Carl-Richard

Leo started it Yeah, mine lasted about a microsecond before I jumped up in fear. It changed me forever though.

Sounds like a convenient assumption Ne on its own, sure, but paired with say Te (which is more dominant in an ENFP than an INFP), these potential ideas are more likely to be manifested in the external world, and that requires interacting with it more, i.e. you're out doing stuff. Other intuitives who have a prominent Te instead have a strong Ni, which is probably less conducive to extroversion (you tend to stick to one project and bury yourself in it), except maybe ENTJs with their tertiary Se. Maybe they want people more, but if you're doing stuff out in the world, especially intuitive projects which tend to be ambitious, you will run into people sooner or later. An ESFP that likes experiencing cool things will most likely be doing it with other people, even though there is no Fe involved. My ESFP cousin is the most extroverted person I know.

Extroverted as in forum activity? I would think that the least active members are the most extroverted, because they're out doing stuff

I had an enlightenment my 3rd ever meditation session

@Leo Gura Then you also have the tough nuts, like Rupert Spira or Gary Weber, who spent decades meditating before stabilizing in non-duality.

I think there is only so much you can listen to someone before you get the gist.

There are probably some likely contenders, like Huntingson disease, but I don't know.

Not having a close family can be considered a disease in itself considering its overall impact on health. Some people only have their kids. Now imagine adding coercion on top of that.

Do you extend this to psychiatric conditions like Bipolar type 1? Then I wouldn't have been born. In fact, I doubt I would've had much of a family at all on my father's side ?

Oh yeah definitely ? Btw, I was going off of these: It's what popped up when I googled "MBTI stereotypes ENFP/INFP".

? ?

I have no pile of abandoned projects or quasi-hyper-social patterns to point to as a supposed Duracell Bunny ENFP. When I think about it, my dad is much more likely to be an ENFP (but he also has bipolar type 1). He has had like 10 different variably skilled jobs and a dozen businesses, met tons of people, runs a Facebook page etc. Other than that, he is pretty much like me.

INFP by far ☺

Yeah yeah, you and your cognitive functions reductionism. It's obviously the case that extroverted MBTI types correlate somewhat with trait extroversion (we talked about this before with ESFJs), and I think that applies to ENFPs as well, certainly if we go by stereotypes on personality database.

REEEEEE Then a sea sponge or amoeba uses logic. This also becomes weird when you start talking about how sensors (ESFJs) aren't logical. I think a better word you're looking for is "order" or meaningful behavior. Organisms have to behave in a particular way in order to survive: their bodies are ordered (homeostasis), and they interact with the environment in an ordered fashion to maintain that homeostasis. However, most people tend to reserve "logic" for higher-order survival behaviors, like high-level cognition, abstract reasoning and narrative-making. I've written about some of this before (which you don't have to read): Generally, I think you're using "logic" in a very loose way, and it's confusing.

Maybe, but when that entails using whatever hyper-abstract formulation you desire, you also risk people falling off completely and not engaging at all. You're just generally very hard to follow. I've noticed this in myself, that over the years as I've started assessing clarity of communication through the lens of simplicity (concreteness, conciseness) rather than complexity (abstractness, detailedness), people generally engage with me more, and the discussion is able to flow for perpetuity (and a lot of good can come out of that). True

That is a great point. Both Jordan Peterson and Trump rose to power by using the reverse-uno victim card: "look at all the people who disagree with my victim blaming narrative; I'm a victim!" It's quite, shall we say, postmodern ?

Well, maybe it's a larger problem of communication itself. It's inherently ambigious and imperfect. We each carry different internal dictionaries, different contextual interpretations, generally different ways of thinking, which is why good communication is dialectical rather than an exchange of monologues. We need to piece it together bit by bit, tease out the points, approximate etc. Being overly abstract and wordy and wanting everything to be delivered in a neat package can be detrimental to this process. If I were to use the forbidden MBTI: you need to work on your Fe and Ne blindspots ?

Agreed. I feel this is one big reason why I disagree with him typing me as an ENFP rather than an INFP. I used to be so introverted, it bordered on selective mutism. In high school, I would virtually never initiate a casual conversation with anybody else than my closest friends. Just because I write a lot, that doesn't make me into a Russel Brand ?

So you were the Devil all along. Go figure ?

? Chomsky would shoot you. In the beginning, language acquisition looks nothing like logic, more like basic imitation of sounds and movements. Children start by acquiring single words and phrases, and only over time, after learning thousands of words, they start to develop advanced grammar. It doesn't hurt to read some books just because you label it Te or whatever ? For a common definition of logic, I would recommend Kant's "analytic vs synthetic" and "a priori vs a posteriori" distinction. If you miss out on common definitions of things like "logic" or "emotion", communication will of course be hard.

You should maybe study some Piaget (maybe that helps to clear up some confusion around SD as well while you're at it ). Notice where "logic" arises:

...as I thought. You're inhabiting a different linguistic framework than dare I say most of mainstream academia, be it emotions or logic. No sane biologist would ever say insects use logic, or that animals with complex limbic systems can't feel basic emotions like anger. I learned at least that much from wasting a year in college on things like zoology systematics ?

Evil arguably also involves concepts like will and self-awareness, something that goes far beyond emotions, but of course emotions underlie all of it, because they're more fundamental. You're putting the cart before the horse. "The cortical areas evolved before the limbic system teehee", "sapience evolved before sentience", is essentially what you're saying... or maybe it's your idiosyncratic definition of "logic" as well that is pulling the strings here.

Is evil an emotion now? ? Cmon man. You're using a very idiosyncratic definition if you think that a cat can't experience anger if it isn't able to plot the kitty holocaust. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anger I'm talking about 1. and you're talking about 2. 1. is more fundamental and doesn't exclude 2.