[NF] Essence of People

[nolla]

I've been thinking about people that I have hard time to level with. It seems to come down to me not being able to see their essence. To not have a feeling of what they are about. I am guessing this is an NF type of communication problem. So, tell me...

1) What is the essence?

Soul? Pattern of body language? Pattern of behavior?

2) How it could be missing?

It isn't there? It is inconsistent? I don't see the pattern?

3) How can you find it if it isn't there?

Please, don't keep your thoughts any way limited to the questions...

 

[kiddykat]

Hi Nolla,

I completely get what you're saying.. I honestly think that people who are opposite from our temperament can say the exact same thing.. It's very much so a problem in interpersonal communication that exists when there is friction due to differences.

The 'essence' of a person? For me- the 'whole package'- it's the vibe that I get from them- if we're on the same wave-length or not, an idiosyncratic feeling that's indescribable.

When I don't get the essence of a person, it's usually, because something about them is so difficult that it's hard for me to really mesh with.. something about them in their personality that's so restrained, uptight, routine-like and restricting that I don't get.. almost to the point of being a cross hybrid between human & machine. That's the best of my ability of describing the essence of a person I don't quite understand. lol

 

[nolla]

I honestly think that people who are opposite from our temperament can say the exact same thing.. It's very much so a problem in interpersonal communication that exists when there is friction due to differences.

The 'essence' of a person? For me- the 'whole package'- it's the vibe that I get from them- if we're on the same wave-length or not, an idiosyncratic feeling that's indescribable.

Do you think it is more like you don't like a person that you aren't on the same wave length with, or is it more like you don't get what he is about. To me, I can tolerate people I dislike better than the people I don't get. There is something freaky about them. If I don't like someone the communication is still a lot easier than with someone I don't get any vibes from.

When I don't get the essence of a person, it's usually, because something about them is so difficult that it's hard for me to really mesh with.. something about them in their personality that's so restrained, uptight, routine-like and restricting that I don't get.. almost to the point of being a cross hybrid between human & machine. That's the best of my ability of describing the essence of a person I don't quite understand. lol

This sounds familiar. There's always some hint of "mechanic" kind of behavior. Even if they are being funny and easygoing...

 

[Kestrel]

It seems to me that if you aren't getting *any* vibes, there might be some kind of interference. This is where it gets murky because it could be you, it could be them, or it's possibly both of you. Sometimes people don't want you to see their essence and they do a damn fine job of hiding it. Other times you get an essence but you wonder if it's real or authentic.

Personally, I'm kinda picky about who I share my "full spectrum" with. But that still won't stop me from being friendly and open to people who want to talk to me.

But yes, idiosyncratic details help me gauge if the person I'm dealing with is worth sharing my time with. If they speak alot, do their actions match their words or are they mostly hot air? If they're quiet, what does their body language tell me?

I don't know if this helped, but it was worth a shot.

 

[nolla]

Personally, I'm kinda picky about who I share my "full spectrum" with. But that still won't stop me from being friendly and open to people who want to talk to me.

This is not an issue usually. If someone doesn't want to be like all open, that's fine, no one is open anyways. Or if someone has a fake surface, there still is something visible that is really their essence. But, I am totally puzzled when I can't get a grip of anything concrete in there. And I find it very hard to define what is it that should be there. It seems like they are missing a soul. And then it isn't anymore about whether or not I want to spend time with them, it becomes closer to whether I can understand their language. I hear the words but I don't know where they are coming from.

I think I am making this conversation more blurry as I try to explain it.

 

[Totenkindly]

I've tried to define this before, and I can't. You can't explain an intuitive process sufficiently through linear writing, just as you cannot explain how a perception works or why -- you can merely describe what you see or do not see.

Most people, I interact with and I get a very strong imprint of who they are. Like I have "seen their face" and then I can recognize them anywhere we meet later. I just know who they are and what they'll probably do -- I would definitely label it as "essence." I "know" them.

But there's a small percentage of people whose face I cannot see. I can't figure out whether that is a problem with my perception, or whether they truly have a face at all, or some other scenario. I can't connect with them, I can't anticipate their probable behavior/comments, I can't do anything at all with them. I have no idea who they actually ARE, although I can remember the surface-level interference.

 

[nolla]

Most people, I interact with and I get a very strong imprint of who they are. Like I have "seen their face" and then I can recognize them anywhere we meet later. I just know who they are and what they'll probably do -- I would definitely label it as "essence." I "know" them.

You are definitely talking about the same thing as I am. For a while I thought that maybe I am describing something that isn't there.. or something I imagined.

But there's a small percentage of people whose face I cannot see. I can't figure out whether that is a problem with my perception, or whether they truly have a face at all, or some other scenario. I can't connect with them, I can't anticipate their probable behavior/comments, I can't do anything at all with them. I have no idea who they actually ARE, although I can remember the surface-level interference.

Yes. Have you ever asked from other people if they have the same feeling about that particular person?

I've tried to define this before, and I can't. You can't explain an intuitive process sufficiently through linear writing, just as you cannot explain how a perception works or why -- you can merely describe what you see or do not see.

You know, I can't even think about this in the normal way. Very strange. It is like I have no conscious way to explain it. The essence just comes from somewhere and hoovers around the people and tells me how they are. It is like having a Merriam-Webster definition tagged to the person, but in a language that cannot be translated into this conscious language...

 

[Totenkindly]

You are definitely talking about the same thing as I am. For a while I thought that maybe I am describing something that isn't there.. or something I imagined.

...You know, I can't even think about this in the normal way. Very strange. It is like I have no conscious way to explain it. The essence just comes from somewhere and hoovers around the people and tells me how they are. It is like having a Merriam-Webster definition tagged to the person, but in a language that cannot be translated into this conscious language...

It's sort of why I find "what type is so-and-so" conversations frustrating. A lot of my typing is more intuitive, seeing a person all at once in that mental flash, and any explanation I have for it always seems to be constructed after the fact. I use Thinking to check and vet the intuition, but it's just frustrating to not be able to explain what I'm seeing and why (and honestly, there is no "why" -- I just "see" it). You can't explain a cat by dissecting it and describing all of its component pieces; same thing for much of my type reading, the whole is far bigger than the collection of its parts.

As an analogy, I feel like I'm in an art gallery and everyone's huddled around a painting and saying things like, "Oh it must be Whistler's Mother, because it's got a woman in it!" or "The light blue coloration of the paint clearly leads me to suspect Monet, since he used blue a lot," and meanwhile I'm just there looking right at the Mona Lisa and wondering why everyone is confused... or if I'm going psychotic.

We're funny.

Yes. Have you ever asked from other people if they have the same feeling about that particular person?

Informally.

Would you like to compare notes in PM?

 

[nolla]

It's sort of why I find "what type is so-and-so" conversations frustrating. A lot of my typing is more intuitive, seeing a person all at once in that mental flash, and any explanation I have for it always seems to be constructed after the fact. I use Thinking to check and vet the intuition, but it's just frustrating to not be able to explain what I'm seeing and why (and honestly, there is no "why" -- I just "see" it). You can't explain a cat by dissecting it and describing all of its component pieces; same thing for much of my type reading, the whole is far bigger than the collection of its parts.

I think this is the reason I am bad at typing people...

Would you like to compare notes in PM?

WHO IS IT!

 

[Totenkindly]

I think this is the reason I am bad at typing people...



WHO IS IT!

YOU!

ha ha
j/k

 

[nolla]

Awww.... you rip the soul right out of my chest...

 

[Totenkindly]

Awww.... you rip the soul right out of my chest...

I knew that would happen.

Anyway... maybe some others will participate with the small location move.

 

[Gauche]

Usually, I can understand almost any human being (yea, twas said pathetically).
At first, i watch them and i try to get, what makes them tick, then, only after some time (depends), i usually "get them". I mean, I just start to understand who they are, and why they do what they do. I cannot rather catch immediate motives very accurately, but i have general insight who they are, and they wont surpsise me then, ususally. Id explain it like you are getting into a new concept, and for some time you are struggling with it, and after time you just understand it flawlessly. So i "get" the people and i "know, what makes them tick". Its kinda hard to explain with words, but you sure know that, when you just know "what that person is about".
About time - it depends on complexity of person, some people i "get" after around 2weeks, some may confuse me for half a year, but then just to realize they was pretty easy, only confusing my up and down with inconsistency. (assume you meet that person day to day, e.g. in school, because 2weeks is pretty relative term otherwise )

So maybe a little bit
i didnt read all the posts im lazy
but maybe i put some light into discussion (maybe)

 

[Eruca]

I've tried to define this before, and I can't. You can't explain an intuitive process sufficiently through linear writing, just as you cannot explain how a perception works or why -- you can merely describe what you see or do not see.

Most people, I interact with and I get a very strong imprint of who they are. Like I have "seen their face" and then I can recognize them anywhere we meet later. I just know who they are and what they'll probably do -- I would definitely label it as "essence." I "know" them.

But there's a small percentage of people whose face I cannot see. I can't figure out whether that is a problem with my perception, or whether they truly have a face at all, or some other scenario. I can't connect with them, I can't anticipate their probable behavior/comments, I can't do anything at all with them. I have no idea who they actually ARE, although I can remember the surface-level interference.

I really didn't get what Nolla was on about untill I read this post. I thought he was talking about some Fi thing I could never truly understand, but it sounds to me like you are just talking of people you have grown to know really well. It sounds like you have intuitively "typed" them in your mind and, more importantly, you recognise and understand what you see there. And so you feel a connection.

Or am I wrong?

 

[nolla]

It sounds to me like you are just talking of people you have grown to know really well. It sounds like you have intuitively "typed" them in your mind and, more importantly, you recognise and understand what you see there. And so you feel a connection.

Or am I wrong?

It basically is some sort of typing, except that there is no words and no type boundaries. It is like when I know someone's essence, I can tell what they might do in a hypothetical situation. But, this is not only for people I know well but for almost everyone. I guess it could be called typing. It is very rare that I don't get the feeling of who they are. Usually I know almost anybodys essence on first meeting (it can get more accurate and correct over time).

Also, when I don't see it in someone, I can't have real empathy for them. I don't know what they feel.

 

[Totenkindly]

I really didn't get what Nolla was on about untill I read this post. I thought he was talking about some Fi thing I could never truly understand, but it sounds to me like you are just talking of people you have grown to know really well. It sounds like you have intuitively "typed" them in your mind and, more importantly, you recognise and understand what you see there. And so you feel a connection. Or am I wrong?

Something like that, except I'm talking about an impression I get very very quickly, even if I don't know many details of their past. I just "know who they are" and how they'll probably respond (or the parameters of their response) in a given situation.

(And usually the impression bears itself out, the more I get to know them.)

Over the summer, I went to meet two people. As soon as I met them, in about 2 minutes I had a very good idea of who each was... and also I knew one of them and I would probably become close friends without even knowing much else about her past and even knowing that we were very different in some ways. Everything I've learned fits with my initial impression, and she's probably one of my most consistent close friends IRL now. I'd know her with my eyes shut.

 

[miss fortune]

This thread title keeps making me think The Essence of Emeril.....

 

[Maverick]

A highly interesting topic.

1) What is the essence?


Essence is that which characterizes an object/subject, the noumenon (non-observable) that is contrasted with the phenomenon (observable) of the object/subject.

Interestingly, essence in French has two meanings. The first is "essence" as in the English language, while the second is "fuel".

The "essence" of something could be considered as both what is characteristic of it and what drives it, what gives it the energy to go forward.

2) How it could be missing?


Essence can be missing when only an impression is given to the observer when in reality there is little behind.

However, everything has an essence. If a thing/person is focused on giving an impression, then that is inherently its' essence.

3) How can you find it if it isn't there?

If it isn't there, the fact that it isn't there constitutes what characterizes it. For example, take the example of a "shallow" person who seems to have no essence because s/he only gives an impression. That person's essence could simply be to give an impression.

 

[nolla]

Interesting twist, Maverick. So, the essence might be motivation... why not. But how could anyone be mainly motivated in giving an impression? If someone was, we could as well say he doesn't have a soul, though.

 

[PinkIceTD]

I've been thinking about people that I have hard time to level with. It seems to come down to me not being able to see their essence. To not have a feeling of what they are about. I am guessing this is an NF type of communication problem. So, tell me...

1) What is the essence?

Soul? Pattern of body language? Pattern of behavior?

2) How it could be missing?

It isn't there? It is inconsistent? I don't see the pattern?

3) How can you find it if it isn't there?

Please, don't keep your thoughts any way limited to the questions...

I am answering this before reading the thread, but I just wanted to comment because I totally get what you are saying.

It's really hard to describe with words, but it's a vibe that I get when i feel people are being genuine (just really themselves). Basically not fake and not slipping into a role, it's also a feeling of trustworthiness about that person that i get.

If I don't get that sense of anchored wholeness about a person, they probably are playing of role of who they think they should be around me and I can't trust that. I don't think it's ever missing, just covered by mind projections.

I don't think the essence of a person is tangible, it can be manifested evidentially through things like their behavior patterns. But that in itself isn't the essence. I also think that you must be able to be aware of it in yourself before you can be aware of it in other people.