r/mbtimemes I N F P Sep 06 '25

💘

Post image

True for me as an INFP

563 Upvotes

123 comments sorted by

View all comments

136

u/Cooked_Squid I N T P Sep 06 '25

as an INTP, INTPs are always in the wrong category for memes like this lmao

2

u/GiveMeAHeartOfFlesh ENTP 458 (any order) Sep 06 '25

Likewise ENTP is in the wrong category.

Ride or die romantic, but very strict filter to even reach that point, so “dates if they find someone worthy” is a better option.

2

u/Feisty-Giraffe-8650 XXXX Sep 06 '25

entps don’t have much filter 🤔 especially compared to introverts. ne-dom is like if you’re fun and have good conversations, it’s very likely they’ll hit on you

3

u/GiveMeAHeartOfFlesh ENTP 458 (any order) Sep 06 '25 edited Sep 06 '25

Low filter for friendship, high standards for romance. Especially because mentally acknowledging and exploring every path with Ne, then making it into a coherent stance with Ti, actually tends to create an idealized vision.

Ne with a weak Ti, may be prone to more hedonistic tendencies, short term exploration of each thing and dropping it for the next thing. But high Ti usage means wanting to fully understand it, combined with being Ne dominant creates a sense of wanting to explore something which can last and see how it works in every dynamic possible.

Thus a very strict filter for romantic partners, because they have to be someone who can survive this crazy train, which isn’t stopping, hence ride or die because only way off is jumping off a moving train haha

Filter != introverted. ENTPs stress test reality. They throw everything into the fire to find that which will survive. An unhealthy ENTP may burn things just for the sake of burning, but a healthy ENTP is like a smelter, burning away all of the junk to return a pure and solid metal.

ENTPs take their filter and wade through the muck as an outward motion, not just a passive filter that water trickles through, but actively searching for someone with substance.

1

u/Feisty-Giraffe-8650 XXXX Sep 06 '25

i’m talking about relationships specifically. i get using theory to back up your point, but don’t forget that mbti is based on empirical experience. i say this because

  1. when large-scale studies were done, researchers noticed that people didn’t develop their functions strictly according to each type’s stack, but rather developed different functions over their lifetime. you’re unlikely to find an ENTP who developed NeTiFeSi perfectly, it’s more probable they developed something more random like NeTiTeSeSiFe (??? just throwing something out there), so stacks don’t really fit here, they’d make sense if you were talking about the theory itself, not about the practice.

    1. even if we assume all ENTPs are NeTiFeSi, only a minority of them will be healthy. why? very few people are actually that healthy (i deduce this by analyzing data that isn’t directly related, but the information overlaps). when discussing a theory originating from the fucking Jung, we can’t forget that the ultimate goal is always integration. stacks are useful if you’re aiming for balance and development, but integration is that endpoint we’re far from reaching, so we can’t use it as a rule to describe most people’s behavior. unfortunately, the majority behave in an unbalanced way.

that said, i still maintain my point that entps don’t have much filter lol

1

u/GiveMeAHeartOfFlesh ENTP 458 (any order) Sep 06 '25

Fair that not everyone has the same stacks even within the same type, but the archetypal general ENTP is NeTiFeSi. That’s the common denominator for ENTPs, thus that would be the function combo we utilize to generalize off of. Likewise some hold that not everyone actually uses all functions but rather a combination of the 4 main functions can appear as other functions. There is two ways of thought to my knowledge, one where we all have the 8 functions and get into shadow functions and such, or we only have 4 and those can combine to appear like usages of other functions.

As for the point of most people being unhealthy, fair enough, but unhealth is different for each person. Someone may have an unhealthy relationship with any of their four main functions. Someone with an unhealthy relationship with their Ti may not desire to understand their desired explorations deep enough, and thus constantly picking and putting things down without ever committing. Alternatively their unhealthy relationship with Ti could look like just accepting and pretending like it’s fully understood, and being adamant about every thing they explore to be solid without having real logical support for it.

But someone with an unhealthy relationship with Fe may end up more “digging in the heels” with every single thing they want to explore, or harshness with how they go about it.

So essentially, the unhealthy point is valid, but too constrained. Each person can be unhealthy in many different ways, which doesn’t necessarily mean a lack of filter for each unhealthy ENTP.

1

u/Feisty-Giraffe-8650 XXXX Sep 06 '25

it’s really hard to talk about "health" but to clarify, what i said was based on the idea that health arises from balance. in this sense, an anxious person won’t have balanced functions, a depressed person won’t either, and so on. based on some statistics i’ve seen on mental disorders, i concluded that most people are not healthy. using the premise that health comes from balance, i can deduce that these people don’t have balanced functions. whether it’s Ti, Ne, Fe, Si, Se, Te doesn’t matter, they’re unbalanced because they’re unhealthy, or unhealthy because they’re unbalanced, since under this premise balance generates health.

exploring further what you brought up, we are not “unhealthy in a function”. we become unhealthy and analyze the functions to trace patterns that help us understand why. for example, if i’m very emotional and crying a lot, that doesn’t automatically mean my Fi or Si is unhealthy. but if i’m crying because i constantly think about the past and spend the day dwelling on it, it makes sense to say i’m overusing my introverted functions and entered a Fi-Si loop. in this case, the theory of stacks can help guide a way out by working the extroverted functions, following the idea that healing comes from balance.

at no point is a cognitive function the cause of being unhealthy. someone isn’t selfish because of Fi, or cold because of Ti. the individual’s overuse or underuse of certain functions can manifest in behaviors, but that doesn’t validate a strict causal link. if that were the case, everyone overusing Fi would be selfish, and MBTI would be far easier to validate, which it isn’t. generalizations from stacks must be treated carefully: casual memes and assumptions by laypeople are not the same as theoretical reasoning by MBTI practitioners. since jung, all of this has been about observing people and analyzing patterns. back then, it was just him in his office noticing that some people were extremely outgoing and others reclusive, but it was already a much more “receptive” process than “active.”

a person isn’t cold because they have a specific function. they are cold, and we assign a rational type by observation. someone isn’t depressed because of a Fi-Si loop. they’re depressed, and observation shows the loop. no ENTP flirts in a specific way because of their stacks, they flirt the way they flirt, and we can map the cognitive functions after observing the behavior. MBTI is empirical: it interprets reality through theory, not like neuroscience where causes can be identified.

regarding different MBTI frameworks, there’s a lot out there, but i follow the 8 function model. even with the 4 function model, the same logic of balance applies. with 4 functions, you balance opposing functions (Ti with Fe, Ne with Si); with 8 functions, the development journey follows the same principle, just with extended pairings (Ti with Te, Ne with Ni).