INFJ v. INTJ: Michael Pierce v. Isaac Fischer

I WROTE A BOOK:
__________________

ITS HERE! Good grief. I'm going to go take a nap. Enjoy!

[Blacklotus-dv]

As an INTJ I screamed inside when you said 'If the facts don´t line up, then it´s the facts problem' at 10:16 .

[brandonwilliams]

As an infj with 2 intj best friends, we can be VERY similar. Especially because infj's can be much darker, blunt, and logical than people expect us to be

[elitehunter]

I'm an INFJ married to an INTJ; and I can't tell you how incredibly helpful your videos have been in helping me understand why our thinking just wouldn't be able to line up on certain things. It's been one of those great revelations to change my life.

[Distractiononly]

You are so well spoken, something I struggle with as an INFJ.

[JackfNoTrade]

Now, I may be misinterpreting the INTJ's viewpoint on typology here, but thanks to this video I think I recognize more clearly one of the struggles that I have as an INTP. Although I have an easy enough time looking at typology in new ways and in my own way understanding it better, I have difficulties with what seems to be a natural process for the INTJ and other Te users which is answering the "now what?" question that inevitably comes after a new discovery or revelation. I see it now as a consequence of my functional preferences that I have my proverbial hands tied when it comes to applying my knowledge beyond explaining it to others and myself. Also, it is as if, subconsciously, I always knew that this was a barrier I was encountering, but until now I couldn't put words to it or a logical context around it.

In short, thanks again Michael Pierce! I was blind but now I see.

[JackfNoTrade]

One more point that I found very interesting and helpful is the tendency for INTJs who are focused on typology to look for the concrete manifestations of the abstract functions in their effect on outward behavior. I think that this perspective is particularly useful even for Ti users because it gives us fuel for our abstractions. Separating out what we see as the purest behavioral manifestations of the functions, Ti users can more easily develop illuminating analogies between behavior and function which can then improve our own understanding of the abstract types as well as our capability of communicating that understanding to others.

It seems easier for me to talk to someone else about the types in terms of outward behavior or tendencies rather than purely abstract distinctions. Te, by pointing out typological behavior, thus supplements Ti's ability to explain the types abstractly by "sharpening" Ti's abstractions.

[JustAnotherSean]

"I see Issac's judgement of the types as very partial and contaminated by his narrow, subjective evaluation of things."

That is so concise. Wow. Nice!

[mrpants]

Nailed it, like usually. I am a 25 year old ENFJ and my best friend/big brother is a 30 year old INTJ. Since the main difference between INFJ and INTJ is the Fe/Ti vs the Te/Fi axis, and personally being a predominant Fe, I concur so much with you Mr. Pierce. (ENFJ's are INFJ's sister types--all the same functions just Fe and Ni axis are switched)

When we would hang out, he would always want their to be an end goal "lets beat this video game" where as I would just want to hang out with him and learn from him no matter what we did.

[TuringMachine]

I'm an INTJ and the way I like to look at MBTI is this: there's no need to believe in the existence of actual Jungian functions. The fact of the matter is that we can give 16 personality descriptions such that most people will fit exactly one of them. Jung's theory simply organizes all this data in a neat, easy-to-remember way.

Of course, when explaining MBTI, we talk *as if* such functions exist, but that's all just syntactic sugar for more objective claims, like "behavior X correlates with behavior Y".

I also have a natural tendency to use MBTI to judge some types as more suitable for me or for certain activities.

So it seems your conclusions about INFJ vs INTJ are correct, i.e., they don't only hold for you and your friend. Good job! :)

[tanorbonin]

This is a beautiful piece of work. Nicely done indeed!

[ShotTehTrick]

I'm an INFJ and I can tell that you're one simply by how monotone, passive, and clinical you speak which is similar to how I speak haha.

[exploringabsolutechannel]

INFJ appears to view world from the human psychology point of veiw, whereas an INTJ could well calculate everything from how humans would respond to certain applications that could be applied in the real world with regard to physical laws of nature; its effect on human society, culture etc.

[chrisradano]

INTJ's don't like to talk too much. There's too much paralyzing information. Just boil everything down, so we can move on. Move on to what? Move on to observing and thinking alone.

[EXHellfire]

This was useful, Michael. I struggled to know which I am between those for a few days after I confirmed Ni as my leading function. I agree more with your friend's way of thinking and I can observe it in myself all the time, too.

[anthonybogart]

I feel like I'm an INFJ who doesn't know he's an INFJ but is desperately trying to figure out if he is an INFJ but because he's an INFJ it prohibits him from ever discovering that he's an INFJ... even though when he takes the test it says that he is an INFJ

[nelsonwarner]

This is hilarious. I am an INTJ and yeah I seem to fall in line with your friend. I may need to work through my anti-Fe sentiment.

[mpcc]

I tend to care about paradigms of interpretation rather than facts, because to how you look at the facts and the methods you use to analyze and arrive at those facts is highly relevant discussion about what is true. I never want to believe there is something self evident, but best practices for reasoning and thinking about something. For instance, typology is not about behavior, but I ground it in motivation and propensities of interpretation. I wish I could have spoken to you years ago.

[mustacheglasses]

Michael, I think you're the most interesting expositor of MBTI that I've run across. I don't fully subscribe to MBTI myself but I do enjoy listening.

I'm a bit confused about the way you represent the INTJ against the INFJ concerning representing reality. You make it sound as though the INTJ represents reality in a subjective way and the INFJ represents reality in an objective way. But then you talked about your friend wanting to state things as they actually are when you want to articulate peoples actual thoughts. It seems to me that your friend is attempting to represent reality more objectively than you. I think I'll listen through again and see if I missed anything.

[igeljaeger]

Isaac seems like a guys I'd love to talk with.

[KigenEkeson]

It's strange. I've tested 2x as INTJ on free online tests and once as INFJ but I completely resonant with every single video and detail about INFJ and totally not with INTJ. I think the problem on these tests is that they always contrast 'facts' and 'feelings' rather than 'facts' and 'abstraction' as you did in this video. To choose 'feelings' over 'facts' in the tests seems to me to be too wishy-washy. I don't go by my 'feelings'/emotions...most of the time i don't even feel my own emotions much less solve problems by them. I deal in abstractions and then intuitively compare them and the correct answer just comes up...it's not an 'emotion'...it's a process of intuition...like an internal calculator of abstractions rather than facts. Sorry, had to vent.