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

[BlackCat]

I also would like to add that I think it's ridiculous how AO's threads are treated by the majority of people. He just seems to have a legitimate sense of curiosity about feeling in general, and he's expressing this in his own, misunderstood way. If people would just straight up answer his questions and not flame him and be the nice police, he would get a lot more answers. "You're being mean! Not all NFs are like that!" etc after he's stated that it was a generalization and that he was just curious. People seem to really enter his threads with the intent to flame him due to the up front nature of his posts. It's kind of sad to watch. I think it's funny how people respond and flame him even if his accusation/question doesn't apply to them, like in the NFs pitying themselves thread, I wasn't offended at all because I don't pity myself or make those posts, and those kinds of posts annoy me as well.

It's glaringly obvious that he doesn't care about the context of his text for the most part, and that he just wants to get to the point and have his question answered. He spends most of the time explaining himself because of his apparent insensitivity accused by, you guess it, the nice police.

I think these threads would go a lot smoother if people wouldn't start constant flame wars and would just answer the question. People need to realize that he really means no harm. The flamers just seem to create problems out of the blue for some reason.

Just my 2c though.

 

[Sentura]

I also would like to add that I think it's ridiculous how AO's threads are treated by the majority of people. He just seems to have a legitimate sense of curiosity about feeling in general, and he's expressing this in his own, misunderstood way. If people would just straight up answer his questions and not flame him and be the nice police, he would get a lot more answers. "You're being mean! Not all NFs are like that!" etc after he's stated that it was a generalization and that he was just curious. People seem to really enter his threads with the intent to flame him due to the up front nature of his posts. It's kind of sad to watch. I think it's funny how people respond and flame him even if his accusation/question doesn't apply to them, like in the NFs pitying themselves thread, I wasn't offended at all because I don't pity myself or make those posts, and those kinds of posts annoy me as well.

It's glaringly obvious that he doesn't care about the context of his text for the most part, and that he just wants to get to the point and have his question answered. He spends most of the time explaining himself because of his apparent insensitivity accused by, you guess it, the nice police.

I think these threads would go a lot smoother if people wouldn't start constant flame wars and would just answer the question. People need to realize that he really means no harm. The flamers just seem to create problems out of the blue for some reason.

Just my 2c though.

this is something i could have said. word!

 

[Amargith]

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



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.

And who are you to tell me it is inappropriate? I'm all for fleshing out the other side of the argument, I just don't care for the way in which you propose to do it. If I *know* you're going to assume the other side as a test, try-out or whatever, it's fine with me. If you're just going to pander to my 'sensitivities' by flat lying to me, you will feel the backlash yes. If you are just trying to goad me by taking the other side of the argument without actually believing in it, and do not tell me so, I will leave as there is no point to it. We're arguing over nothing at that point. And I don't enjoy one moment of what you're doing. Nor do I need you to actually take a look at the other side of the argument. I appreciate your input, but not at that cost.

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.

That's a bunch of bullshit. Conflict is just not enjoyable, hence I'll avoid it (as I will after this post as well btw since I've said what I needed to say imo). I have no problem reviewing my values in light of new information, and I'm the first to see the two sides of a conflict, as you need that to resolve conflict and come to a mutual beneficial agreement. I just prefer a different method of getting there than you propose. Yours actually breeds paranoia, mistrust and misunderstanding ime.

 

[heart]

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?

First off, about NT saying that their assumptions are not the same as NF making assumptions.


To address your question: Being out of harmony just feels uncomfortable. I'd rather not deal with it but I will if I have to.

 

[Vanitas]

In my case, NFs just have slightly/ very different idea about (my) happiness/ things that would make me happy. Or the concept of (un)happiness itself. And they would try to help me with that.

Their intentions are good, and I'm thankful that they care, but it's somewhat annoying after awhile. I don't need saving, really. Getting that to some NFs seemed like a lost cause sometimes.

 

[Tallulah]

I also would like to add that I think it's ridiculous how AO's threads are treated by the majority of people. He just seems to have a legitimate sense of curiosity about feeling in general, and he's expressing this in his own, misunderstood way. If people would just straight up answer his questions and not flame him and be the nice police, he would get a lot more answers. "You're being mean! Not all NFs are like that!" etc after he's stated that it was a generalization and that he was just curious. People seem to really enter his threads with the intent to flame him due to the up front nature of his posts. It's kind of sad to watch. I think it's funny how people respond and flame him even if his accusation/question doesn't apply to them, like in the NFs pitying themselves thread, I wasn't offended at all because I don't pity myself or make those posts, and those kinds of posts annoy me as well.

It's glaringly obvious that he doesn't care about the context of his text for the most part, and that he just wants to get to the point and have his question answered. He spends most of the time explaining himself because of his apparent insensitivity accused by, you guess it, the nice police.

I think these threads would go a lot smoother if people wouldn't start constant flame wars and would just answer the question. People need to realize that he really means no harm. The flamers just seem to create problems out of the blue for some reason.

Just my 2c though.

+1

 

[heart]

If people would just straight up answer his questions and not flame him and be the nice police, he would get a lot more answers. "You're being mean! Not all NFs are like that!" etc after he's stated that it was a generalization and that he was just curious. People seem to really enter his threads with the intent to flame him due to the up front nature of his posts. It's kind of sad to watch. I think it's funny how people respond and flame him even if his accusation/question doesn't apply to them, like in the NFs pitying themselves thread, I wasn't offended at all because I don't pity myself or make those posts, and those kinds of posts annoy me as well.

In the post below, he seems to be admitting that he frames his postings in a provoking way to get a certain response and that he thinks he finds it educational.

Another "problem" is that NF act very differently when they are in normal mode or when they are emotionally charged. So what they say in normal mode probably will not apply to situations when they are angry.

Which is the side I am far less familiar with. Since I have a trouble understanding the fact that someone can get so emotionally charged. When someone attacks him/her on verbal level.

I am pretty sure that this thread would not got so far in the case that the OP was some "normal" post and to be honest this thread has been quite insightful for me. Since the "insult" has triggered a part of NF they try to hide in many cases. Since they dislike conflict at least that is what they calaim in other threads.

 

[Virtual ghost]

In the post below, he seems to be admitting that he frames his postings in a provoking way to get a certain response and that he thinks he finds it educational.

Yes, I have posted a few provoking post in the last couple of days and I have stoped since I see that this is a too big deal.

But I don't understand why creating a conflict is something that bad.
Escecially since it is not excessive or physical conflict.

I used word conflict but I would dare to say that NTs like to do this to
each other. Since we think that ideas should be challnged so with conflict you are creating an atmosphere of objectivity. (At least this is how I see it.)


I think you(NFs) are taking this too seriously.

 

[heart]

Yes, I have posted a few provoking post in the last couple of days and I have stoped since I see that this is a too big deal.

But I don't understand why creating a conflict is something that bad.
Escecially since it is not excessive or physical conflict.

I used word conflict but I would dare to say that NTs like to do this to
each other. Since we think that ideas should be challnged so with conflict you are creating an atmosphere of objectivity. (At least this is how I see it.)


I think you(NFs) are taking this too seriously.

I don't understand you at all. You say first that you post in a way meant to provoke because you want to see the reactions. Then you say "hey conflict is not so bad" then you tell the NF who are giving you the reactions you claimed to be seeking that they need to stop taking you seriously.

If I stop taking you seriously, I'll either ignore you or poke fun at you. Which would you prefer?

 

[garbage]

I used word conflict but I would dare to say that NTs like to do this to
each other. Since we think that ideas should be challnged so with conflict you are creating an atmosphere of objectivity. (At least this is how I see it.)

I don't usually see the same level of provocation in the NT forum that I see with your posts in the NF forum.

 

[TenebrousReflection]

I don't think I always understand NTs, nor do I always understand NFs or any other type. But in the case of NTs, there is a certain directness and logic that is more common than among most other types, so if you can follow their logic, you can often see what is motivating them and (in the case of conversation) you can pick up on vocal tone to get an even better idea of what parts of an argement are important to them. The same could be said of any other type, but since NTs (and some STs) are more logical, it applies more to them than those that are opperating on feeling (or an emotional logic).

It may be more accuracte to say I appear to undestand the facade that a lot of NTs use, but it may be a false understanding if there are undetectable emotions at work underneath the impersonal logic. I don't think its easy to emotioanly read an NT, but it may be easier to notice in a more gneric sense when something is "not right" with one and to followup and see if they are willing to talk about it (and if there is resistance to talking about it, then I'm not any better at coaxing them to open up or understand them than anyone else).

In the case of INTJs, Fi is your tertiery function, so you actualy have a lot more in common with NFPs that is operating at a subconscious level that you may or may not be aware of. To a lesser extent there is also a share Te bond in NFPs and INTJs.

NTPs and NFJs share Fe and Ti, but I don't know if they notice any shared commanality because of it or not (thats somethign for NTPs and NFJs to comment on )

 

[Orangey]

NTPs and NFJs share Fe and Ti, but I don't know if they notice any shared commanality because of it or not (thats somethign for NTPs and NFJs to comment on )

Well, since the other part of the discussion has died down, I will go ahead and comment on this. Although my INFJ friend and I are starkly different in many regards because of my TiNe and her NiFe, I do think that we sometimes have similar reactions due to Fe. For instance, when we are in class and someone is expected to speak (but no one is speaking), we both feel the tension and awkwardness that results. Of course, she takes it one step further by taking it upon herself to fill in the silence, whereas I feel no such need, though I may recognize that the silence is awkward.

I say that this is unique to her as an INFJ and me as an INTP because, when discussing the issue with our INTJ friend, she claimed that she honestly didn't feel anything of the sort.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

This might sound like a random question, but which of the following statements has the greater potential to be an insult on these online forums? Both are plausible as neutral statements, but which one makes the better insult in a flaming situation?

To tell an F labeled poster that "you sound like a T. The way you post makes me think you are a Thinker."

Or to tell a T labeled poster, "you sound like an F. Your post makes me think you are an Feeler".

An example in this thread

...You seem very close minded and frustrated with NFs. I think back on another thread where people were surmising that you aren't actually an NT at all. It puts an interesting spin on your threads.

I didn't take any offense at Antisocial One's OP. It was rather mild compared to what I've often read about Feelers. I do want to say one thing in reaction to the statements about NFs taking everything too personally. While there can easily be an element of that (can't claim to know the motivations), there is also an underlying power imbalance between Ts and Fs, which might be fading by this point, but that has been present on online forums. Having posted on these forums from before the creation of this one and understanding the reason for the creation of this forum, I can make a more detailed case if necessary, but don't see the point. I just say as a reminder for those who understand it that there can be more to a reaction of defensiveness than merely personalizing.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

This might sound like a random question, but which of the following statements has the greater potential to be an insult on these online forums? Both are plausible as neutral statements, but which one makes the better insult in a flaming situation?

To tell an F labeled poster that "you sound like a T. The way you post makes me think you are a Thinker."

Or to tell a T labeled poster, "you sound like an F. Your post makes me think you are an Feeler".

An example in this thread


I didn't take any offense at Antisocial One's OP. It was rather mild compared to what I've often read about Feelers. I do want to say one thing in reaction to the statements about NFs taking everything too personally. While there can easily be an element of that (can't claim to know the motivations), there is also an underlying power imbalance between Ts and Fs, which might be fading by this point, but that has been present on online forums. Having posted on these forums from before the creation of this one and understanding the reason for the creation of this forum, I can make a more detailed case if necessary, but don't see the point. I just say as a reminder for those who understand it that there can be more to a reaction of defensiveness than merely personalizing.

f's seem to have a harder time dealing with criticism, and tend to be more likely to take things personally, but i think t's would be the more offended ones to be told they think like an f. it almost makes me grin to think about it. sounds fun. taking an nt down a notch.........j/k

 

[Fluffywolf]

I don't understand you at all. You say first that you post in a way meant to provoke because you want to see the reactions. Then you say "hey conflict is not so bad" then you tell the NF who are giving you the reactions you claimed to be seeking that they need to stop taking you seriously.

If I stop taking you seriously, I'll either ignore you or poke fun at you. Which would you prefer?

I think he means he wants to be taken seriously, but not that literally. As his intentions are not as ill-conceived as they may appear.

And I agree with Asocial One on the fact that NT's enjoy heated discussions when they are filled with good arguementation. Not for the sake of conflict, but for the sake of interest. I do realize that at times NT's appear to be very blunt in that regard towards NF's. And although I try to psycho-analyze every poster involved in an arguementation as to prevent arguementations from going out of hand. The result of such analysis are often misconceptions and result in misinterpretation anyway.

But NF's are cute to handle, so we keep trying.

o/

 

[Salomé]

I don't understand you at all. You say first that you post in a way meant to provoke because you want to see the reactions. Then you say "hey conflict is not so bad" then you tell the NF who are giving you the reactions you claimed to be seeking that they need to stop taking you seriously.

If I stop taking you seriously, I'll either ignore you or poke fun at you. Which would you prefer?

His point is not difficult to understand: he wants to be provocative but not antagonistic. That is, he wants to provoke thoughtful discussion but not a flame war. Conflicting opinions=good. Conflicting egos=waste of energy

 

[mortabunt]

It may be a superficial post but.

Understanding feelings is understanding thinking.

In the words a bad teacher, you fail . Feeling and thinking are only partially related. Feeling is irrational and can change instantly. THinking requires build up thought then a logical course. I could explain more, as I shall when I get home from school.

 

[Salomé]

^You also fail. Feeling and Thinking are both rational functions. Look it up.

 

[Fluffywolf]

Per definition of rational yes.

But both are based on entirely seperate fundaments, which may clash in terms of rationality when comparing one to the other in any given situation.

But that goes both ways and is entirely subjective.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

I want to be clear this does not refer to this thread or the OP, because I agree with those who see it as a way to explore an actual question. In other contexts when someone does have prejudicial contempt for something you are, it is a useful little trick to draw them out by poking them with a stick and accusing them of being who you are labeled to be. This isn't projection, and you insult yourself by doing it, but when you are in a position of little social power or influence, it is a way to regain a little power and bring that contempt to the surface so it no longer functions as an underlying assumption. When you see people doing this, it is likely they are in the position of less power. I've done it once with someone who actually did appear to have strongly prejudicial contempt for Feelers. I usually avoid the emotional stuff on forums, but that was just too rich a temptation and I was properly amused by the response. /confession time.

not sure. sorta confused with the wording. but did i just get made an example of, and taken down a notch? or were you appreciating that i answered your question in an honest fashion?