u/Even-Broccoli7361

I was wondering, why is the INFJ 5w4 not INTJ? If I understand correctly, the INXJ type, above all, is the type for - the artist or seer/mystic as mentioned by Jung. So, regardless of the secondary functions, both INTJ and INFJ are driven by their artistic, that is to say, perceiving visions.

But when adding the wing, 5w4, to the Ni, the desire to integrate logical (or scientific) analysis with the creative analysis, naturally aligns with the preference for "thinking" to support Ni over "feeling".

Whereas, an INFJ naturally prefers his aesthetical analysis over logical analysis. This kinda leads to a more "existential" approach to the universe over logical analysis (propositional facts). Doesn't mean, he cannot have a good logical or scientific grasp, but he simply does not care. By the time an INFJ would stop caring about the moral problems, he would already be getting closer to INTJ.

While, most people would agree that MBTI does not have any correlation music, but I would slightly disagree and say that it does.

If my memory serves, then Jung once said something like, music recalls the images of collective unconscious. This partly explains why Ni-doms like Friedrich Nietzsche and Arthur Schopenhauer were dead serious about music, that they even attempted to interpret it to the highest level of aesthetical (or even metaphysical) experience.

However, how do Ti-doms, particularly INTPs see music? I don't simply mean this question as listening to music casually, but trying to relate the bigger perception of music. Or is there not any, according to INTPs, lol?

One of the popular ongoing sayings of Wittgenstein is that he called Schopenhauer "a crude (shallow) thinker". But why did he really say that? Is it because of philosophical reasons at all?

Quite frankly speaking, there is a lot of similarity between Wittgenstein and Schopenhauer's writings. One might even say Wittgenstein directly imports some of the views from Schopenhauer such as "my world", with their own underlying introspective nature.

Now. can it be the reason that Wittgenstein was a choosy person, with his God-complex, and saw himself as unique figure. But when he saw his own reflection in Schopenhauer, he seemed to discard Schopenhauer as a shallow thinker?

I was wondering what do you think of Ayub Bachchu as a singer. He was a great guitarist, and also a very good music arranger, but his singing style never attracted me.

This is one of the reasons why I can't really enjoy his songs. Though he wrote his lyrics, but they are ok. The only song I really liked is his "Ghumonto Shohore" but that again mostly because of the heavy background riff.

I kinda feel like his songs are wasted potential, missing a good vocalist.

This is rather a short description of why Cartesian doubting process and its solution is Ti-dom. While, everybody knows Rene Descartes was more likely an INTP, but I see some misconceptions in the process.

First of all, when Descartes says, "I think, therefore I am" (originally, Cogito, ergo sum) he is not in anyway referring to anything remotely close to the Jungian "thinking". When he says, I think therefore I am, he is referring himself to a "thinking object (thing)". It means, Descartes is aware of his existence, because he is a thing that is aware of its "conscious" state.

You could rephrase the statement as, "I feel, therefore I am" or "I intuit, therefore I am", and it would remain same. So, at best, the statement itself is a representation of "intuition" as opposed to sensing. Its because, when Descartes is doubting something, he is doubting his senses (empirical senses). He doubts if any of the empirical senses and the perceived objects could be real at all. So, as opposed to sensing, intuition stands as a mode of "existence".

However, Descartes is still using Ti to cast aside his doubts, even if his "thinking thing" is more of an intuitive thing. Here's how,

If I say, Being is something that exists and Non-Being as something that does not exist. I denote Being as X, and Non-Being as Y. So, Being = X, Non-Being = Y. I cannot say which is true or which is false (Being or Non-Being). But I could say one thing, X =/= Y. That is to say, if Being exists, non-Being does not. And if non-Being exists (which cannot) then Being does not. So, whether Being (X) or Non-Being (Y) is true, is determined by their definition, not their existence.

So, similarly Descartes could exist or not. It could be certain that he exists or he does not. But, the truth of his doubt cannot not exist, since his doubt applies equally for both his existence and non-existence. In other words, you can doubt your existence, but you cannot doubt your own doubts. And Carl Jung defines Ti as,

>Introverted thinking is primarily oriented by the subjective factor. At the very least the subjective factor expresses itself as a feeling of guidance which ultimately determines judgment. Sometimes it appears as a more or less complete image which serves as a criterion. But whether introverted thinking is concerned with concrete or with abstract objects, always at the decisive points it is oriented by subjective data. It does not lead from concrete experience back again to the object, but always to the subjective content. External facts are not the aim and origin of this thinking, though the introvert would often like to make his thinking appear so. It begins with the subject and leads back to the subject, far though it may range into the realm of actual reality. With regard to the establishment of new facts it is only indirectly of value, since new views rather than knowledge of new facts are its main concern. It formulates questions and creates theories, it opens up new prospects and insights, but with regard to facts its attitude is one of reserve.

Since, the entire process of his thinking is not based on empirical evidence but theoretical discussion, its Ti.

It may seem somewhat odd to compare between INFJ and INTP, since they share only two stacks - Ti and Fe, and one is the intuitive feeler, whereas the other thinker intuitive. However, I do believe sometimes an INFJ may appear like INTPs when writing too methodologically or structuring his worldview alike. So, one must differentiate personal psychology from professional work. One good example of it is Sigmund Freud, who despite being very analytical and empirical oriented, was typed down as Fi (introverted feeler), by Von Franz, who believed personal biography and philosophical works should be separated.

Some possible INFJs who are being typed as INTP are - Baruch Spinoza, Ludwig Wittgenstein, or Arthur Schopenhauer. Probably due to heavy analytical enforce in their works. But their biographies project a different case.

Conversely, pure thinking intuitives (INTP) are - Immanuel Kant, Rene Descartes, or Willard Van Orman Quine. Their thinking styles are quite different from the abovementioned philosophers I mentioned.

Nonetheless, there are some specific cases, which make it easier to spot an INFJ apart from an INTP. I would write in brief,

• Analytical process: INFJs (any Ni-dom), are driven by conclusion first and analysis later, whereas the reverse if true for INTPs. INTPs like to analyze things and create systematic theoretical framework through logic or other means to arrive at conclusions. Whereas, INFJs experience their inner visions and then lay down their systematic structure to support them. That does not mean, INFJs (or Ni-doms) come with pre-determined biases, but simply that their focus is on different matter. Because, introverted intuition is an irrational function, it derives its images from the unconscious, which transcend both scientific/empirical and logical analysis. It could be compared to the "introspective" aspect of life, where his focus is on an individual's life and his internal subjective mechanism (which comes to next points). This closely aligns with Jung's original writing that the normal representative of Ni is the artist, who's artistic visions are manifested in their works.
• Morality (Existential vs Metaethical): INFJs, because they have high intuition and feeling, are more concerned about morality than INTPs. That is not to say, INTPs are less moral than INFJs. But that, the high feeling, combined with dominant intuition, make an INFJ to get emerged in the "living experience" of morality. Which is quite like the existential understanding of morality. They oftentimes love to do internal thought-experiment to understand morality. One could say, its like, putting yourself in others' shoes. Conversely, INTPs engage in more structural moral analysis and create a more metaethical theory of morality.
• Relation to matter (materialistic world): Combined with the first and second point, INFJs oftentimes love to contemplate things like - Being, death, One, consciousness, eternity etc. And this is mainly because, all of its opposite attributes (i.e. temporality to eternity, living experience to death) are associated more to the intense relationship to matter. In other words, INFJ's inferior Se, makes it difficult to engage in material world and in return he contemplates more about its alternative. Whereas, an INTP has balanced intuition and sensation, for which these topics come under their logical analysis of Ti, and its intensity is not high as INFJ's.

That's it. I hope it helps.

Note: Because this post was originally posted on INFJ sub, the case for INFJ is discussed more.

It may seem somewhat odd to compare between INFJ and INTP, since they share only two stacks - Ti and Fe, and one is the intuitive feeler, whereas the other thinker intuitive. However, I do believe sometimes an INFJ may appear like INTPs when writing too methodologically or structuring his worldview alike. So, one must differentiate personal psychology from professional work. One good example of it is Sigmund Freud, who despite being very analytical and empirical oriented, was typed down as Fi (introverted feeler), by Von Franz, who believed personal biography and philosophical works should be separated.

Some possible INFJs who are being typed as INTP are - Baruch Spinoza, Ludwig Wittgenstein, or Arthur Schopenhauer. Probably due to heavy analytical enforce in their works. But their biographies project a different case.

Nonetheless, there are some specific cases, which make it easier to spot an INFJ apart from an INTP. I would write in brief,

• Analytical process: INFJs (any Ni-dom), are driven by conclusion first and analysis later, whereas the reverse if true for INTPs. INTPs like to analyze things and create systematic theoretical framework through logic or other means to arrive at conclusions. Whereas, INFJs experience their inner visions and then lay down their systematic structure to support them. That does not mean, INFJs (or Ni-doms) come with pre-determined biases, but simply that their focus is on different matter. Because, introverted intuition is an irrational function, it derives its images from the unconscious, which transcend both scientific/empirical and logical analysis. It could be compared to the "introspective" aspect of life, where his focus is on an individual's life and his internal subjective mechanism (which comes to next points). This closely aligns with Jung's original writing that the normal representative of Ni is the artist, who's artistic visions are manifested in their works.
• Morality (Existential vs Metaethical): INFJs, because they have high intuition and feeling, are more concerned about morality than INTPs. That is not say, INTPs are less moral than INFJs. But that, the high feeling, combined with dominant intuition, make an INFJ to get emerged in the "living experience" of morality. Which is quite like the existential understanding of morality. They oftentimes love to do internal thought-experiment to understand morality. One could say, its like, putting yourself in others' shoes. Conversely, INTPs engage in more structural moral analysis and create a more metaethical theory of morality.
• Relation to matter (materialistic world): Combined with the first and second point, INFJs oftentimes love to contemplate things like - Being, death, One, consciousness, eternity etc. And this is mainly because, all of its opposite attributes (i.e. temporality to eternity, living experience to death) are associated more to the intense relationship to matter. In other words, INFJ's inferior Se, makes it difficult to engage in material world and in return he contemplates more about its alternative. Whereas, an INTP has balanced intuition and sensation, for which these topics come under their logical analysis of Ti, and its intensity is not high as INFJ's.

That's it. I hope it helps. I didn't add things like door slamming or similar since they are not consistent with original theory.

I was wondering what are the perceptions of INTPs on INFJs (particularly the type introverted intuitive).

Because, INFJ is probably the most misrepresented type of all types in MBTI community. Majority of the introverted intuitive (INFJ or INTJ) are not mystics or seers who possess psychic power to predict the future. Their focus is simply oriented towards the symbolic meaning of the unconscious. Jung also identified the normal introverted intuitive as the "artist" over "mystics".

Contrary to popular belief, INFJs don't particularly have the best love life. While, INFJs have strong Fe, which help them connect with others, but their poor Se makes it difficult to socialize with others. This in result creates a peculiar and somewhat paradoxical type of character which in Myers's term would be labelled as friendly but unsocial. This stereotypically creates the wrong impression of INFJs, where they are perceived as INTP.

Jung never explicitly typed him, but I think the philosopher Baruch Spinoza is a good example of INFJ, where his thought runs parallel to the irrational insight of his (spiritual) monism. Another good example of INFJ is probably the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein, who gets frequently typed as INTP simply because he wrote on logic.

So, wrote a lot of things. Was wondering about your perception.

Finished Homeland a while ago. So, thought of sharing a discussion on the psychology of Carrie since her character shares similar characteristics of Jung's introverted thinking.

First of all, Carrie is a very good example of an introverted thinker (INTP, though its possible she is ISTP), who despite having a strong sense of Ti, is not driven by mathematics or science. Because Ti is not simply logic (math or science), but an internal framework of creating systematic structure of the mind to derive laws. This thinking may be both logically valid or invalid, but the main point is if its consistent with the person's subjective analysis.

Carrie is always fixated on her goals and follows her own methodology to come to a conclusion. Unlike the extraverted thinker, she is hyperfocused on her own internal subjective analysis, that might or might not play with the rules of CIA (or other organizations) to her investigations. Her utmost priority always remains solving any case to come to its final state of solution rather than empathizing with people. Solving a case, for Carrie Mathison, is coming to the solution which would eventually save humanity in her view. This directly matches with the description of Ti given by Von Franz on Dr. Heidegger's student in her lectures.

Her Fe seems to be most interesting. Although her Fe is in inferior state, it fluctuates quite a lot between the developed and undeveloped states (because she suffers with bipolar). With her undeveloped Fe, she remains constantly suspicious of people, rude to others, and her judgements appear cold. But in developed state, she becomes very empathetic of people, very loyal to her assets and her priority of mission shifts to people.

Whether Carrie's auxiliary function is intuition or sensation, I am not sure. But her focus on the unconscious pattern for forming ideas seems stronger than adapting to external data. Sometimes she is cobbled in webs of thoughts, that she constantly requires guidance from her closed ones like her sister, father or Saul.

Now, contrast it to Saul Berenson. Saul is guided by his inner visions. He is very inspiring in his visionary dreams, which offers constant guidance to Carrie's journey. Unlike Carrie, Saul has feeling in conscious state, which places people in high esteem. Saul is also good with people and is far more concerned with external moral framework to change the condition of people. Though he usually appears a lot more realistic than Carrie in external affairs, but his missions are guided by his own grand (idealistic) plan - his plan consisting of people. But it all comes down hard on Saul with his inferior Se, where his marriage life is almost in ruin (this is true for Ni doms who oftentimes have difficulty in their marriages). Saul is likely an INFJ. Saul appears to be the mystical dreamer of introverted intuition as described by Jung.

Finished Homeland a while ago. So, thought of sharing a discussion on the psychology of Carrie since her character shares similar characteristics of Jung's introverted thinking.

First of all, Carrie is a very good example of an introverted thinker (INTP, though its possible she is ISTP), who despite having a strong sense of Ti, is not driven by mathematics or science. Because Ti is not simply logic (math or science), but an internal framework of creating systematic structure of the mind to derive laws. This thinking may be both logically valid or invalid, but the main point is if its consistent with the person's subjective analysis.

Carrie is always fixated on her goals and follows her own methodology to come to a conclusion. Unlike the extraverted thinker, she is hyperfocused on her own internal subjective analysis, that might or might not play with the rules of CIA (or other organizations) to her investigations. Her utmost priority always remains solving any case to come to its final state of solution rather than empathizing with people. Solving a case, for Carrie Mathison, is coming to the solution which would eventually save humanity in her view. This directly matches with the description of Ti given by Von Franz on Dr. Heidegger's student in her lectures.

Her Fe seems to be most interesting. Although her Fe is in inferior state, it fluctuates quite a lot between the developed and undeveloped states (because she suffers with bipolar). With her undeveloped Fe, she remains constantly suspicious of people, rude to others, and her judgements appear cold. But in developed state, she becomes very empathetic of people, very loyal to her assets and her priority of mission shifts to people.

Whether Carrie's auxiliary function is intuition or sensation, I am not sure. But her focus on the unconscious pattern for forming ideas seems stronger than adapting to external data. Sometimes she is cobbled in webs of thoughts, that she constantly requires guidance from her closed ones like her sister, father or Saul.

Now, contrast it to Saul Berenson. Saul is guided by his inner visions. He is very inspiring in his visionary dreams, which offers constant guidance to Carrie's journey. Unlike Carrie, Saul has feeling in conscious state, which places people in high esteem. Saul is also good with people and is far more concerned with external moral framework to change the condition of people. Though he usually appears a lot more realistic than Carrie in external affairs, but his missions are guided by his own grand (idealistic) plan - his plan consisting of people. But it all comes down hard on Saul with his inferior Se, where his marriage life is almost in ruin (this is true for Ni doms who oftentimes have difficulty in their marriages). Saul is likely an INFJ. Saul appears to be the mystical dreamer of introverted intuition as described by Jung.

I am not talking about everyday disagreements but rather difference in philosophical views.

I think, sometimes, INTJs appear to have some of the most antagonistic views of INTP's philosophy. That is primarily because, an INTJ (despite having the thinking stack), is driven by his inner visions, running parallel to collective unconscious, that are very hard to define in intellectual terms (taking directly from Jungian analysis). A type like INFJ (IN(F)) also have this, but the problem seems to be that, an INTJ has strong thinking (Te), which oftentimes tend to make a strong analysis of his inner visions, which run opposite to the analysis of INTP's Ti.

An INTP, conversely, leads with a judging function, and seems to make a priori approach to forming his epistemological foundation that runs opposed to the "empirical verification" of Te (rationalism vs empiricism). An INTP's Ti analysis, mostly favoring logical inferences, is suspecting of the visionary ideas of Ni-doms (judgement vs perception).

Historically speaking, this somewhat seems to be the case. Lets say, the case of INTJ and INTP philosophers,

INTP - Kant (direct example by Jung), Descartes, Quine, Frege etc.
INTJ - Nietzsche (direct example of Ni), Sartre, Heidegger, Ayan Rand

You would see, people with these types, oftentimes hold opposing views. Kant vs Nietzsche case seems to be strongest. While, Kant was an INTP, who was digging up all possible metaphysical and epistemological analysis to come to "a solution", Nietzsche seemed to be rejecting Kant's theories in favor of a more existentialist case. While Schopenhauer (possibly INFJ), was trying to refute Kantian metaphysics too, but in a more intellectual and rational manner (Fe-Ti), whereas Nietzsche as unconsciously making a more empirical case against Kant through his Te-Fi (i.e. in his Genealogy).

So, I was wondering what's the meaning behind this sub's icon. Is it chosen solely based on aesthetic taste, or there is more to it?

Is it like stacking boxes of books which INTPs love to do or something else?

Remember reading in some places that Jung identifying sensation and thinking being more common among men. That makes intuition and feeling uncommon among men. Myers also concluded that feeling is more prevalent among women.

Does it explain why intuitive feeler, especially INFJ (or INFP) is more uncommon type? Although I doubt the statistics, but I think logically it makes sense.

I oftentimes see countless explanations of Ti however, most of them are oversimplified and somewhat misleading. But very few people in the pop-circle, could explain Ti as Nathan Glass (LoveWho) which gets closer to the heart of Jungian analysis cognitive functions.

I mean not sure how good his other videos are, but you should definately check out his explanation if you think you are like INTP but cannot sort it out.

While, reading psychological types, I came across a concept of empathy by Jung.

>[486]Wundt reckons empathy among the elementary processes of assimilation. It is therefore a kind of perceptive process, characterized by the fact that, through feeling, some essential psychic content is projected into the object, so that the object is assimilated to the subject and coalesces with him to such an extent that he feels himself, as it were, in the object. This happens when the projected content is associated to a higher degree with the subject than with the object. He does not, however, feel himself projected into the object; rather, the “empathized” object appears animated to him, as though it were speaking to him of its own accord. It should be noted that in itself projection is usually an unconscious process not under conscious control. On the other hand it is possible to imitate the projection consciously by means of a conditional sentence—for instance, “if you were my father”—thus bringing about the situation of empathy. As a rule, the projection transfers unconscious contents into the object, for which reason empathy is also termed “transference” (Freud) in analytical psychology. Empathy, therefore, is a form of extraversion.
- Psychological Types

Jung seemed to identify empathy (introjection) to the process of extraversion. That partly would explain some of the MBTI types being more empathetic in regard to their use of cognitive functions. I think people with high Fe tend to be more empathetic.

However, many people, especially thinker types, use the term cognitive empathy as a form of empathy over affective empathy. However, I disagree with the connection of cognitive empathy to empathy we know through true understanding of emotions. Cognitive empathy rather remains at the domain of analyzing things, which does not uniquely apply to empathy.

In your opinion who remains the best songwriters in the popular music circle (i.e. rock, pop, metal). Singers like James are popular but they often do not write their own stuff.

So, far I have seen, Sumon aka bassbaba, remaining a good songwriter with high introspection, social commentary, and emotion by maintaining consistency through the years. Some of his lyrics like from the 2016 album, are not liked. But till Dhrubok, he wrote great stuff.

Another recently emerged great songwriter is Moontasir Rakib of Odd Signature. Great songwriting with emotional tone and integration of introspection and nostalgia. His "Mondo" has similar vibe to Aurthohin's "Shaat Din".

Don't know who was the original songwriter of Warfaze, but Warfaze's '90s songs were great based on isolation, asociality, despair, and anti-establishment motto.

And then of course, there is "Rupok", the primary songwriter of Artcell, who wrote excellent stuffs like - Pothchola and Bhul Jonmo, before his passing away in early 2000s. Rumman Ahmed also wrote some great songs for Artcell and occasionally Aurthohin.

Is there any compelling philosophical argument against "cognitive empathy"? I find this term "cognitive empathy" seriously problematic in linguistic sense. For me its just a reinvention of the term "recognizing empathy" by attaching different name that fundamentally applies to any other thing for recognition for a thing.

My interest specifically comes from later Wittgenstein, Heidegger's existentialism (phenomenology), and missing gap between "syntax" and "true understanding of emotions".

So, is there any philosopher who argued against it?

I was wondering, how do you usually write, when trying to express your thoughts (especially essays).

Do you prefer poetic style with metaphors and abstraction, or rather prefer to make it more ludic and methodological? Also, do you tend to make it more esoteric or exoteric in general?

I heard that, writings by Ni oftentimes get dense and complex due to aphorisms and symbolic language. Like, Nietzsche for instance (possible INTJ). However, other possible INFJ (Ni) writers were serious about their stuff to make things clear like Schopenhauer.

I tend to prefer lucidity, structure, methodology, and clarity unless its a literary work. I have low tolerance for symbolic, metaphorical, and unnecessarily dense writing style cause I believe it runs contrary to wisdom, where the writer deliberately wants to encrypt his work.

In the MBTI community, INTP (thinker) is classified as business like with focusing on impersonal truth. While feeler types are classified as friendly ones focusing on people harmony and similar.

However, the more one gets into original Jungian analysis, one sees that, the descriptions do not align with Jung's writing. Ti in fact, is not analogous to logic, forget about the mathematics and science phenomena later topologists like Myers attributed to. Rather the one who is guided by his internal systematic consistency within his own framework.

This also does not exclude Ti having empathy and prioritizing truth over people, since the "truth" is here in accordance with the subjective contention, as all introverted functions are "subject" oriented. An INFP may as well be guided by his internal morality over the priority of his external people. His rationale is his moral values.

So, was wondering if there are any empath INTPs and how they react.

Though video game genre must not always need to be aligned with MBTI, but stereotypically, INFJ is oftentimes aligned to visual novel and dramatic video games. While, I do like some of the interactive choice based games like Life is Strange or Telltale's Walking Dead but absolutely love stealth, strategy (RTT rather than RTS), and puzzle games like - Styx, Dishonored, Shadow Tactics or Portal type of games.

What I seemed to notice is that in all these games, pattern-recognition is a core essence, which makes an INFJ follow each move to complete the quests.