EVLF vs. ELFV. Can someone help me understand the differences here?

I am trying to see if I am deluding myself into one type over another. I'm finding it difficult to draw the lines between the resulting vibes of 2V + 3L and the resulting vibes of 2L + 4V. I also am not exactly sure how much coverage 2V has, if that is my second position. Like, there are some days where I tell myself that I am only going to do what I want to do, and I will make sure I get it done, but at the same time I often find it difficult to enter that space if I am not already in it. I find that I am very open to others and will go along with almost any idea or activity because I am just open to it. I can't tell if that's because I want to be open to the ideas of everyone or that I don't know what I want and will just go along with everyone or if its kind of both. So basically I can't tell if these preferences are the vibes of 2V/4F or 3F/4V.

For example, I literally don't care where/what I eat as long as my body functions well and it doesn't taste awful. I also rarely care what physical activities I participate in, it's more about being around people I like. I find that I have very specific aesthetic tastes when I am left to myself, but I only rarely have strong opinions about the way something needs to be. Also, the strong opinions about the physical ambiance are usually related to an evoked group emotion, not necessarily the physical space itself. I usually care most about ideas. My ideas about the world mean the most to me and I will defend them until I am explicitly, deeply proven otherwise, unless I am not confident in them in the first place, to which I won't really care because I had very little state in them in the first place - it depends on the topic.

I usually hate logical realists/empiricists who don't entertain the fact that emotion/perception itself is part of reality as well, that reality is not exclusively physical. I think their perspective is a fine one to have and it makes sense why they might think that, but I feel they are missing a big portion of reality. I am also against positivism. I think that what they say is part of the truth but not the full truth. I guess it's the same thing.

My life philosophy is about many things, I cannot write about all of them here, but one is about the idea that religion and science do not contradict each other at all and I admire attempts in both religion and science to translate the truth of the world into human understanding. I think that all religions have some truth in them--in the felt sense--not that any sort of mythical being exists, but that the allegories that these mythical beings represent represent something true and real (i.e. a "god of trees" does represent the spiritual beauty of nature). Essentially, I believe god is nature, everything, and we are all part of it, in all aspects. I also believe the world is predetermined but that our second-order free will, as we exercise it, is part of that determination. These are a couple ideas I believe in that I will defend to the core. However, something like my own type, I am not confident in my own conclusions, so I am really quite open to other POVs. I am also open to other POVs regarding the ideas that I just stated that I care about, but unless I feel like my points are seriously understood and a genuinely strong alternative view is proposed, I won't change my mind.

TL;DR: I hope this paints some picture of me and can offer as some evidence as to what type of the above two I might be, or if you don't want to read all of this and comment on it, that someone can help me draw lines between the presentation of these two types so I might be able to figure it out myself.