems like you have a load of investigating to do. Quadra values have everything to do with Socionics, since Socionics is a theory of relationships with people, based on values. You should know what quadra you're in first before anything else. Know your valued information elements. A common question online, for instance, is: "How do I tell if I'm an INTp or INTj?" This should be the most obvious decision for you to make once you have identified your quadra values, and to rely on dichotomies here could be a big mistake and leave you open to having numerous errors in typing other people. This site is called, which assumes that it is the official Socionics site of English. In my opinion, the admin of this site needs to get to work if he expects people to learn the right information to type. Duality never worked in MBTI, and it doesn't work in this simplistic remake MBTI look-a-like. If you know your valued information elements, then dichotomies won't be needed to identify which people you get along better with. Dichotomies never did such a thing in MBTI, you'd think people would stop wasting time on them and focus more on the essence and relative relational essences of the individual. -- Anonymous
*Please note that the opinions expressed are not necessarily those of*
Page 1
Would you like to add anything?
(When posting, we ask you to make the effort to qualify your opinions.)

Name: (leave blank for "Anonymous")

10 Most recent
By category
All questions
Submit a question