• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

[INFJ] INFJ personality type descritpion

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
I don't have a problem. I'm just pointing out that you care about being intelligent and being seen as such just as much as Kiddo cares about being agreeable. So when you ask "what do you care?", you're just pointing back at yourself.

i care about being agreeable, too. the "what do you care" wasn't literal, obviously. i more meant, why, for your sake, SHOULD you care? how does it further your life goals to pretend not to be as intelligent as you are?

it would be most efficient (in terms of long term happiness maximization) to accept yourself for who you are and find people that accept that too. from this profit-seeking stance, screw anyone who's offended by your intelligence. drop 'em.

Interesting. On what basis did you make this assumption?

well, your tone was insulting, so i was assuming you had some reason to put me in my place. and instead of looking for a logical way to interpret what i said, you just jumped on me. you probably thought "wow, this kid is too full of himself" and it came out clearly in your choice of words.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
But that's the problem: Kiddo is someone who cares about being nice to people. Telling him to dismiss that part of himself is akin to telling him to act like someone he's not. That's why HE needs balance, while YOU don't: because he's got those two conflicting urges, while you don't.

okay, first of all, you don't know me. you have no idea how much i struggle with being nice vs. speaking my mind. it's one of the main issues i am working on in my life. don't assume i don't have this issue, please.

i'm only speaking this way because i understand the issue so well -- it hits super close to home. and i've spent pretty much my whole life holding myself back for the sake of others (or at least i think it's best for them). i'm giving kiddo advice that I NEED TO LEARN TO FOLLOW TOO.

honestly, i'm frustrated with almost every person i meet because i feel like if i let myself just be me, i would hurt them. my biggest goal right now is to find more people who i can let go around. i only know two people right now that i can do that with. not my parents, not any relatives, not my ex... shit, one of them lives 85 miles from me and i only see her for two day spans every two weeks, and the other one lives 3000 miles from me and i see her maybe twice a year.

putting a bunch of effort into friendships that will never get to that level is pointless. that effort would be better used in finding new friends or strengthening my friendships that might make it to that level someday. but the problem is, i care about those people so much, i don't want to just drop them. unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your position), I AM THE MOST IMPORTANT PERSON IN MY LIFE. screw anyone who won't fulfill my needs. i can find other people. it will be hard, and i'll feel terrible, but the alternative is worse.

allright? happy now wandering?
 

Wandering

Highly Hollow
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
873
MBTI Type
INFJ
i care about being agreeable, too. the "what do you care" wasn't literal, obviously. i more meant, why, for your sake, SHOULD you care? how does it further your life goals to pretend not to be as intelligent as you are?
It all depends on one's life goals, doesn't it? There are many possible life goals that do not depend one bit on one's intelligence, or lack thereof.

it would be most efficient (in terms of long term happiness maximization) to accept yourself for who you are and find people that accept that too.
Agreed. However, that doesn't necessarily mean surrounding oneself ONLY with such people.

from this profit-seeking stance, screw anyone who's offended by your intelligence. drop 'em.
Quite frankly, I've personally never met anyone who was offended by anyone else's intelligence. By someone's smugness and/or fixation over their intelligence, yes, but not by the intelligence itself.

well, your tone was insulting, so i was assuming you had some reason to put me in my place.
It wasn't meant to be insulting, only provoking.

and instead of looking for a logical way to interpret what i said, you just jumped on me. you probably thought "wow, this kid is too full of himself" and it came out clearly in your choice of words.
Not "too full of himself", no. I've had many friends who thought and acted as you recommend, and I know for a fact that they were NOT full of themselves - most of them anyway. However, they WERE unaware that intelligence, and being able to constantly use and/or display it, is far from being the be-all and end-all of life. And this made most of them pretty unhappy, which is something I do not wish Kiddo (or even you for that matter, but you've apparently already made your choice) to go through.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
It all depends on one's life goals, doesn't it? There are many possible life goals that do not depend one bit on one's intelligence, or lack thereof.

i was talking about PRETENDING TO BE SOMEONE YOU'RE NOT. i wasn't talking about not focusing on your intelligence.

of course your statement is true. it seems too obvious to even state.

However, they WERE unaware that intelligence, and being able to constantly use and/or display it, is far from being the be-all and end-all of life. And this made most of them pretty unhappy, which is something I do not wish Kiddo (or even you for that matter, but you've apparently already made your choice) to go through.

why do you think i think this? i'm making an argument about efficient life choices for people that spend too much time worrying about others (codependents). i'm not talking about anything else here. your inference is unwarranted and untrue.
 

Wandering

Highly Hollow
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
873
MBTI Type
INFJ
okay, first of all, you don't know me. you have no idea how much i struggle with being nice vs. speaking my mind. it's one of the main issues i am working on in my life. don't assume i don't have this issue, please.
I wouldn't assume you don't have this issue, especially since it wasn't the one under discussion :huh: The issue was "embracing one's intelligence to the point that we might alienate myself from others" vs "swallow our distaste for discussion we might find less than intelligent so that we can be accepting of others" (which was simplified as being nice). And you said that there should be no compromise, no balance, that the first solution was the only one acceptable. You made it sound like you weren't struggling with that question anymore, and I believed you.

i'm only speaking this way because i understand the issue so well -- it hits super close to home. and i've spent pretty much my whole life holding myself back for the sake of others (or at least i think it's best for them). i'm giving kiddo advice that I NEED TO LEARN TO FOLLOW TOO.
Except that Kiddo is in a totally different situation than you are. You say you've spent all your life in that situation: Kiddo explained that he entered that situation rather recently. So the situations are not comparable.

honestly, i'm frustrated with almost every person i meet because i feel like if i let myself just be me, i would hurt them.
How so :thinking: ? I mean, how would you hurt them, exactly?

my biggest goal right now is to find more people who i can let go around. i only know two people right now that i can do that with. not my parents, not any relatives, not my ex... shit, one of them lives 85 miles from me and i only see her for two day spans every two weeks, and the other one lives 3000 miles from me and i see her maybe twice a year.
Do what Kiddo did ;) Get onto that INTJ forum. Or join a geek club. Or get into the right studies :D (that's what I did, tons of ultra-smart people to deal with... :rolleyes: )

putting a bunch of effort into friendships that will never get to that level is pointless. that effort would be better used in finding new friends or strengthening my friendships that might make it to that level someday. but the problem is, i care about those people so much, i don't want to just drop them.
Seems to me like you have the OPPOSITE problem to Kiddo's, then: you care too much about being nice. So of course, for YOU, the solution would be to nurture your intellectual side more. But Kiddo comes from the other side of the coin: he's discovered he can get mean when he nurtures his intellectual side too much, and he's wondering how to regain his nice side.

unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your position), I AM THE MOST IMPORTANT PERSON IN MY LIFE. screw anyone who won't fulfill my needs. i can find other people. it will be hard, and i'll feel terrible, but the alternative is worse.
Yes, for YOU this does indeed seem to be the right thing to do.

allright? happy now wandering?
Huh :huh: ? How am I supposed to be happy that you're having such hard times??
 

Wandering

Highly Hollow
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
873
MBTI Type
INFJ
your inference is unwarranted and untrue.
It's untrue, yes, I noticed that when reading your next post. I did honestly infer it from your own words, though. But I was missing information and got it wrong. Sorry about that.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
I wouldn't assume you don't have this issue, especially since it wasn't the one under discussion :huh: The issue was "embracing one's intelligence to the point that we might alienate myself from others" vs "swallow our distaste for discussion we might find less than intelligent so that we can be accepting of others" (which was simplified as being nice). And you said that there should be no compromise, no balance, that the first solution was the only one acceptable. You made it sound like you weren't struggling with that question anymore, and I believed you.

why do you take every word so literally? in my post, i was using "nice" as a way of abbreviating "swallow[ing] my distaste for discussion I might find less than intelligent so that I can be accepting of others".

and you really think i meant there was literally no compromise? i actually made a post earlier in this thread about how INFJs are good at disagreeing, but phrasing it nicely. there's definitely a way to politely debate. i'm not advocating being obnoxious.

Except that Kiddo is in a totally different situation than you are. You say you've spent all your life in that situation: Kiddo explained that he entered that situation rather recently. So the situations are not comparable.

not comparable. at all. heh.

it's pretty much the same situation, except he's new to it. so i'm offering advice, having a lot of experience with it.

Seems to me like you have the OPPOSITE problem to Kiddo's, then: you care too much about being nice. So of course, for YOU, the solution would be to nurture your intellectual side more. But Kiddo comes from the other side of the coin: he's discovered he can get mean when he nurtures his intellectual side too much, and he's wondering how to regain his nice side.

sounds like the same exact problem. we both have to balance being overly dominant in debate with caring about people's feelings. we both have both traits, and those traits won't go away.

Huh :huh: ? How am I supposed to be happy that you're having such hard times??

sorry, got a little emotional there.
 

Wandering

Highly Hollow
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
873
MBTI Type
INFJ
why do you take every word so literally?
Damned if you do, damned if you don't :rolleyes:

and you really think i meant there was literally no compromise?
Well, you WERE pretty forceful in your wording...

it's pretty much the same situation, except he's new to it.
Which is precisely what makes it different ;)

sounds like the same exact problem. we both have to balance being overly dominant in debate with caring about people's feelings. we both have both traits, and those traits won't go away.
Yes, but you approach this problem from OPPOSITE positions. That's why the solution for your problem is not going to be the solution for Kiddo's problem.

Let's take a more down-to-earth example. Let's say you suffer from chronic hypoglycemia. You've spent years fighting hypoglycemia. Your problem, your goal, is to maintain the level of your blood sugar *up constantly*. Then you meet this person who's got diabetes, but they indulged in too much cake at lunch, and in order to compensate took too much insulin, and now they are definitely having an hypoglycemia episode. What are you going to tell them? Are you going to teach them how to maintain a high level of blood sugar constantly, or are you going to remind them to be careful not to send their blood sugar up too high in the first place? They have the same problem as you do *at that moment in time*, but given your and their history, you two actually have the *opposite* problem on the long term. You need to eat more carbs, they need to eat less of them.

See what I mean?

Your "problem" is: I'm too nice with people, I need to learn to defend my need for serious intellectual discussions.

Kiddo's "problem" is: I've become too harsh with people, I want to get some of my niceness back.

On the surface, those two problems may look similar. In depth though, they are the opposite of each other. You need to move further towards the "mean" end of the spectrum, while Kiddo wants to move back further towards the "nice" end of the spectrum. So obviously, you can't both apply the same method, can you?
 

cascadeco

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
9,083
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
BlueWing said:
The following picture is often paradigmatic of the way the INFJ perceives the external world—he lives in the state of antithesis of his own will to promote his inner being through his inner vision and the external world which by virtue of itself thwarts the inner vision.

INJs are often uncomfortable with the world itself, as external environment, by definition is cruel and imposing.

Especially the case for the INFJ as his attunement with the human element reinforces the pre-existing interest in human nature. Incidentally, the fear complex and the greatest problem of all, our demise appears to be of much interest to many INJs. As Ernest Becker has argued the thesis that death is indeed the greatest anxiety of man which is not over the horizon for any of us. This is less of a claim about Becker’s work, but more about his INJ prejudices. As becomes obvious to any sober thinker, most of us do not see far-ahead enough to envisage such a problem, or even less be preoccupied with it. Yet, INJs very much do for the aforementioned reasons.

However, in regards to dealing with most of the world, this faculty remains inadequate as impersonal judgment will be necessary for that. In order to achieve this, the INFJ shall go to the next best thing, the tertiary Introverted Thinking faculty. This is where the vision becomes a notion that the INFJ becomes clearly aware of. Without the support of Introverted Thinking, the INFJ will have a very strong hunch and a feeling in favor of their perceptions, but will not be able to certify that their ideas are sound as they’d lack the objective means to prove that. Once Introverted Thinking has been properly applied, the vision of the INFJ will not be an unintelligible flow of perceptions, but is an entity shaped in coherent and intelligible units of ideas. Introverted Thinking by and large is first and foremost used to support the vision of the Introverted Intuition and the Feeling oriented goals of the INFJ.

Since the INFJ is primarily concerned with their inner vision, yet rely on Extroverted Feeling to make conscious assessments of their ideas, they tend to be most concerned with emending the external code of behavior. Their approach to Extroverted Feeling is not at all like that of SFJs who strive to preserve status quo. INFJs tend to have a highly innovative approach to ethic and on this account are not afraid to question the current set of mores and societal ethics. By contrast they take for it to be their primary task to influence the ethical convention to become as humane as possible. The INFJ much differs from the ENFJ in the regard that the former is much more individualistic than the latter. The ENFJ sees himself as part of the external ethical convention, yet the INFJ sees the ethical convention as means to the end of concocting the best vision possible. On this account, the INFJ strives to meet the external standard of ethic to the end of furthering his vision and will not feel gratified after having met the standard alone. Behaving as dominant Fe types would, or seeing the external standard of ethic as an end in itself goes against the grain of the INFJ, in this regard the INFJ holds more in common with the INFP.

Yet, despite the external focus, the external behavior for the INFJ, stems from the inner motives and hunches. Even though the External standard may be the only way for the INFJ to properly assess his actions, the decisions made by virtue of the external standard will not be acceptable to the INFJ unless they align with the voice of Introverted Intuition and hunches.

Clearly, the INFJ sees the satisfaction of the external standard as only means to the end and not an end in itself as it is for the typical Judging types.

Because of the extremely abstract nature of the Introverted Intuition, properly assessing such a vision as it is possible for the ENPs is out of the question for INJs. This leads to further internal conflict for the INFJ as their Judgment oriented mindset vehemently insists on meeting concrete external agenda which is ostensible to all—one that has a beginning and an end. This is manifestly impossible for the INFJ because the vision in itself takes on the other world, continuously flowing aura. It certainly does not appear to have a beginning nor an end and a sober thinker must deem the mere idea of pigeonholing such a grandiose vision into simplistic conventional moulds that the Extroverted Judgment insists on employing inadequate. Accomplishing this for the INFJ is even more difficult than for the INTJ as the INFJ is not exactly sure what the external standard must be like due to the lack of objectivity of their auxiliary faculty.

Incidentally, Introverted Intuition reaches for the heavens that not a word of ours could describe, yet Extroverted Judgment of the INJ refuses to recognize any notion that cannot be properly depicted in conventional terms as substantial. Thus, the Feeling of the INFJ promptly declines the vision, and to make matters worse, the negative Ti sends them down the loop of self-denigration and dismissal of their lofty visions. This is the nature of the INFJs, negative, self-critical Introverted Thinking faculty. Because this function is aimed inwards, it is particularly focused on dissecting the visions propounded by the Introverted Intuition. When not properly handled the Introverted Thinking could appear to be nearly an anathema to the primary faculty of the INFJ, the Introverted Intuition.

Even though Extroverted Feeling of the INFJ would have long asserted the vision should be dismissed because it is not relevant to a clear-cut external agenda, the vision continues to be the primary driving force of the INJ, and rarely hesitates to do different or the opposite from what the Extroverted Judgment prescribes. The INTJ may maintain a cool and unperturbed demeanor despite the inner chaos, yet all the INFJ has for consolations is their orderly and systematic approach to the external world offered by their Extroverted Judgment. However, this does not provide the INFJ with the consolation of objective and rational thought that the INTJ relies on heavily. This only exacerbates many problems the INFJ is forced to deal with as a result of their chaotic inner vision. Clearly, the INFJ is in need of a savior, there needs to be a higher purpose, yet even this is not accessible to this type because of the negative and self-critical nature of Introverted Thinking. The vision of the INFJ insists on depth and authenticity, yet the standard of Extroverted Judgment is inadequate for this as it is much too rigid and superficial. Introverted Judgment is necessary in order for the INFJ to find the inner peace and stability introverted Intuition longs for. Moreover, since Extroverted Feeling could also go corrupt very easily if the INFJ is to be unbalanced, in such a case this type will be almost wholly without judgment and rely on extremely abstract, amorphous hunches that are nearly impossible for one to make sense of.

When the INFJ is out of tune with the auxiliary faculty, he may be stuck deeply within his head with no sound way of engaging the external world.

However, in order to engage Extroverted Feeling the INFJ must engage the external world. This is anathema to such a type as interacting with the external environment tends to be difficult and painful due to lack of attunement with the inferior Extroverted Perception. Because the INFJ is unable to interact with the external environment, he is not able to properly access Extroverted Feeling and receive the much needed emotional support and ingredients for balance. The more cut off the INFJ becomes from the External world and Extroverted Feeling, the more he looses touch with conscious judgment and is swept away by the amorphous perceptions that overwhelm him. He lives in reality of his own, almost wholly bereft of that outside of him.

I've enjoyed reading this. I've cut out some of the paragraphs that really caught my eye and resonated with me quite a bit.(this so reminds me of some of my blog posts, hahaha)

I have some minor quibbles with Se, but it's more on a personal level, in that I think I have pretty good access to it and I don't think I really have the 'fear' of it that you have cited is typical of INFJ's. I embrace aspects of it that I think are meaningful, useful, or necessary for my health/balance, and reject other aspects.

Perhaps the distinction is that when external conditions infringe upon me or impact me in a negative way (impacting my lifestyle/vision/views), I'll have a problem w/ it, and in that sense might be 'afraid' or I might need more time than for other types to adjust my inner world to fit the changing external one. And that might be more what you were referencing when discussing the Se function. I'd have to think about it some more.
 

zarc

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
2,629
MBTI Type
Zzzz
Firstly...whoa, to read...

So, I became curious and wondered if BW had perhaps stolen all these posts or if he'd written them elsewhere. So, far, it's that he's written them elsewhere.

Well, he wrote word for word at INTPc on Feb 24-- baring a few slight wordings which he's added here...but nearly ALL is almost the same.

However, it was written as INTJ profile. He just reveresed the wording for INFJs here---

I don't have time to better respond just yet, would that he'd posted this a few days ago when I had time aplenty. Anyone else may do so for me. :D

That isn't to say I'm disagreeing with what's written nor that it's a crime to regurgitate your own writing (no harm doing that, at all)--. I just wonder that he didn't give a Disclaimer this time or some notice that he'd already written the nearly exact posts but just so happened to switch a few wordings here and there to suit the INFJ this time.

If anyone else has mentioned this, forgive me for repeating it. I've mostly skimmed the responses.
 

Kiddo

Furry Critter with Claws
Joined
Sep 25, 2007
Messages
2,790
MBTI Type
OMNi
:shock:

Wandering and dissonance, that was certainly an interesting discussion.

I still believe I need a balance between my emotional Fe needs (being nice and accepting of others) and my intellectual Ti needs (finding people who I find interesting and who will challenge me). I know if I embrace the latter, then I will be "mean", because my personal prejudices and preconceptions will get the better of me, and at some point I may become narcissistic or develop a psychosis. But it sounds like if I embraced the former, as dissonance at one point did, then I would become bored and resentful for not living up to my potential.

Wandering, you suggested I find different people who can meet each of my needs, but I think it would be better for myself and those I am with, to express both of my needs with everyone I encounter. If I were to hang around a bunch of people who I found it fun to be with but who didn't intellectually challenge me, then I think I would eventually resent them because I would feel I was "dumbing myself down". And if I were to hang around a bunch of people who were very intelligent but whom I didn't feel compelled to be kind towards, then I think I would eventually become abusive toward them because I would be more interested in being right than maintaining a relationship.

It sounds to me, that if I wish to maintain my sanity, I think I'm going to have to learn how to establish boundaries within myself so that I can remain amiable when I'm intellectual and intellectual when I'm being amiable. In that essence, when I'm debating a bunch of INTJs, then I won't become dominating and abusive, whereas when I'm with a bunch of friends whose conversations I don't find very intelligent, I can assert my intelligence so I don't become bored or resentful of those friends. As long as I am both amiable and intellectual, with each person I meet, then I will continue to be authentic and take care of my own needs. The key would be to express both those needs, and never to deny myself one or the other because that will eventually lead to problems.

That way, if people don't like me for being me, it is their problem and they can stay away from me. It's not a big loss since I would probably become resentful or abusive towards them if I were to try to accommodate them over my own needs. At least, that is what my reasoning is telling me.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Firstly...whoa, to read...

So, I became curious and wondered if BW had perhaps stolen all these posts or if he'd written them elsewhere. So, far, it's that he's written them elsewhere.

Well, he wrote word for word at INTPc on Feb 24-- baring a few slight wordings which he's added here...but nearly ALL is almost the same.

However, it was written as INTJ profile. He just reveresed the wording for INFJs here---

I don't have time to better respond just yet, would that he'd posted this a few days ago when I had time aplenty. Anyone else may do so for me. :D

That isn't to say I'm disagreeing with what's written nor that it's a crime to regurgitate your own writing (no harm doing that, at all)--. I just wonder that he didn't give a Disclaimer this time or some notice that he'd already written the nearly exact posts but just so happened to switch a few wordings here and there to suit the INFJ this time.

If anyone else has mentioned this, forgive me for repeating it. I've mostly skimmed the responses.


Some modifications have been made to section I on Introverted Intuition, Section II was radically rearranged, section III almost altogether re-written, and section IV almost entirely unaltered.
 

zarc

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
2,629
MBTI Type
Zzzz
Some modifications have been made to section I on Introverted Intuition, Section II was radically rearranged, section III almost altogether re-written, and section IV almost entirely unaltered.

Really. I sincerely beg to differ, especially by what you must define as "radically rearranged" and "almost altogether re-written".

I find it odd how quickly you'd jump to respond at what seems to be an accusation (miiiiine :nice:) intsead of responding to the others. I figure it's because I've brought negative attention towards you.

Well....explain to me how these paragraphs are SOME what different than nearly EXACTLY the SAME, please. I'll only take a few paragraphs from each INTJ and INFJ 'profiles' as you have far too many to tackle, my dear. Rather, I'd have too many to tackle-- Let's begin with Section 1 which you said has "some modificatons"! :D

INTJ profile on INTPc, 2 paragraphs from Section I:

The accentuation here was on the locomotives and animals because the Introverted Sensing type, the type that the previous quotation meant to depict is focused primarily on concrete things--or sensations. Hence, he anthropomorphizes concrete entities. Or assumes that the objects in themselves have much to do with his own personal qualities. This is precisely the reason why we often have seen eyes on the Moon, the nose on the sun, and the Sword in the hands of the clowd. So our mythologies have compelled us to see!

However, since Introverted Intuition, the function by which the INTJ is lead is abstract, it tends not to see the external world in this fashion. However, the relationship it has to abstract perceptions is indeed much analogous to the relationship Introverted Sensing has to concrete data. Thus, Introverted Sensing anthropomorphizes the physical world, Introverted Intuition, almost wholly without a doubt, anthropomorphizes abstractions and ideas. For this reason it is not uncommon for INJ philosophers and scientists to be observed deeming some ideas as wicked and others as benevolent without having any reasonable explanations for such taxonomy. That is because there truly is not an explanation for such a thing, as judgments of the like reflect more about them personally rather than about the matter they have commented on and therefore often serves as evidence of their personal biases and prejudices.

INFJ profile MBTIc, 2 paragraphs from Section I:

The accentuation here was on the locomotives and animals because the Introverted Sensing type, the type that the previous quotation meant to depict is focused primarily on concrete things--or sensations. Hence, he anthropomorphizes concrete entities. Or assumes that the objects in themselves have much to do with his own personal qualities. This is precisely the reason why we often have seen eyes on the Moon, the nose on the sun, and the Sword in the hands of the cloud. So our mythologies have compelled us to see!

However, since Introverted Intuition, the function by which the INFJ is led is abstract, it tends not to see the external world in this fashion. However, the relationship it has to abstract perceptions is indeed much analogous to the relationship Introverted Sensing has to concrete data. Thus, Introverted Sensing anthropomorphizes the physical world, Introverted Intuition, almost wholly without a doubt, anthropomorphizes abstractions and ideas. For this reason it is not uncommon for INJ philosophers and scientists to be observed deeming some ideas as wicked and others as benevolent without having any reasonable explanations for such taxonomy. That is because there truly is not an explanation for such a thing, as judgments of the like reflect more about them personally rather than about the matter they have commented on and therefore often serves as evidence of their personal biases and prejudices.

Okay, what the hell, here's a bit more from Section I:

INTJ profile from INTPc continued of Section I!:

Incidentally, Introverted Intuition without the due support of Extroverted Thinking will become very narrow and self-involved, focusing on nothing else but the quintessence of the internal vision. Whatever is not in tune with the internal vision will almost certainly be dubbed evil. Not because there is a reason to believe it undesirable, but simply because the INJ has deemed such idea evil, much like the ISJs often deem certain trains and dogs evil. Incidentally Freud's expression of 'occultism' to depict ideas that disagree with his sexual theory was off-base. He was using this word emotionally, rather than in linguistically precise fashion as he seems to have been carried far away by his hunches. The term 'bulwark' that Freud has used in that fragment is strikingly indicative of the state of mind he has held- that he wished to fortify his vision from all ideas that are even slightly inconsistent with his, as they are simply 'the black tide of occultism'. Freud of course did not give an argument for deeming the things he considered occultism as such, and this seems to evince the subjective bias of his own perceptions.

As a side-note on Introverted Intuition as a function in itself it should be noted that it does not perceive the world in the conventional fashion of Extroverted perception, or in terms of how the individual may contribute to his environment. But perceives the environment in terms of how it strikes its own apparatus of perception. In this respect, the external influx of ideas is imposing and invading to the INJ because his primary purpose is to preserve the vision that he has in mind, which by all rights to him is superior to that of the External vision. Had he had his way, he would freeze the scenario he has in mind and be content with that eternally. The following picture is often paradigmatic of the way the INTJ perceives the external world- he lives in the state of antithesis of his own will to promote his inner being through his inner vision and the external world which by virtue of itself thwarts the inner vision. Nietzsche, an INTJ himself, has argued that two drives inhere within human nature. That of the Will to Power and that of fear. Incidentally, the will to power is the vision the INTJ ought to impose on the external world, and the pursuit of power is necessary, because failure to attain power means succumbing to the terms of the external world and the renunciation of the inner vision, which in itself is unacceptable because the INJ equates this with a negation of existence itself. For this reason, INJs are often uncomfortable with the world itself, as external environment, by definition is cruel and imposing. Very often INJ philosophers asserted that we are at the very essence of our being, are driven by fear. As by Nietzsche's theory, fear is indeed the main drive in human nature. This fear, doubtlessly, represents the INTJ's fear of the External environment, especially of the external, concrete world which is represented by their shadow side of Extroverted sensing.


INFJ profile over hereeeee continued from Section I:

Incidentally, Introverted Intuition without the due support of Extroverted Thinking will become very narrow and self-involved, focusing on nothing else but the quintessence of the internal vision. Whatever is not in tune with the internal vision will almost certainly be dubbed evil. Not because there is a reason to believe it undesirable, but simply because the INJ has deemed such idea evil, much like the ISJs often deem certain trains and dogs evil. Incidentally Freud's expression of 'occultism' to depict ideas that disagree with his sexual theory was off-base. He was using this word emotionally, rather than in linguistically precise fashion as he seems to have been carried far away by his hunches. The term 'bulwark' that Freud has used in that fragment is strikingly indicative of the state of mind he has held- that he wished to fortify his vision from all ideas that are even slightly inconsistent with his, as they are simply 'the black tide of occultism'. Freud of course did not give an argument for deeming the things he considered occultism as such, and this seems to evince the subjective bias of his own perceptions.

As a side-note on Introverted Intuition as a function in itself it should be noted that it does not perceive the world in the conventional fashion of Extroverted perception, or in terms of how the individual may contribute to his environment. But perceives the environment in terms of how it strikes its own apparatus of perception. In this respect, the external influx of ideas is imposing and invading to the INJ because his primary purpose is to preserve the vision that he has in mind, which by all rights to him is superior to that of the External vision. Had he had his way, he would freeze the scenario he has in mind and be content with that eternally. The following picture is often paradigmatic of the way the INFJ perceives the external world- he lives in the state of antithesis of his own will to promote his inner being through his inner vision and the external world which by virtue of itself thwarts the inner vision. Nietzsche, an INTJ , has argued that two drives inhere within human nature. That of the Will to Power and that of fear. Incidentally, the will to power is the vision the INTJ ought to impose on the external world, and the pursuit of power is necessary, because failure to attain power means succumbing to the terms of the external world and the renunciation of the inner vision, which in itself is unacceptable because the INJ equates this with a negation of existence itself. For this reason, INJs are often uncomfortable with the world itself, as external environment, by definition is cruel and imposing. Very often INJ philosophers asserted that we are at the very essence of our being, are driven by fear. As by Nietzsche's theory, fear is indeed the main drive in human nature. This fear, doubtlessly, represents the INJ's fear of the External environment, especially of the external, concrete world which is represented by their shadow side of Extroverted sensing.

Oiii, this is only of "some" modifications of Section I! How are they "some"? Please explain what "some" means to you? I really don't have time just yet, so I'll continue with the rest later-

I figured you might've posted that INTJ profile here as well and you did in January, so you posted the same INTJ profile at INTPc later in February (so, my mistake in thinking it was there first~). And you didn't explain to me as to why you wouldn't give any notice of disclaimer (or w/e) at the beginning of your posts to indicate you'd already written the same stuff elsewhere. Not that you'd have to, but you know, for those of us who wouldn't be familiar that you have a different username elsewhere might think you've stolen your own writing if we'd guessed the same/similar writing was posted elsewhere and perhaps by another person- as I wouldn't have known as I'm a new member- but ah, I'd inferred a bit from posts made by others about you and someone confirmed it for me when I wanted to be certain- Oh, and of course, you might try mentioning that you have similarly written profiles b/w your INTJ/INFJ profiles in case people become suspect that you've just rehashed your own writing by substituting one Type for the other. Have you done the same with your ENTP/ENFP or INTP/INFP ones? (I have yet to check). Again, nothing wrong if you regurgitate your own stuff- but uh, lacking some creativity, mate?

I'm curious. Why bother responding to me only when you have so many others who've praised your writing or have commented on it at least?
 

heart

heart on fire
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
8,456
well Ni is the same for both INFJs and INTJs, so whatever.

Exactly. I would not expect the INTP-INFP profiles to be that similar but there would be more similar with the INFP-ISFP profiles because of the shared dom Fi.


I found BlueWing's INFJ profile very interesting and very spot on with much about the INFJ in my life. Very helpful to gain new insight into the INFJ.
 

zarc

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
2,629
MBTI Type
Zzzz
well Ni is the same for both INFJs and INTJs, so whatever.

I don't mind what's written or even that they're both mostly written word for word or some sections are written exactly word for word or with a slight alteration (although, it's not being creative but whatever), it's that he later said he'd made "some modifications" for Section I when he did not make "some" and then "radically re-arranged" Section II when it's not radical- etc

And then, why did he only comment to ME as I'd written something that could 'expose him' (if he felt that was what I was doing) or at least cast a negative light on him instead of responding to you or to others who'd actually commented about his writing? I find that suspect- He didn't comment on a few others who complained in his other ENP Ne thread recently and he certaintly could've as he's posted this thread and I think the ENFP profile is new today too or yesterday. However, I didn't put down his writing, I just showcased how they were the same (or most of it is) for his INTJ/INFJ profiles. Why jump to comment on that and not attempt to defend yourself against others who'd just complained about you for writing things they disagreed with in another Thread?

Why not even mention that he'd posted his INTJ profile (or any other, I don't know yet) elsewhere instead of making it appear as though it's new? Not that he'd have to, but it makes me wonder as well.Or not comment on it after I had?

Oh crap, Deja Vu !_!

Anyhoo, I'm waiting patiently BW. Please enlighten me.
 
Top