[MBTI General] Why NFs think that they understand NTs ?

[Salomé]

The understanding is there. As I said, I have no problem discussing the other side and looking at it as point of interest. To me as an NF it is also vital to see why others do believe in that point of view, as I crave to understand. However, to pretend you are in fact very much in agreeance with their POV only to later say you were not, is somethign I will usually pick up on and if not, will destroy the trust we have between us when I find out.

It is tiring to constantly be looking for lies and deceit in others. Furthermore, it's not pleasant. If I need to do it with the people I consider my friends, I will opt to remove them from my circle of friends so I don't have to constantly keep an eye on them and watch them for backstabbing behavior.

You don't even understand that you don't understand, to paraphrase heart's Kierkegaard quote.

Only when you master the arguments of the opposite side you are really ready to defend yours.

Thanks for validating my answer then. If this is in fact what you do, I feel justified in blocking the conversation or leaving
I have no patience with liars or deceivers. Though I can see the merit in your last sentence, this type of situation is just nausiating to me and makes me wanna leave, pronto.

How can you understand if you block and/or leave? You're having an entirely inappropriate emotional reaction to someone who is merely exploring possibilities. This has happened to me countless times when debating with Fs. It's equally frustrating/exhausting to be the T on the other side of this sort of hysterical reaction. Taking a position in a debate which you don't necessarily hold is not a crime. It's simple a way of trying to ensure balance. For some people, balance and thorough exploration of the issues is more important than reaching agreement or feeling personally comfortable with an outcome.

 

[Virtual ghost]

How can you understand if you block and/or leave? You're having an entirely inappropriate emotional reaction to someone who is merely exploring possibilities. This has happened to me countless times when debating with Fs. It's equally frustrating/exhausting to be the T on the other side of this sort of hysterical reaction. Taking a position in a debate which you don't necessarily hold is not a crime. It's simple a way of trying to ensure balance. For some people, balance and thorough exploration of the issues is more important than reaching agreement or feeling personally comfortable with an outcome.

I totally agree with you.
The problem that a typical FP is afraid of being judged. Which is probably becuse they are afraid of conflict in general and they are afraid of it because they usually don't go well in them.


Also they can't watch when someone starts playing with their "values" but they don't understand that there is nothing personal in this.
I am sorry but I simply can't accept your claims without testing them. I am not even sure that I would be able to do this even if I force myself.

 

[heart]

I totally agree with you.
The problem that a typical FP is afraid of being judged. Which is probably becuse they are afraid of conflict in general and they are afraid of it because they usually don't go well in them.

Do you realize this is an...*gasp*...assumption about why FP don't like to engage in conflict?

This is the same thing you people keep harping on about that you don't like about Feelers. The very reason for the generation of this thread.

All humans make assumptions.

 

[Tigerlily]

Do you realize this is an...*gasp*...assumption about why FP don't like to engage in conflict?

This is the same thing you people keep harping on about that you don't like about Feelers. The very reason for the generation of this thread.

All humans make assumptions.

i see nothing wrong with lumping groups of people together. it makes things less complicated, don't you think?

 

[Stanton Moore]

i see nothing wrong with lumping groups of people together. it makes things less complicated, don't you think?

Especially when your 'thesis' requires it.

 

[Salomé]

Do you realize this is an...*gasp*...assumption about why FP don't like to engage in conflict?

This is the same thing you people keep harping on about that you don't like about Feelers. The very reason for the generation of this thread.

I would argue it's not really the same thing. He is postulating a theory which is open to be challenged. And he is abstracting to cover the group, rather than singling out an individual. MBTI is all about this so surely no-one who happily self-identifies with a four-letter MBTI designation is going to object to being classified along these lines? And that Fs don't enjoy conflict is pretty much a given, isn't it?

The main objection in the thread seems to be NTs taking issue with NFs who have made assumptions about how the NT feels or what their personal motivations are in a given situation.

FWIW, I don't think he's right (about the fear of judgment). I think it's probably closer to fear of rejection - perhaps that is what he meant.

What do you think is the reason?

 

[Athenian200]

I totally agree with you.
The problem that a typical FP is afraid of being judged. Which is probably becuse they are afraid of conflict in general and they are afraid of it because they usually don't go well in them.

I don't think FPs are afraid of being judged at all. They'll cling to their values no matter what other people feel about them, and then pretend to be open-minded by simply avoiding the issue.

I think all Ps tend to avoid conflict, because they're very unsure of themselves on some level, and don't want to have to justify their reasoning or values to other people, so that they can comfortably hold on to them no matter what.

I've seen this in all types of IPs, although only a few are extreme about it. Most of them are actually fairly reasonable, though.

 

[Salomé]

I think all Ps tend to avoid conflict

Do you know any NTPs?

 

[JocktheMotie]

I think all Ps tend to avoid conflict, because they're very unsure of themselves on some level, and don't want to have to justify their reasoning or values to other people, so that they can comfortably hold on to them no matter what.

El. Oh. El.

You've been on fire lately Athenian.

 

[garbage]

FWIW, I don't think he's right (about the fear of judgment). I think it's probably closer to fear of rejection - perhaps that is what he meant.

What do you think is the reason?

I think all Ps tend to avoid conflict, because they're very unsure of themselves on some level, and don't want to have to justify their reasoning or values to other people, so that they can comfortably hold on to them no matter what.

Avoidance of conflict or doesn't necessarily need to stem from any sort of fear or insecurity. It's probably just prioritization of harmony and personal integrity over seeking the objective truth.


It's interesting that NTs think that they understand NFs in this thread, too.

Kind of puts a spin on the thread and tells us that we're all looking at each other through our own lenses and wondering why the other doesn't see exactly what we do.

 

[Orangey]

I think all Ps tend to avoid conflict, because they're very unsure of themselves on some level, and don't want to have to justify their reasoning or values to other people, so that they can comfortably hold on to them no matter what.

Um, no.

 

[Virtual ghost]

FWIW, I don't think he's right (about the fear of judgment). I think it's probably closer to fear of rejection - perhaps that is what he meant.

You are right, my thinking goes more in that direction but for me this is pretty much the same thing. Since judgement is the beginning of rejection.
So when we start to play our game they strat to think that the have stoped to like them.

I don't think FPs are afraid of being judged at all. They'll cling to their values no matter what other people feel about them, and then pretend to be open-minded by simply avoiding the issue.

I think all Ps tend to avoid conflict, because they're very unsure of themselves on some level, and don't want to have to justify their reasoning or values to other people, so that they can comfortably hold on to them no matter what.

I've seen this in all types of IPs, although only a few are extreme about it. Most of them are actually fairly reasonable, though.

You are right that Ps are not fans of a conflict but there are large differences inside the group.

I think that FPs can chling to their values and hold them in conflict but that does not mean that they like it.

 

[kyuuei]

First I will say that I am not posting this as a provocation I am really interested in this topic.

If you feel the need to start out your thread like this...

While you tend to overlook/ignore out thinking side on regular basis.

I think there are a number of times that T's overlook and blatantly ignore our F side, or even worse, talk about it like it's a sort of weakness.

But in general you are not too interested in our thinking side and even if you are you are still more interested in our feelings.

Can you honestly claim that you are interested in our emotions and feelings? Usually, T's only want T responses, and dislike emotions invading their conversations. So why would you think F's would react any differently?

On the other hand how can you fully understand someone if you "ignore" the largest part of them?

I agree with this entirely.

 

[Laurie]

Is that why p's aren't embracing conflict in this thread?

 

[Salomé]

Avoidance of conflict or doesn't necessarily need to stem from any sort of fear or insecurity. It's probably just prioritization of harmony and personal integrity over seeking the objective truth.

What about when harmony and personal integrity conflict?
Personal integrity is not opposed to seeking objective truth if you are NT. Quite the reverse is true.

It's interesting that NTs think that they understand NFs in this thread, too.

Not I. Read my other posts.

 

[INA]

I don't think FPs are afraid of being judged at all. They'll cling to their values no matter what other people feel about them, and then pretend to be open-minded by simply avoiding the issue.

Plausible.

I think all Ps tend to avoid conflict, because they're very unsure of themselves on some level, and don't want to have to justify their reasoning or values to other people, so that they can comfortably hold on to them no matter what.

Wut?
What's your basis for this? Doesn't jive with either IRL or experiences on this board.

 

[Thalassa]

I don't think FPs are afraid of being judged at all. They'll cling to their values no matter what other people feel about them, and then pretend to be open-minded by simply avoiding the issue.

I think all Ps tend to avoid conflict, because they're very unsure of themselves on some level, and don't want to have to justify their reasoning or values to other people, so that they can comfortably hold on to them no matter what.

I've seen this in all types of IPs, although only a few are extreme about it. Most of them are actually fairly reasonable, though.

Actually, I don't avoid all conflict, and if I feel *really* strongly about something I'd probably fight someone to the death about it.

The way you bash IPs is ridiculous. You do it constantly.

 

[Thalassa]

To respond to the original post: to be perfectly honest with you, my experience thus far on this board is that some NTs read stuff into what I've written that was never even there. I've been accused of saying something I never even said by two NTs on here so far. That isn't to say that all NTs do that - because they don't - anymore than all NFs think they know you emotionally.

Now, I think IRL an NF may be more likely to prod an NT to see what they might be feeling, especially in a romantic relationship, but I don't know about otherwise.

All I know is that all of these stereotypes are really starting to grate on my nerves.

 

[BlackCat]

I don't think FPs are afraid of being judged at all. They'll cling to their values no matter what other people feel about them, and then pretend to be open-minded by simply avoiding the issue.

I think all Ps tend to avoid conflict, because they're very unsure of themselves on some level, and don't want to have to justify their reasoning or values to other people, so that they can comfortably hold on to them no matter what.

I've seen this in all types of IPs, although only a few are extreme about it. Most of them are actually fairly reasonable, though.

At first I was like
Lately you seem to have been making a lot of stereotypical points that don't make much sense really and aren't really applicable, you might wanna watch out for that in case someone a bit meaner decides to bite than me.
Then I was like

How untrue. I don't honestly understand how you got to this conclusion about P types either, avoiding conflict is a personality trait, not a type trait. Not wanting to express reasoning "just because" is also just a personality trait and not a type trait.

All I know is that all of these stereotypes are really starting to grate on my nerves.

Agreed x1000, it amazes me how some of these stereotypes can be believed to be related to type. Some of them can, but a lot of them can't, and are just personality traits.

 

[garbage]

What about when harmony and personal integrity conflict?
Personal integrity is not opposed to seeking objective truth if you are NT. Quite the reverse is true.

Point taken. Rather than priorities, I should have used the two groups' differing definitions of personal integrity as the reason for the differing mindsets between them.

Not I. Read my other posts.

Sorry. More the exactly parallel mindset that the OP claims that NFs understand NTs' motivations when they do not, yet flat-out states his "understanding" the NFs' motivations in conflict avoidance when it's absolutely clear that he doesn't understand at all.

I hated using the NT generalization myself, but I so wanted to hit that parallel home