• 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.

[MBTI General] INFJ Compatibility - Why the INFJ/ENTP dynamic is hands down the best.

1487610420

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
6,431
That the OP is misguidedly optimistic (my "nice" way of saying wrong)? Unless the dynamic of ENTPs and INFJs going around and around is considered "best" by both types. :dry:

Now stop quoting yourself...and stating the obvious. People will start to wonder. :newwink:

...my type? :unsure::doge:
 

Amargith

Hotel California
Joined
Nov 5, 2008
Messages
14,717
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4dw
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Welp. At least INTJ-ENFP threads aren't the only catastrophic cluster fuck around here, despite being considered 'ideal' in theory.
 

Werebudgie

I want my account deleted
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
398
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
Welp. At least INTJ-ENFP threads aren't the only catastrophic cluster fuck around here, despite being considered 'ideal' in theory.

I really do think it's not type-related, but rather something about the dynamics of this site under certain circumstances (per the comment I just posted). We've discussed other manifestations of this pattern in another context/with different specifics, I think.
 
S

Society

Guest
I do. I'd trust the person who said "I fucked up and stole" (thereby confessing that they DID something) much more than the person who said "I wanted it so I stole it" (thereby confessing how much the action suits their personality - making it a characteristic rather than an action).

So that seems like the opposite from what you're advocating. I can't imagine how telling the person saying "I fucked up and stole" to take that on as a 'characteristic' would help to make them more

if the goal is to manipulate people to act more trustworthy, you might be right - i am not entirely sure on that front.

but in terms of determining which one is more trustworthy - person B doesn't have the value for you to trust in, person C's judgement of whether they enact their value does not include your experience of another person acting in accordance to the value, but person A is able to stop and ask "i am being a jerk... i should stop". in order for them to be able to do so, it is absolutely a necessity that they'd be able to say "i am being a jerk".

Your 'more relevant' case is nothing but a straw man, and a flimsy one at that. There's no such thing as "My intent was not for you not to have it but for me to have it" if it's about physical goods - every two-year-old knows that taking something from you means you no longer have it. Anyone who'd say "it didn't count because my intent was not for you to not have it by for me to have it so it's not real stealing" needs to get their head checked.

far from a strawman - while physical goods serve to demonstrate the cause of affect maintained regardless of intent in a more concrete fashion- valjean desire and need for food do not change the fact another human being has their silverware stolen and valjean was the cause - they are in no way a requirement. when a solipsistic causes harm to another, the general behavior seems to be to attempt to refute the claim by proposing a contradicting narrative disowning the affect by sticking to the intent.

"i wasn't stealing, i was just hungry"
 

1487610420

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
6,431
So, the unintended consequences of me trying to better understand publicly, as opposed to just staying in my blog, is that it's once again become an INFJs attacking Mane free-for-all. I'm just as big a disappointment in that I might be more aware of my own thought processes and more aware of how that impacts others, but I haven't been able to change them to any great degree, so what I say and what I demonstrate still don't match and I still end up hurting people who have been nothing but kind to me. This was the cost for posting that I was talking about. Flak and fallout. No direct consequence to me, but consequences to anyone else who has spoken out. It's most likely unintentional and unconscious, but it's a good way to shut down any dissenting voices. It's why so many who disagree with the most vocal INFJs give up and shut up.

I'm not sure what I'm going to do yet--give up like the rest, or continue and deal with the fact that by doing so I get by without consequence while others don't.

FWIW, I first came into contact with MBTI circa2000's. I wasn't immediately active after joining the forum until after some months. When I did, I started some threads about topics on interest I'd been delving on, following both my willingness to share and subjective reasoning it'd be welcome in a community about personal insight & development. And then I learned.
 

PeaceBaby

reborn
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
5,950
MBTI Type
N/A
Enneagram
N/A
I really do think it's not type-related, but rather something about the dynamics of this site under certain circumstances (per the comment I just posted). We've discussed other manifestations of this pattern in another context/with different specifics, I think.

Then you are missing the patterns because you have already concluded which perspective you desire to see, and finding evidence to fit that as opposed to the other way around. :shrug:
 

PeaceBaby

reborn
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
5,950
MBTI Type
N/A
Enneagram
N/A
However it does seem to be in some participants' interest to keep the unnecessary misuse-of-type-sourced conflict and related ick flowing. That pattern never fails, or at least hasn't so far in what I've seen.

Mane's wound is not yet healed, which is why this comes up over and over again. It's probably worth mentioning that Mane likely did not expect some of his worst possibilities to be confirmed via the interactions over time in this space. I think he came here initially to have them debunked and have his interaction with an INFJ mate be evidenced as an anomaly. And he hoped for advice to help him reestablish a relationship with his stepson.

As for me, I'm not uncomfortable with what others routinely and continually call "ick". In this forum there's little NOW I personally gain from these discussions aside from a sense of trying to provide cognitive balance to the interaction, since in Fe world, if you are one voice amid a sea of dissenting voices, you drown. I do try to suss out some additional information that might add in future clarifications.

eta: I should say too I have learned a ton of stuff being here, which has been very enriching. I still hold out hope for better communications between the types that seem to have more difficulty connecting in this venue.
 

Eilonwy

Vulnerability
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
7,051
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Welp. At least INTJ-ENFP threads aren't the only catastrophic cluster fuck around here, despite being considered 'ideal' in theory.

I haven't done my research, but based on what I've said about the function types and order in the ENTP/INFJ dynamic, it looks like the ENFP/INTJ dynamic is much the same but with Fi/Te instead of Ti/Fe: attraction through novelty and play, judging functions making it seem that there is a similar pov, which is misleading because of the totally different thought processes. :shrug: All guesses.
 
S

Society

Guest
arguments require common ground, a sense of trust. if you make arguments in a way that erode trust
well if it's my trust your trying to appeal too then there's nothing to erode.

if - which i find more likely - you are trying to claim that i do, then the answer is absolutely yes. from the perspective of INFJs anyway - with both the ones that trust me and the one's that don't, it is largely being consistent that they associate trust not only with trusting someone to be reliable or honest, but rather trust that you'd think the best of them and not judge them negatively, or better said, they need to trust you to judge them the way they judge themselves, a desire which you expressed yourself (to determine your role in your own terms). since my general stance is that many seem to be incapable of judging themselves from the point of view of others, my perspective is inherently untrustworthy - not only i am threatening you with the suggestions of point of view judging you in a way that is inconsistent with how you judge yourself, but i am also arguing they are probably more valid.


it's more like a paradigm, but the activity isn't science. it's living, which is about loving at least as much as it is about codifying the laws of knowledge. if you call loving "lying,"

in rejecting from your universe all but yourself, who is it that you are meant to love? anywyay, while you are at it, let's push it up a notch:


1. take out a weapon
2. show it off to people
3. address those you find sexually attractive
3. talk about possible negative out comes
4. strongly express your desire
5. title the above love.

now let's see if anyone dares to call the act of love by any other name.


and just to be clear: while satiric, it carries your exact pattern, whether your aware of it or not, the vast majority of your posts take very simple concepts and break them down to avoid common sense implications. if i'd met you years back i might have even being engaged by it, now i see through it: ofcourse it isn't love - neither this nor your description above - if the act of love was rejecting everything that doesn't fit your little emotional paradigm, the only remaining subject for you to love would be yourself - but then again since you aren't really acknowledging yourself beyond what fits your paradigm, it doesn't get to even be that. the act of sharing that paradigm isn't love, its marketing at the best of times and outright deception at most. you want to claim its the basis for honest relationships but in demanding that they'll love your novel character of yourself you aren't even giving them the opportunity to love whoever the f' you might actually be.
 

Avocado

Permabanned
Joined
Jun 28, 2013
Messages
3,794
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I haven't done my research, but based on what I've said about the function types and order in the ENTP/INFJ dynamic, it looks like the ENFP/INTJ dynamic is much the same but with Fi/Te instead of Ti/Fe: attraction through novelty and play, judging functions making it seem that there is a similar pov, which is misleading because of the totally different thought processes. :shrug: All guesses.

Interesting theory.
 

the state i am in

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,475
MBTI Type
infj
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
well if it's my trust your trying to appeal too then there's nothing to erode.

if - which i find more likely - you are trying to claim that i do, then the answer is absolutely yes. from the perspective of INFJs anyway - with both the ones that trust me and the one's that don't, it is largely being consistent that they associate trust not only with trusting someone to be reliable or honest, but rather trust that you'd think the best of them and not judge them negatively, or better said, they need to trust you to judge them the way they judge themselves, a desire which you expressed yourself (to determine your role in your own terms). since my general stance is that many seem to be incapable of judging themselves from the point of view of others, my perspective is inherently untrustworthy - i am threatening you with the suggestions of point of view judging you in a way that is inconsistent with how you judge yourself, but i am also arguing they are probably more valid.

haha, they can be "probably more valid" according to you if you want them to be. that's your business.

once again, you're using language that keeps saying judgment, judgment, judgment. we don't need positive judgment. we need compassion. that's a real need that many of us have and base our entire lives around giving and receiving. it's the way we fully feel like ourselves. it supports us to be and do the best we can, not just for ourselves but for others. it is our deepest source of fulfillment. sharing is more significant than judgment. it's more whole.



in rejecting from your universe all but yourself, who is it that you are meant to love

i'm sorry if you feel rejected, and that's on its own terms, and i don't know what else to say to that. in terms of what you're saying, i don't believe this true. i am not a particularly social person, so my sense of social space is less broad than many others. but there are many people who are deeply part of my reality, as i am with theirs. i do have an intense desire to blend and merge them. mine does not feel static, and it connects through even if is not reducible to consensual social reality. i'm okay with all of this, even the headaches and miscommunications and feeling like i'm going backwards with respect to other people's expectations sometimes. i do want people to communicate with me (and establish a record of doing so) in an adult-like way. especially adults. otherwise, i need to assess my responsibilities and decide how much i am truly able and willing to give.


1. take out a weapon
2. show it off to people
3. address those you find sexually attractive
3. talk about possible negative out comes
4. strongly express your desire
5. title the above love.

now let's see if anyone dares to call the act of love by any other name.

i appreciate the shock value, but i don't exactly see what you're trying to illustrate. it appears you feel threatened by something i am doing and feel forced into giving something simply because i want it? or are you saying that this is a template for my relationships with other people that has nothing to do with what you're personally experiencing right now and is instead a "likely" pattern for how all my real world relationships unfold?


and just to be clear: while satiric, it carries your exact pattern, whether your aware of it or not, the vast majority of your posts take very simple concepts and break them down to avoid common sense implications. if i'd met you years back i might have even being engaged by it, now i see through it: ofcourse it isn't love - neither this nor your description above - if the act of love was rejecting everything that doesn't fit your little emotional paradigm, the only remaining subject for you to love would be yourself - but then again since you aren't really acknowledging yourself beyond what fits your paradigm, it doesn't get to even be that. the act of sharing that paradigm isn't love, its marketing at the best of times and outright deception at most. you want to claim its the basis for honest relationships but in demanding that they'll love your novel character of yourself you aren't even giving them the opportunity to love whoever the f' you might actually be.

i do the bold quite often. i think this is actually kind of a type thing (Ni). i don't know if this is an "exact pattern," but it's definitely a big part of how i work through an idea or develop understanding. i don't know if what you're saying is that only "common sense implications" are real or worthy of consideration. i feel a judgmental tone, but i don't really see your point or your needs, so it's difficult to really do anything with this.

it's okay with me if you disagree with how i see love. like i said before, it feels like a kind of grace to me. i think the power to accept yourself as you really are is one of its most precious benefits. i don't feel like your story of me has anything to do with the reality of me, but i realize that we don't know each other very well. i think our ability to be open and create space for each other's reality, not a complete one but an independence from ours, is a hallmark of love. but i don't think fixating on a need to keep every possibility open to the point that it takes away our ability to feel ourselves as we really are, is a good thing (if by good we mean supports and promotes love rather than diminishes it).

"when the past is present"
 

Ivy

Strongly Ambivalent
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
23,989
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6
I do not understand these flare-ups. Seems like much ado about, if not nothing, very little.

PS: This is solely my own opinion and does not represent any official policy of TypoC as a whole, &c &c, in perpetuity throughout the universe or whatever.
 

digesthisickness

✿ڿڰۣஇღ♥ wut ♥ღஇڿڰۣ✿
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
3,248
MBTI Type
ENTP
I don't understand either, [MENTION=2]Ivy[/MENTION]. But that's because I can't keep the sides straight with half of them not posting their type.
 
S

Society

Guest
i don't feel like your story of me has anything to do with the reality of me, but i realize that we don't know each other very well.

and funny story: you wont.

your conception of "the truth" requires:
- that it makes you feel good.
- to be maintained without testing
- to only be examined on your own terms
essentially: accepting who you really are just happens to have the same mature adult requirements as accepting santa claus.

and guess what? when anyone of the people you claim to care about experiences something negative about you, its not going to feel good - it's not going to fit with an idea of "the truth" built around what feels good. and being open to whether their point of view subjected to the experience has a merit? that's taking the risk of testing the truth, and worst - testing it in the terms of another. the result is that your values aren't valid predictions on whether others will experience you breaking them, they merely predict that you wont be able to mentally account for others when they do.


your story isn't accountable to who you are for anyone else, and that's why trusting you with the well being of another is.. batshit crazy.
 

March

New member
Joined
Apr 8, 2011
Messages
54
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
Eilonwy said:
Respectfully, I'm pretty sure that you have been understood. Can you stop your automatic thought processes, strip out any emotions or judgements that you attach to Mane's posts, stop taking the posts personally, and see if you can understand in return?

I'm not so sure, unfortunately. For person A to be understood, person A needs to feel understood and person B needs to have the rough idea that they get what A's about. For mutual understanding, the same needs to happen the other way around.

I think at most one of those four criteria is satisfied - perhaps [MENTION=15291]Mane[/MENTION] gets what I'm saying but I'm sure I still don't get him. And I doubt either of us feels confident in saying 'Yup, March/Mane really gets me! I'd let him/her explain a situation from my POV any time 'cause I'm sure they'll do my case justice.'

Maybe what I'm trying to get him to understand is what I need from him to be able to understand. (Edited to add: Which of course doesn't oblige anyone to give me anything.)

That may seem like 'useless semantics' (ouch) to you, but it's my LIFE. It's my BRAIN. If I don't know someone (and assuming you're not actually Peter Dinklage, [MENTION=15291]Mane[/MENTION], I wouldn't know the first thing about you - if you ARE, then Hi! Big fan of your work! Still don't know anything about you as a person) then intellectual understanding coupled with a general sense of wishing well is all I have to go by. Sure, it's not a failproof instrument and in this case it probably generates failure. But it's still all I've got to try with.

Mane said:
if the goal is to manipulate people to act more trustworthy, you might be right - i am not entirely sure on that front.

Then I've lost you again. Initially, you said your reason for needing people to be able to see themselves as the villains in a story was to make them realize what they're doing, stop doing it, and not do it again. That's 'manipulating people to act more trustworthy', right? (Edited) So is that no longer the goal? Regardless of what you think is the most effective way to reach that goal?

And here's why I'm not sure you get MY POV either:

Mane said:
valjean desire and need for food do not change the fact another human being has their silverware stolen

My example specifically referenced Jean stealing BREAD. He stole bread because he was hungry, then society cracked down on him and made sure he took on the villain role, and then he BECAME the villain, stealing silverware which isn't that good for your digestive system nor a great way to get stuff that IS good for the digestive system, so is not covered by the 'intent' clause. My point was that being reasonable in allowing Jean to make amends for the bread (of course still a tangible loss to the baker, but not comparable to silverware) would have allowed him to stay part of society. In which case the silverware would never have been stolen. None of which is trying to pretend that he didn't either steal the bread OR the silverware. (Except of course he didn't, 'cause he's fictional. But real-life equivalents exist.)

I blame tl;dr syndrome.
 

á´…eparted

passages
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,265
The vast majority of the time I have seen an ENTP on typology forums go out of their way to profess their love of INFJ's or how they are in some ways better than all others types and want ones themselves... ultimately just want one as a pet to have their way with.

It both makes me laugh and and go "oh good lord...".
 

Eilonwy

Vulnerability
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
7,051
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
For person A to be understood, person A needs to feel understood and person B needs to have the rough idea that they get what A's about. For mutual understanding, the same needs to happen the other way around.

I need to spend more time with your whole post, but, quickly, the bolded strikes me as a big part of our problem. In a recent experience I had, after, hopefully, apologizing for my behavior (not quite sure some of those coping strategies didn't rear their ugly heads), the urge to explain myself and make sure I felt understood was really strong. But, really, being understood in that way doesn't matter to that particular situation. I impact people all the time, whether they are close to me or not. I can't expect every stranger I run across to understand me to the point that I feel understood. That's unrealistic. And yet, I will have impact on those people. Some of it may be negative. So, do they have no right to inform me of my negative impact on them, does their negative experience of me have absolutely no meaning, just because I don't feel understood? Isn't that a bit crazy?

ETA: For the record, I had the urge to explain, even though the person I apologized to did understand me and was absolutely correct in their assessment of my negative, hurtful behavior. And the crazy part is that I know all the stuff I just said about being unrealistic, but still the urge was there. So, once again, what I say and what I demonstrate don't match.

ETA2: And because I'm pretty sure that we're going to end up going there--this doesn't mean that one should NEVER, EVER, EVER try to explain their actions or need to feel understood. We need to try to stop automatically going to the extreme ends of things and settle somewhere in the middle in order to have a productive conversation.
 

Eilonwy

Vulnerability
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
7,051
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Perhaps it would be helpful for Je which is predisposed to think in terms of "wrong" and "right", to try to NOT think in terms of wrong or right. It's not about INFJs being wrong and ENTPs being right. Or vice versa. Wrong or right is not the point. It all just IS. It's also not about blame and who should bear blame. It's just about seeing from another pov. Without all the judgement. Seeing that there IS another point of view.
 
Top