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

[March]

that's a double dose of bullshit:

That is a double dose of uncalled-for knee-jerk aggression. And it's frustrating as fuck.

I am working on a post answering your questions to me, and those posts take a little more time and finesse than a quick knock-off post pointing out that someone's language sounds reasonable in my native tongue and processed through my native brain structure, the latter of which you do not possess.

For better continuity of this discussion, here's a tip: If you can't hold the completely IMO noncontradicting perspectives of 'this sounds evil' and 'but that doesn't mean it IS evil', at least try to remember that it's highly likely we are not even speaking the same language here, and maybe focus on the things I'm writing for your benefit rather than a quick aside to someone else. Jerk your knees elsewhere or at least be explicit that you're just knee-jerking.

Answer me this, then: where did I say I want the right to fuck people? Direct quotes, please, and no misreading between the lines.

And I'm pretty sure that you've disappointed a couple of people in your time. So you'd know it's not always possible to respect the needs, wishes or boundaries of others. (Personally I think it's always possible to respect people's boundaries but not always possible to meet their needs and wishes, but that would be going into the area of definitions, something the two of us are notoriously bad on seeing eye to eye on or even attempting to communicate on.)

 

[Society]

Answer me this, then: where did I say I want the right to fuck people? Direct quotes, please, and no misreading between the lines.

it isn't literal - the point was that right now there are two stances, "we don't do X" alongside of "we have every right and need to do X", and each of those was made by different people, and while on the surface both camps feel a consensus because they are both defending INFJs, the actual arguments outright contradict.

in regards to X being mentally closing off to perspectives which conflict with your own, you've taken the first defense, z buck has taken the later. thus the advice.

maybe focus on the things I'm writing for your benefit rather than a quick aside to someone else

you mean this:

Mane pulled a couple of 'invest' quotes together and linked them to objectification of people

?

in that frame, i'll agree to this:

(because not nice to talk about people without letting them know! because not nice to drag people into something!)

and i'll add that its not only just to let them know, but also to let them do something about it - meaning its giving them a chance to react and speak up for themselves and behind what they had to say. you didn't give that gesture to me and that's fine - personally there are certainly people i don't respect enough to make the effort and you just got asked by someone else to not do it to them so that probably added to the choice to do so - and if you have a problem with what i said i can address it, but trying to shut people up for explaining what they said isn't going to be very productive, its actually rather aggravating.

 

[March]

and i'll add that its not only just to let them know, but also to let them do something about it - meaning its giving them a chance to react and speak up for themselves and behind what they had to say. you didn't give that gesture to me and that's fine - personally there are certainly people i don't respect enough to make the effort and you just got asked by someone else to not do it to them so that probably added to the choice to do so - and if you have a problem with what i said i can address it, but trying to shut people up for explaining what they said isn't going to be very productive, its actually rather aggravating.

Murgh, can't win for losing here.

Yes, I left out your mention because I didn't want to aggravate you in the way Z Buck felt aggravated.

Still, I DID extend that gesture to you - Z Buck was merely responding to my 'segue' thing where I already explained that you collated a couple of quotes that seemed in your mind to point to a single feature of INFJ processing, something where I did, in fact, ask you to clarify and explain. And that request still stands, and I would still be interested and appreciative to read your answers.

I did not request of you to call my efforts a double dose of bullshit. And I'm definitely not trying to shut you up - I'm trying to get you to answer the things I asked outright, rather than read between the lines. 'Cause you know as well as I do that you & I can't roll like that.

(And yes, my last post was written from frustration, but point for point using the same argument structure that you used on me before - are you suggesting I should interpret that as you trying to shut me up or shall we just agree that we need to tread gently here?)

 

[March]

OK, here's my epic post. Please be gentle & try to read goodwill in this - it's a bit of a work in progress, it's not exhaustive by any means, and I'm happy to answer questions, but if your response is going to be 'Nah, still evil bullshit' please keep that to yourself, OK? Not because I can't take unflattering judgements, but because that would be too low-resolution for me to learn anything from. Also, I don't claim to speak for every INFJ everywhere ever - maybe this is all just me.

Preamble and disclaimer:
I'm a firm believer in 'helping things go right' rather than 'correcting what goes wrong.' (See for instance the pyramid here.) So when it comes down to "You screwing your boss/abandoning me while I was carrying your baby/getting me evicted/keeping me from seeing someone I love like a father really hurts me and I want you to confront the thing in yourself that allowed you to do it and make it up to me so I can trust you'll never hurt me like that again", that's a really hard place to have a conversation from.

It's very likely that there's nothing that can give the hurt person the reassurance they need (because everyone's aware of the strategy of 'saying whatever gets the other person to shut up, regardless of whether you intend to follow through' and that will be a niggle in the back of your mind even if the other person is sincere), it's very likely that the hurt-causing person will be unwilling to invest the energy to give that reassurance if they see the whole situation as an escalation of the both of you not being there for each other anyway, and it's very likely that the hurt person doesn't have any mental energy to support that change. It can be done, but it will be a long hard slog with lots of pain on both sides. That's one of the reasons why jumping in at that point felt so weird to me - I think that at that point, everything is basically fucked, regardless of type, and it would take superhuman strength and self-control to create a diamond out of that steaming heap of organic material.

OK, now for the way to talk to INFJs before things have gone THAT pear-shaped. I'm also assuming a reasonably stable and intelligent INFJ.

Wrongheaded INFJ approach (for INFJs who are being stupid) OR Funhouse Mirror interpretation by misunderstanding observer of Right-headed INFJ approach:

I have a need, which I chose to meet through action X.

X hurt you? Well, that sucks.

Still, I have a fundamental right to try to meet my needs and you do not have a fundamental right to tell me I can't have needs.
So I have a right to do action X, and you can't trust me to refrain from X - I can try because you ask me to, but eventually that need will require meeting and you'll have to deal with me doing X again.

And I'm sorry that hurt you, but I just stole this food because I'm starving and if you want to prohibit me from doing action X forever you're mean and if you want to tell me that I shouldn't even WANT to do action X because your hurts are more important than my fundamental right to meet my needs, you're an evil person who wants to crush my spirit. Do you WANT me to die, just so you can feel more comfortable? Huh? Huh?

Right-headed INFJ approach.

I have a need for A, which I chose to meet through action X.

X hurt you? Well, that sucks. Man, I'm so sorry. What can I do to make amends?

Boy, there's still that fundamental need for A to deal with, and everyone has a fundamental right to work towards meeting their needs. Luckily there's probably different ways I can meet need A without having to do action X.

You're in some kind of a relationship with me, right? And you want to stay in it, right, and are therefore invested in making this relationship good for both? Okay, if so: what do you think of alternative actions Y or Z? Are they better than X? And could you help me make those possible, either by helping out or by not standing in my way during the changes making ready for Y and Z will bring? Oh, by the way, I'm realizing that you doing Q is a pretty strong trigger for need A and makes it really hard for me to avoid going into X. Could you please watch your Q for the next couple of weeks while I practice my Y and Z? Won't hold it against you if a Q slips by you, but you'd really help me out. Ah, and I just saw online that there's a class for Y on next week after work - would you be willing to make dinner that day so I can go?

The entire difference is in the realization that there's no such thing as 'a need for {something specific}. There's no need for eating THIS bread, there's no need for having sex with THIS person, there's no need for living in THIS city or doing THIS job. Those are all tactics to meet underlying needs for food, intimacy, adventure, fulfillment, or what have you. So there's no fundamental conflict between 'me getting my need for intimacy met' and 'stopping doing a certain thing that I was doing to get my need for intimacy met.'

So that's where the problem is simple.

But that's also where the problem is hard.

• Difference between needs and tactics isn't well understood by most people/in most cultures
• Vocabulary is tainted - INFJ are sensitive to questions of intent and most words do not rule out that reading
• Ni tends to tunnel vision under stress, leading to latching on to one strategy and undercutting the needed flexibility to find other ways to meet needs. This is NOT a tunnel vision of motive or caring - healthy INFJs in a non-pear-shaped situation, at least, are acutely aware of the other person's distress and displeasure and are probably actively trying to fix things. They also don't default to doing whatever the heck they feel like. It's just really hard to see more than that one solution when the stress is really high.
• INFJs tend to fill their lives with responsibilities to the point of even one thing going wrong causing a lot of stress, basically setting themselves up to fall into a Ni tunnel-vision trap when they most need their flexibility

Problems with the wrongheaded INFJ approach:

1. It's bullshit A to Z. It may be bullshit because it's misguided and the INFJ doesn't know better or it may be bullshit because the person employing it (like that little clip [MENTION=6723]phobik[/MENTION] contributed a while back with the kitten thing) knows it's a manipulative mindfuck that tries to mash as many buttons as it can to get someone to be swept away in a maelstrom of confusion and give them what they want. Doesn't really matter to the receiving person.

Problems with the right-headed INFJ approach:

1. To the casual observer it may not look that different to the wrongheaded approach, making them think that's also either misguided or horribly manipulative. But there's a real, honest-to-god, workable strategy in there. Its failure mode just happens to look like 'arrogant, self-righteous ass'.
2. Ni is not as good as Ne at pulling together different bits of information, but it's ace at spotting trends. The INFJ will have one eye on the future already, prioritizing 'how do we make sure I won't hurt you this way again, how can we use the strength, weight and mutual commitment of our relationship to both contribute to that, how do we make sure this incident and the recovery from it doesn't unbalance our relationship permanently' over 'how can I make you feel better in this particular moment and how can I make you feel like you can trust me'? These things aren't mutually exclusive, but from the outside it sure can seem like the INFJ is trying to make the other person 'pay' for half of the solution, even though they weren't half of the problem. Also known as 'INFJs don't know how to take responsibility' and 'INFJs always wiggle out from underneath everything to make themselves seem blameless.'
3. INFJs are sensitive to implications of intent and it's hard to use language in a way that absolutely rules out questions of intent. I don't know why that sensitivity is so strong, though it would be fun to speculate. But it's something that's a thing and I'm not sure if it can change.
4. It requires at worst a moderately unstressed INFJ.
5. It frames problems of persons in a relationship as a problem of the relationship, and feels comfortable drawing on 'the relationship' to solve those problems. If the state of the relationship is uncertain (as in 'You've screwed me over so hard that I think I might just divorce you over this' or 'You messed up this business pitch - YOU fix it or suffer the consequences'), INFJs will flail & be ineffective until they have sufficient information about the strength and vital signs of the relationship.

How the type and desired continuation of the relationship matters:

• The more reasonable action X is, the more fully the right-headed script needs to take place for full resolution and the health of the relationship for INFJ. INFJ does not have the right to request Partner to help them stop murdering babies. If INFJ has a habit of consistently making extremely poor choices, INFJ should seek professional help. If Partner wants to keep the relationship with INFJ, their support could consist of protecting themselves from further hurt, not interfering with INFJ getting professional help, and having a little patience to see what shakes out. But if that's asking too much, go ahead and DTMFINFJ.
• If Partner doesn't consider it their responsibility to help INFJ get their needs met, INFJ shouldn't say the 'how do we fix this' part at all. This is the case where Partner doesn't have or want an emotionally intimate relationship with INFJ.
• If Partner couldn't care less about amends, INFJ should just STFU altogether. This is the case if there's no actual relationship. If I'm a cop who catches an INFJ red-handed stealing bread, I don't care about meeting their need for food (I think that's up to the government to fix and some people will think that's up to charities to fix), or about their needs to make amends (consequences will be decided by the courts, thankyouverymuch), nor do I personally feel hard done by. INFJ STFU'ing, however, doesn't vitiate their need for food nor the right for them to take action to get it met. It just lets 'em know in no uncertain terms that certain need-meeting actions have negative consequences, and that sometimes nobody cares enough about them to help them become better people. Which is just life.

Things people wanting INFJs to change can do to facilitate change. All really good ideas; none mandatory. Bolded one is the most important one, IMO.

• 0) In the spirit of helping things go right - focus a lot of energy on that. I bet most people tend to coast along on their default patterns until a problem occurs and then pull out all the stops in alien communication, but that's not the most efficient way to go.
• Re 1) Keep a modicum of goodwill. If you don't have that, the relationship is probably better off dead anyway. Be aware of the difference between needs and tactics yourself, so you can communicate clearly and hold the INFJ to clear communication as well.
• Re 2 and 3) Keep focusing on the hurt and the atonement request (Truth) while also emphasizing a general acknowledgement that INFJ didn't INTEND hurt (Truth), and that INFJ and you both have a right to work towards a mutually satisfying relationship (Truth) that you do not intend to discard right now (Truth). Accept that the price of admission for having any relationship with an INFJ is dealing with a tendency to prioritize the future over the now and the intent over the outcome. Enjoy the benefits of that, and learn to gracefully help reinforce the context for your INFJ.
• Re 4) Practice good fighting hygiene. If you are the kind who loves to stomp around, raise your voice, or curse, be aware that INFJ is likely going to have a stress response that's through the roof, making them less likely to be able to satisfy you and perhaps permanently earning you a spot on the 'slightly unsafe people' list - maybe blow off steam first before picking the fight. If you're the kind of person who has the skill to build a lot of slack into their lives, help INFJ figure out how to do that/offer to use up a bit of that slack to help them give you what you want - a better relationship and a changed INFJ. Have snacks on hand if INFJ is sensitive to blood sugar fluctuations.
• Re 5) Have the necessary metadiscussions about this beforehand - each relationship has its own culture and if agreed to beforehand, INFJs can function perfectly well in a relationship where the culture has been decided to include 'everyone cleans up their own messes and nobody gets to ask for support during clean-up'. It's not likely that INFJ will assume this as the default, though, and it will take some thorough rearrangement of their lives. (If I have to keep enough of an energy buffer to be able to gracefully expend a lot of energy if the situation arises, I will have to learn to be a lot more self-centric in my energy management. Default position is 'I can give whatever I feel like giving without taking care of my energy beyond a cursory level - if I overextend myself, my relationships will provide a soft place to land.') Conscious creation of culture.

Things INFJs need to do to make it easier/more comfortable for people to ask them for change. All of them good ideas, most of them definitely advised if INFJs want to be able to call themselves good eggs.

• 00) In the spirit of helping things go right - focus a lot of energy on that. I bet most people tend to coast along on their default patterns until a problem occurs and then pull out all the stops in alien communication, but that's not the most efficient way to go.
• 0) Remind yourself to NOT trust your instincts when it comes to hearing implications of intent, heavy-handed judgements that seem impossible to come back from, or the loud silence of someone NOT saying they want you in their lives. That language gap is pretty wide as is and it just widens under stress. If you still really think someone may have MEANT that judgy thing they say, wait until you're in an emotionally less volatile place before asking for clarification. You're not going to call the divorce lawyer right this second anyway, so you might as well borrow some strength from the future you still think you have ahead of you. If you didn't believe in it anymore, you wouldn't be here - so while you're here, SHOW UP.
• Re 1) Constantly be aware of what things LOOK like. If someone starts accusing you of being unfair, irresponsible, evil, or what have you, refer back to 0. Also, be on guard in your thoughts and communications so that you're crystal clear on what your needs are, that your tactics are not your needs, and that you're happy and willing to compromise on tactics as long as you can settle on something that also meets your needs.
• Re 2) Spend 95% of your time on the 'so sorry, what can I do to make it up to you' part and 5% on the 'OK, let's prevent this from happening again' part, preferably only after the amends has been accepted. Nobody cares about the future as much as you do, anyway, so don't bother them with it when they're stressed and unhappy.
• Re 3) During a fight, bite your tongue. If you're lucky, the person you're fighting will be sensitive to your sensitivity to intent and won't feel too put out by throwing you a bone and reassuring you. If you're unlucky, the person you're fighting doesn't understand you or doesn't want to help you feel better. If so, work on being lucky next time by engaging your partner in metadiscussions while you're reasonably happy with each other - see if they can learn to understand how this works for you, but mostly see if YOU can build up enough trust in your partner's respect for you that you don't flinch at every implication.
• Re 4) Watch your bloody energy levels. It's not sensible to plan your life to the brink of collapse. And you don't owe anyone the last drop of your blood anyway. Don't overschedule, watch your diet, make sure you take time to exercise and take long walks in the woods or whatever you need to balance that Ni/Se. Yes, that's hard. Yes, you'll mess up. No, that doesn't make you a horrible person. Dust yourself off and try again. You're not doing anyone a favour by being with them if you're just going to saddle them with a partner/employee/friend on the brink of burnout. Take care of them by taking care of yourself. Practice good fighting hygiene - it's okay to walk away temporarily from things that flood you with stress, as long as you give (and stick to!) an indication of when you're going to return. Have snacks on hand if you're sensitive to blood sugar fluctuations.
• Re 5) Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. Just like you can't expect someone to be in an exclusive relationship with you unless you've had the talk, you can't really expect anyone to share any relationship assumptions with you unless you've had the talk. Sure, your Fe-aux of a network of semi-dense (compared to Fe-doms) mutual commitments and obligations works like a charm. But so do a lot of other systems. Still, the crash and burn of conflicting relationship assumptions can be spectacular. Fe 'seek consensus before doing things' and Te 'do things if they're good ideas/people will pipe up if they disagree' can be fireworks, let me tell you that! But in the case where YOU hurt your partner, mismatched assumptions might lead to your partner dropping you like a hot ember if you ask them for help in meeting their needs, which will then be YOUR problem because you can't call them a bad partner for not meeting your unstated needs while you WILL prove yourself a bad partner if you don't make amends because you've overbudgeted your energy. Metadiscussions beforehand are necessary.

Sounds complicated and like a whole lot of work, but I think most of this can be assumed anyway and I just wanted to be thorough.

Point is - INFJs have certain weaknesses that need to be taken into account (just like anyone else has) but as long as you manage to avoid the huge 'stress of DOOOOM!' triggers on both sides and both have a modicum of compassion for the triggers and limitations of the other, there's oceans of space to speak the truth and have the truth be accepted. But this is my list of what I see as the deep flaws of the INFJ and how they can be worked around by people who care, and my explication of the healthy version of the INFJ problem-solving approach.

 

[1487610420]

OK, here's my epic post. Please be gentle & try to read goodwill in this - it's a bit of a work in progress, it's not exhaustive by any means, and I'm happy to answer questions, but if your response is going to be 'Nah, still evil bullshit' please keep that to yourself, OK? Not because I can't take unflattering judgements, but because that would be too low-resolution for me to learn anything from. Also, I don't claim to speak for every INFJ everywhere ever - maybe this is all just me.

Preamble and disclaimer:
I'm a firm believer in 'helping things go right' rather than 'correcting what goes wrong.' (See for instance the pyramid here.) So when it comes down to "You screwing your boss/abandoning me while I was carrying your baby/getting me evicted/keeping me from seeing someone I love like a father really hurts me and I want you to confront the thing in yourself that allowed you to do it and make it up to me so I can trust you'll never hurt me like that again", that's a really hard place to have a conversation from.

It's very likely that there's nothing that can give the hurt person the reassurance they need (because everyone's aware of the strategy of 'saying whatever gets the other person to shut up, regardless of whether you intend to follow through' and that will be a niggle in the back of your mind even if the other person is sincere), it's very likely that the hurt-causing person will be unwilling to invest the energy to give that reassurance if they see the whole situation as an escalation of the both of you not being there for each other anyway, and it's very likely that the hurt person doesn't have any mental energy to support that change. It can be done, but it will be a long hard slog with lots of pain on both sides. That's one of the reasons why jumping in at that point felt so weird to me - I think that at that point, everything is basically fucked, regardless of type, and it would take superhuman strength and self-control to create a diamond out of that steaming heap of organic material.

OK, now for the way to talk to INFJs before things have gone THAT pear-shaped. I'm also assuming a reasonably stable and intelligent INFJ.

Wrongheaded INFJ approach (for INFJs who are being stupid) OR Funhouse Mirror interpretation by misunderstanding observer of Right-headed INFJ approach:

I have a need, which I chose to meet through action X.

X hurt you? Well, that sucks.

Still, I have a fundamental right to try to meet my needs and you do not have a fundamental right to tell me I can't have needs.
So I have a right to do action X, and you can't trust me to refrain from X - I can try because you ask me to, but eventually that need will require meeting and you'll have to deal with me doing X again.

And I'm sorry that hurt you, but I just stole this food because I'm starving and if you want to prohibit me from doing action X forever you're mean and if you want to tell me that I shouldn't even WANT to do action X because your hurts are more important than my fundamental right to meet my needs, you're an evil person who wants to crush my spirit. Do you WANT me to die, just so you can feel more comfortable? Huh? Huh?

Right-headed INFJ approach.

I have a need for A, which I chose to meet through action X.

X hurt you? Well, that sucks. Man, I'm so sorry. What can I do to make amends?

Boy, there's still that fundamental need for A to deal with, and everyone has a fundamental right to work towards meeting their needs. Luckily there's probably different ways I can meet need A without having to do action X.

You're in some kind of a relationship with me, right? And you want to stay in it, right, and are therefore invested in making this relationship good for both? Okay, if so: what do you think of alternative actions Y or Z? Are they better than X? And could you help me make those possible, either by helping out or by not standing in my way during the changes making ready for Y and Z will bring? Oh, by the way, I'm realizing that you doing Q is a pretty strong trigger for need A and makes it really hard for me to avoid going into X. Could you please watch your Q for the next couple of weeks while I practice my Y and Z? Won't hold it against you if a Q slips by you, but you'd really help me out. Ah, and I just saw online that there's a class for Y on next week after work - would you be willing to make dinner that day so I can go?

The entire difference is in the realization that there's no such thing as 'a need for {something specific}. There's no need for eating THIS bread, there's no need for having sex with THIS person, there's no need for living in THIS city or doing THIS job. Those are all tactics to meet underlying needs for food, intimacy, adventure, fulfillment, or what have you. So there's no fundamental conflict between 'me getting my need for intimacy met' and 'stopping doing a certain thing that I was doing to get my need for intimacy met.'

So that's where the problem is simple.

But that's also where the problem is hard.

• Difference between needs and tactics isn't well understood by most people/in most cultures
• Vocabulary is tainted - INFJ are sensitive to questions of intent and most words do not rule out that reading
• Ni tends to tunnel vision under stress, leading to latching on to one strategy and undercutting the needed flexibility to find other ways to meet needs. This is NOT a tunnel vision of motive or caring - healthy INFJs in a non-pear-shaped situation, at least, are acutely aware of the other person's distress and displeasure and are probably actively trying to fix things. They also don't default to doing whatever the heck they feel like. It's just really hard to see more than that one solution when the stress is really high.
• INFJs tend to fill their lives with responsibilities to the point of even one thing going wrong causing a lot of stress, basically setting themselves up to fall into a Ni tunnel-vision trap when they most need their flexibility

Problems with the wrongheaded INFJ approach:

1. It's bullshit A to Z. It may be bullshit because it's misguided and the INFJ doesn't know better or it may be bullshit because the person employing it (like that little clip @phobik contributed a while back with the kitten thing) knows it's a manipulative mindfuck that tries to mash as many buttons as it can to get someone to be swept away in a maelstrom of confusion and give them what they want. Doesn't really matter to the receiving person.

Problems with the right-headed INFJ approach:

1. To the casual observer it may not look that different to the wrongheaded approach, making them think that's also either misguided or horribly manipulative. But there's a real, honest-to-god, workable strategy in there. Its failure mode just happens to look like 'arrogant, self-righteous ass'.
2. Ni is not as good as Ne at pulling together different bits of information, but it's ace at spotting trends. The INFJ will have one eye on the future already, prioritizing 'how do we make sure I won't hurt you this way again, how can we use the strength, weight and mutual commitment of our relationship to both contribute to that, how do we make sure this incident and the recovery from it doesn't unbalance our relationship permanently' over 'how can I make you feel better in this particular moment and how can I make you feel like you can trust me'? These things aren't mutually exclusive, but from the outside it sure can seem like the INFJ is trying to make the other person 'pay' for half of the solution, even though they weren't half of the problem. Also known as 'INFJs don't know how to take responsibility' and 'INFJs always wiggle out from underneath everything to make themselves seem blameless.'
3. INFJs are sensitive to implications of intent and it's hard to use language in a way that absolutely rules out questions of intent. I don't know why that sensitivity is so strong, though it would be fun to speculate. But it's something that's a thing and I'm not sure if it can change.
4. It requires at worst a moderately unstressed INFJ.
5. It frames problems of persons in a relationship as a problem of the relationship, and feels comfortable drawing on 'the relationship' to solve those problems. If the state of the relationship is uncertain (as in 'You've screwed me over so hard that I think I might just divorce you over this' or 'You messed up this business pitch - YOU fix it or suffer the consequences'), INFJs will flail & be ineffective until they have sufficient information about the strength and vital signs of the relationship.

How the type and desired continuation of the relationship matters:

• The more reasonable action X is, the more fully the right-headed script needs to take place for full resolution and the health of the relationship for INFJ. INFJ does not have the right to request Partner to help them stop murdering babies. If INFJ has a habit of consistently making extremely poor choices, INFJ should seek professional help. If Partner wants to keep the relationship with INFJ, their support could consist of protecting themselves from further hurt, not interfering with INFJ getting professional help, and having a little patience to see what shakes out. But if that's asking too much, go ahead and DTMFINFJ.
• If Partner doesn't consider it their responsibility to help INFJ get their needs met, INFJ shouldn't say the 'how do we fix this' part at all. This is the case where Partner doesn't have or want an emotionally intimate relationship with INFJ.
• If Partner couldn't care less about amends, INFJ should just STFU altogether. This is the case if there's no actual relationship. If I'm a cop who catches an INFJ red-handed stealing bread, I don't care about meeting their need for food (I think that's up to the government to fix and some people will think that's up to charities to fix), or about their needs to make amends (consequences will be decided by the courts, thankyouverymuch), nor do I personally feel hard done by. INFJ STFU'ing, however, doesn't vitiate their need for food nor the right for them to take action to get it met. It just lets 'em know in no uncertain terms that certain need-meeting actions have negative consequences, and that sometimes nobody cares enough about them to help them become better people. Which is just life.

Things people wanting INFJs to change can do to facilitate change. All really good ideas; none mandatory. Bolded one is the most important one, IMO.

• 0) In the spirit of helping things go right - focus a lot of energy on that. I bet most people tend to coast along on their default patterns until a problem occurs and then pull out all the stops in alien communication, but that's not the most efficient way to go.
• Re 1) Keep a modicum of goodwill. If you don't have that, the relationship is probably better off dead anyway. Be aware of the difference between needs and tactics yourself, so you can communicate clearly and hold the INFJ to clear communication as well.
• Re 2 and 3) Keep focusing on the hurt and the atonement request (Truth) while also emphasizing a general acknowledgement that INFJ didn't INTEND hurt (Truth), and that INFJ and you both have a right to work towards a mutually satisfying relationship (Truth) that you do not intend to discard right now (Truth). Accept that the price of admission for having any relationship with an INFJ is dealing with a tendency to prioritize the future over the now and the intent over the outcome. Enjoy the benefits of that, and learn to gracefully help reinforce the context for your INFJ.
• Re 4) Practice good fighting hygiene. If you are the kind who loves to stomp around, raise your voice, or curse, be aware that INFJ is likely going to have a stress response that's through the roof, making them less likely to be able to satisfy you and perhaps permanently earning you a spot on the 'slightly unsafe people' list - maybe blow off steam first before picking the fight. If you're the kind of person who has the skill to build a lot of slack into their lives, help INFJ figure out how to do that/offer to use up a bit of that slack to help them give you what you want - a better relationship and a changed INFJ. Have snacks on hand if INFJ is sensitive to blood sugar fluctuations.
• Re 5) Have the necessary metadiscussions about this beforehand - each relationship has its own culture and if agreed to beforehand, INFJs can function perfectly well in a relationship where the culture has been decided to include 'everyone cleans up their own messes and nobody gets to ask for support during clean-up'. It's not likely that INFJ will assume this as the default, though, and it will take some thorough rearrangement of their lives. (If I have to keep enough of an energy buffer to be able to gracefully expend a lot of energy if the situation arises, I will have to learn to be a lot more self-centric in my energy management. Default position is 'I can give whatever I feel like giving without taking care of my energy beyond a cursory level - if I overextend myself, my relationships will provide a soft place to land.') Conscious creation of culture.

Things INFJs need to do to make it easier/more comfortable for people to ask them for change. All of them good ideas, most of them definitely advised if INFJs want to be able to call themselves good eggs.

• 00) In the spirit of helping things go right - focus a lot of energy on that. I bet most people tend to coast along on their default patterns until a problem occurs and then pull out all the stops in alien communication, but that's not the most efficient way to go.
• 0) Remind yourself to NOT trust your instincts when it comes to hearing implications of intent, heavy-handed judgements that seem impossible to come back from, or the loud silence of someone NOT saying they want you in their lives. That language gap is pretty wide as is and it just widens under stress. If you still really think someone may have MEANT that judgy thing they say, wait until you're in an emotionally less volatile place before asking for clarification. You're not going to call the divorce lawyer right this second anyway, so you might as well borrow some strength from the future you still think you have ahead of you. If you didn't believe in it anymore, you wouldn't be here - so while you're here, SHOW UP.
• Re 1) Constantly be aware of what things LOOK like. If someone starts accusing you of being unfair, irresponsible, evil, or what have you, refer back to 0. Also, be on guard in your thoughts and communications so that you're crystal clear on what your needs are, that your tactics are not your needs, and that you're happy and willing to compromise on tactics as long as you can settle on something that also meets your needs.
• Re 2) Spend 95% of your time on the 'so sorry, what can I do to make it up to you' part and 5% on the 'OK, let's prevent this from happening again' part, preferably only after the amends has been accepted. Nobody cares about the future as much as you do, anyway, so don't bother them with it when they're stressed and unhappy.
• Re 3) During a fight, bite your tongue. If you're lucky, the person you're fighting will be sensitive to your sensitivity to intent and won't feel too put out by throwing you a bone and reassuring you. If you're unlucky, the person you're fighting doesn't understand you or doesn't want to help you feel better. If so, work on being lucky next time by engaging your partner in metadiscussions while you're reasonably happy with each other - see if they can learn to understand how this works for you, but mostly see if YOU can build up enough trust in your partner's respect for you that you don't flinch at every implication.
• Re 4) Watch your bloody energy levels. It's not sensible to plan your life to the brink of collapse. And you don't owe anyone the last drop of your blood anyway. Don't overschedule, watch your diet, make sure you take time to exercise and take long walks in the woods or whatever you need to balance that Ni/Se. Yes, that's hard. Yes, you'll mess up. No, that doesn't make you a horrible person. Dust yourself off and try again. You're not doing anyone a favour by being with them if you're just going to saddle them with a partner/employee/friend on the brink of burnout. Take care of them by taking care of yourself. Practice good fighting hygiene - it's okay to walk away temporarily from things that flood you with stress, as long as you give (and stick to!) an indication of when you're going to return. Have snacks on hand if you're sensitive to blood sugar fluctuations.
• Re 5) Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. Just like you can't expect someone to be in an exclusive relationship with you unless you've had the talk, you can't really expect anyone to share any relationship assumptions with you unless you've had the talk. Sure, your Fe-aux of a network of semi-dense (compared to Fe-doms) mutual commitments and obligations works like a charm. But so do a lot of other systems. Still, the crash and burn of conflicting relationship assumptions can be spectacular. Fe 'seek consensus before doing things' and Te 'do things if they're good ideas/people will pipe up if they disagree' can be fireworks, let me tell you that! But in the case where YOU hurt your partner, mismatched assumptions might lead to your partner dropping you like a hot ember if you ask them for help in meeting their needs, which will then be YOUR problem because you can't call them a bad partner for not meeting your unstated needs while you WILL prove yourself a bad partner if you don't make amends because you've overbudgeted your energy. Metadiscussions beforehand are necessary.

Sounds complicated and like a whole lot of work, but I think most of this can be assumed anyway and I just wanted to be thorough.

Point is - INFJs have certain weaknesses that need to be taken into account (just like anyone else has) but as long as you manage to avoid the huge 'stress of DOOOOM!' triggers on both sides and both have a modicum of compassion for the triggers and limitations of the other, there's oceans of space to speak the truth and have the truth be accepted. But this is my list of what I see as the deep flaws of the INFJ and how they can be worked around by people who care, and my explication of the healthy version of the INFJ problem-solving approach.

tl:dr.

 

[March]

tl:dr.

Well, he asked.

 

[1487610420]

Well, he asked.

 

[Society]

you mean those? alright:

If so, can y'all who dislike those quotes elaborate a little on what you think investing or choosing not to invest in someone's POV (edited to clarify) MEANS?

• What does investing in someone's POV (or choosing not to) mean to you in terms of feelings, thoughts, actions, priorities? When they're in the same room with you and when they're not?

first of all, i should address the core assumptions underlining the semantics of the question:

i live in a world involving around 7 billion skulls whose content is capable of human emotions, what's in there is in there - a real and existing pattern of matter and energy, expressing themselves in various ways that our minds are adapted to picking up and recognizing while associating with the most similar pattern of matter and energy within ourselves. its all there and it exists. anything anyone experiences is an actual physical event.

now, i don't know what is going on in all of those skulls, for that matter i don't know about other physical events either. for example i don't know what's the weather in most places, i am talking to you and yet don't even know what is the weather like in Holland atm. there is a lot of information out there that which i don't know.

i might seek to find out and i might not, and perhaps the closest equivalent i would have for "investment" is curiosity - that is actively seeking to find out more information. but, what i can't do is reject the information's existence & create an imaginary world where information that doesn't suit my needs or creates conflicting meaning to what i prefer it to mean.

if you express being frustrated, while its possible you are directly lying, the much more likely possibility is that you are frustrated. knowing i didn't intend to frustrate you won't change that, knowing that i do care to not frustrate you and have taken efforts in other areas to avoid doing so won't change that, believing myself to be the person who would never cause frustration to anyone won't change that. your frustration is a real physical event in a skull which belongs to a person, and a causality which originated from me. i can't reject that information from existence. now i you decide based on that event that i maliciously frustrated you and that is my main goal, i can reject that interpretation as being an incorrect speculation on your part as to what going on in my head, but i even then i can't reject the fact this is what you think, and if it was the case i'd have to interpret your choices based on you thinking this.

now, that's being said, within the larger plethora of information i am accepting, i am entirely capable of not caring. i can't pretend i don't frustrate you while i do something that you express frustration about, but i can choose whether i care and if so what is it's priority. presumably you can do that too - we both find the conversation engaging enough to go on in it despite knowing it can cause ourselves and the other a degree of frustration, we chose to prioritize one thing over the other. i can find information boring & uninspiring and down right banal. but i can't pretend it isn't there.

in summary: i do not need to invest in a point of view in order to not reject the point of view, i don't really have the ability to reject it in the first place.

i've related this in the past (though maybe not with you): i do not view this as an INFJ trait, but as an INFJ ability.
the trap is within your choice to use it, and whether you can be trusted not too by those you impact. because...

• Is investing in a person a 'requirement for minimal decency as a person' or an 'above and beyond' thing?
• What's the least amount of effort a person needs to put in to show they're investing in someone's POV? What would be the key difference between 'minimally invested' and 'not invested'?

if we define investment as curiosity, then its a gesture of caring, no a requirement.
if we define investment as acknowledging what actions mean within it, then yes.

why? because any statement about what you wouldn't do is irrelevant to others if its only a result from selectively avoiding interpretations of others in which you'd do it.

• if someone would never rape anyone only because having held the right to define their behavior by their own terms they decided it was an act of love and thus the perspective from which it wasn't consensual is wrong, then that's statement irrelevant for others around him as a predictor on whether he would rape them or not.
• if i wouldn't steal only because i don't acknowledge the perspective from which an item is viewed as their own, then that statement isn't relevant to you, because you can't trust whether i would acknowledge your property as your own, merely that i personally wouldn't consider it stealing if i chose not too.
• etc...

those are rather obvious examples which are legally covered, but many others aren't so much (as illustrated in the above example of whether i acknowledge causing you frustration).

• Whose POV should a minimally decent POV invest in? If the answer's anything other than 'everyone on earth', what are acceptable ways to distinguish? What percentage of the world's population would it make sense for you to say you're invested in?

depends what are you trying to understand - but when you are trying to understand the meaning of something you do, then anyone influenced by what you do is a rather safe bet.

• What's the least amount of effort a person needs to put in to show they're investing in someone's POV? What would be the key difference between 'minimally invested' and 'not invested'?

to simply not use the ability to mentally block points of view in reaction to conflicting with your own would probably do the trick.

• And what's maximum amount of effort a person can expend before they become ridiculously overinvested? Or is there even such a thing?

if you have reached the point where you avoid including your own perspective & experience into the equation, that might be the case.but note that i am saying "into the equation": i am not speaking about situations where you justify choosing your own perspective to override the information and meaning from another, but when you don't include information about your own.

edit: i wrote this was before the epic post. i'll take my time with it.

 

[Society]

[MENTION=13502]March[/MENTION], on first impression - i really liked the separation between need & tactics.

but i have a question which seems crucial to understanding the entire frame:
when you say "acknowledge that the INFJ didn't intend to hurt", do you mean:

do you mean acknowledging that pain of the other wasn't the goal?
in which case, simply acknowledging that the INFJ wasn't doing so out of sadism? i have a hard time understanding what is this an exception too - the thief wanted money, the rapist was horny, the person who punched you wanted to release steam and get some adrenaline rush, not a single one of them is particularly motivated by your pain one way or another, if they thought about it at all they simply decided it doesn't matter.

or do you mean acknowledging that not hurting you was a goal - they wanted to avoid causing pain?
this is what i tend to assume you mean, and i have to admit there's a bit of a problem here. your entire post does seem to assume a positive intent on the INFJs part.
on the surface, i can see this working out. but if the goal is be able to confront the INFJ honestly, then this isn't always going to be the case.
the very underlining topic here is an example of what i mean:

• if your goal is to avoid hurting others, then information about what you do that hurts others and how you impact them is critical for you to achieve your goal.
• if your goal is to avoid having to think about yourself as someone who would hurt others, then rejecting & doorslamming perspectives in which you are makes sense.

those two problems can seem similar, but their solutions often come into conflict: if your goal is to avoid hurting others, then rejecting & door slamming perspectives possessing information about you hurting others is... i am not even sure how to describe it without appearing dismissive, i want to use the word insane without you thinking i am dismissing you or your post out of that, simply: its a behavior who's consequences directly conflict with the claimed motive, at that point pick-pocketing me to make me wealthy or shooting my brains out to make me live longer make just as much sense. the claimed intent doesn't make sense. so how can you acknowledge a positive intent to avoid hurting you when the behavior outright conflicts with it so bluntly?

 

[PeaceBaby]

Here's where my difficulties having different conversations at the same time come in. If I were a in-person friend of yours, all you'd ever hear from me (unless you asked) was "Man, that sucks. What bitches/bastards. I can't imagine how hurt you are. Ugh, the nerve of some people. I hope their decisions come back to bite them in the backside." I'm not defending their actions at all - I think those actions are despicable.

Hmm, but that's not what he wants either. As nice as it would be, he does not prioritize emotional consoling since that will not help him be able to see his stepson in the future. In this thread, being in a place discussing typological tendencies, he was hoping to find INFJ's who, purportedly having a good understanding and awareness of their internal processing, could step back and say, "That's a pretty extreme case and here is what you would need to do to help reestablish communications, no guarantees." Instead, he received a whole bunch of judgement, "You must have done something terrible if this happened to you" and denial, "I would NEVER do that / your partner must not be INFJ / you are picking on INFJs / you are mean so you force me to be mean back!" and very little substance or information of value.

And little emotional consoling either, because Je in general has trouble empathizing with that it does not agree with or understand. I find it fascinating, really.

Maybe it's a personal flaw and other people have no problems hearing and being heard wearing two hats, but it's hard for me to interpret things 'correctly' if the two aims of receiving emotional support and receiving new perspectives and skills are present at the same time. My - problematic - efforts to juggle them result in monster posts going 'If I interpret X from perspective A, I'd say P, and if I interpret X from perspective B, I'd say Q. But wait - were you maybe thinking of perspective C, D or E? If so, R, S and T. Maybe. Unless F. And oh wait, Q and T are mutually exclusive, so please pick one?' And I don't think anybody wants THAT.

I don't think it's a personal flaw, it's a flaw only of choosing one vantage point and never revisiting that. Actually @ bold, I do think this is what Mane wants, but it's vital to first understand all of the vectors, including his. Just imagine though that he does not want the emotional support part atm as it will conflate your posts. Emotional support last.

For one, I don't have an actual beef with the other INFJs you call out (or anyone here), so it would be hypocritical for me to pretend that I do and impossible for me to pick an 'image contrary to their ego' that I think they need to accept. Keyword here is 'real life misgivings,' and right now I don't have any.

So even if you see bad behaviour, you have no personal grievance, therefore you do nothing?

For two, Fe is a relational function - I don't have actual relationships with the other INFJs (nor anyone here), so I have no relationship weight to call on. This would also prevent me from 'calling out' anyone else I'm not in a direct conversation with, by the way, so it's not some secret INFJ-INFJ protection scheme. In other words: why should they care? They have no obligations to me.

There may not be an intimate level of relationship, but having a conversation here implies people are at least acquaintances I think. At least I see myself as having a relationship and therefore certain obligations in interacting with anyone here. I do not get to be "rude" just because you cannot see me behind this screen and there are no perceived immediate consequences.

I still stand by my claim that it's possible to tell an INFJ the truth about how you feel and what you want and have them accept that truth and change their ways. Some caveats apply, of course, like picking a common language to duke things out in and the INFJ having mental space to think so they don't act stupid, but I think they apply to all fights. If you're interested, I could sketch a hypothetical situation & point out what I think the essentials are.

Yes, it is possible, I agree. The difficulty is that, going in, there's a heavy Je investment that your vantage point is correct, and F generally is subjective, so most times, I think I see Je conceding than actually agreeing / adding to / updating a framework.

I'm interpreting your reply to of "Still, I palpably feel your hurting spaces. I feel you as a real 3 dimensional human being" as describing what you mean by investing, is that correct?

I am not sure I understand your question. But, if you mean even though I find werebudgie's conduct and behaviour distasteful, I still acknowledge she is a real person and therefore would communicate with her and try to understand her, then yes.

Did you mean for me to answer the other questions too?

 

[PeaceBaby]

I want to add for the INFJ's who think they see all the perspectives but are choosing which to invest in: I know what it feels like to be understood and heard, and I don't feel it. INFJs historically have not been able to "get" my vantage point and I know many are not seeing Mane's either. Therefore, how can anyone choose what to invest in when they don't actually SEE everything in the first place? Shouldn't trying to understand that which you do not comprehend take precedence? Wouldn't it offer fantastic benefits to all of your human interactions to understand? I've been giving away the keys to the castle and it's not even recognized as such.

I can guarantee that even though I am more vocal than most, there are people who read what I say and it resonates for them too. I am not alone, more like the tip of the iceberg really.

 

[digesthisickness]

If anyone knows, could someone point out the names of those who are representing ENTPs?

 

[Eilonwy]

[...]In this thread, being in a place discussing typological tendencies, he was hoping to find INFJ's who, purportedly having a good understanding and awareness of their internal processing, could step back and say, "That's a pretty extreme case and here is what you would need to do to help reestablish communications, no guarantees." Instead, he received a whole bunch of judgement, "You must have done something terrible if this happened to you" and denial, "I would NEVER do that / your partner must not be INFJ / you are picking on INFJs / you are mean so you force me to be mean back!" and very little substance or information of value.

Yep. I threw some of that judgement and denial his way at first, too. And not only his way, but towards others on this forum, too.

And little emotional consoling either, because Je in general has trouble empathizing with that it does not agree with or understand. I find it fascinating, really.

Yep, again. I have to monitor myself for this. I haven't been able to completely rid myself of the initial reaction of "wrong", but I have learned to notice that "wrong" and question it. I was noticing and questioning the "wrong" before joining this forum, but what I've learned here is that I was missing a whole big area of "wrong" that I hadn't even noticed existed.

There may not be an intimate level of relationship, but having a conversation here implies people are at least acquaintances I think. At least I see myself as having a relationship and therefore certain obligations in interacting with anyone here. I do not get to be "rude" just because you cannot see me behind this screen and there are no perceived immediate consequences.

I do find it easier to forget that the people on the other side of the screen are struggling with life issues, just like I am (as opposed to being able to see people in real life and experience their struggles). It is all too easy for me to imagine that you all have perfect lives, or at least better lives.

Yes, it is possible, I agree. The difficulty is that, going in, there's a heavy Je investment that your vantage point is correct, and F generally is subjective, so most times, I think I see Je conceding than actually agreeing / adding to / updating a framework.

I can see this. I haven't been looking for it so I can't bring up any instances of it, but now that you've mentioned it, I'll watch for it.



ETA: Regarding the third point, in my early days on the forum, your posts, [MENTION=5999]PeaceBaby[/MENTION], came across as so even-keeled, even when in response to some very hurtful posts, that I assumed that you could take it. That you had some character trait that helped harsh words bounce off of you, leaving you unaffected. But I learned differently during one particularly contentious discussion, when you posted about how what had been said had hurt your feelings. I'm ashamed that it took that for me to realize that your feelings could be hurt.

 

[1487610420]

If anyone knows, could someone point out the names of those who are representing ENTPs?

No.

ENTP's are just an urban myth created to assist INFJ's transcendence.

 

[digesthisickness]

No.

ENTP's are just an urban myth created to assist INFJ's transcendence.

Wow. That was sneaky of everyone.

 

[Eilonwy]

An example of INFJ transcendence?

 

[statuesquechica]

on the surface, i can see this working out. but if the goal is be able to confront the INFJ honestly, then this isn't always going to be the case.
the very underlining topic here is an example of what i mean:

• 
  [*]if your goal is to avoid hurting others, then information about what you do that hurts others and how you impact them is critical for you to achieve your goal.
• if your goal is to avoid having to think about yourself as someone who would hurt others, then rejecting & doorslamming perspectives in which you are makes sense.

The bolded part above is pure gold to me, IMO...I can say to myself I didn't intend to hurt that person, but I did, I know I did, and it is some sort of cognitive dissonance to not recognize that...even if I had the best of intentions. Once again, my ego has acted as a blinder, even though I am a very self-effacing individual, I can recognize myself protecting my ego.

"Hell isn't merely paved with good intentions; it's walled and roofed with them.
Yes, and furnished too."

Aldous Huxley

Just my two cents worth...please don't come out of the woodwork lambasting me for "stalking" this thread and for no reason suddenly appearing and posting (sorry, a bit of trauma left over from the INFJ doorslam thread...and I am INFJ)

LOL! Love the before and after INFJ transcendence!!

 

[statuesquechica]

Shouldn't trying to understand that which you do not comprehend take precedence? Wouldn't it offer fantastic benefits to all of your human interactions to understand? I've been giving away the keys to the castle and it's not even recognized as such.

FYI: I have been listening and reflecting...and I thank you for the keys!!

 

[Eilonwy]

Just my two cents worth...please don't come out of the woodwork lambasting me for "stalking" this thread and for no reason suddenly appearing and posting (sorry, a bit of trauma left over from the INFJ doorslam thread...and I am INFJ)

Well, this just pisses me off. Several new posters appeared in that thread at that time. Heck, it was brought back to life by a new poster. Why anyone would be immature enough to criticize you for posting is beyond me. And to do so outside of the public forum was just cowardly and verging on bullying. Or was that more flak and fallout from my actions? Because if I remember correctly, you posted in support of something I was saying, or in support of [MENTION=5999]PeaceBaby[/MENTION]. I'm so sorry that you got caught up in the middle of that.

LOL! Love the before and after INFJ transcendence!!

Thanks.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

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.

I'm honestly not paying attention to latest posts, but for some reason I keep thinking about this. Can I ask, who exactly are "so many" and "the rest"- I presume you're referring to members of the forum who have tried pointing out this specific this thing that INFJs do that (even though it seems to us like we're seeing it and we don't understand why it's an epiphany, you don't seem to believe we're seeing it) you're trying to point out?


[eta: Or maybe the "so many" is a more general comment about forum dynamics, but not this specific issue.]

[more eta: also, maybe rep or PM usernames if it's putting people on the spot to list them- I'm just genuinely wondering if more people have actually tried selling this particular 'insight' than I've seen.]