User Tag List

First 95999107108109110111119159 Last

Results 1,081 to 1,090 of 1696

  1. #1081
    Just a note... LittleV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w3
    Socionics
    IEI
    Posts
    279

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cafe View Post
    I was like that for a very long time. Now I've swung the other way. Maybe @Mane will be right and I can look forward to being more balanced and open in the next several years.

    I've come to consider myself mostly a free agent when it comes to relationships. The people I'm obligated to interact with are very few and people that are allowed to 'damage my calm' are even fewer. I can count them without using my toes and most of them are blood kin. I won't be shamed like I was for years by family, church, or society for looking after myself. I'm indispensable to a shrinking handful of people. Everyone else is just fine without me.
    I agree about being a 'free agent'... but I also value the 'ideal' that most people should be "as kind as we can to one another..." as I have a lot of responsibilities. I think I'm getting a sense of where my 'edge' lies, also due to the many, amazing people I have come across on my personal journey.

  2. #1082
    Senior Member cafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    INFj None
    Posts
    9,831

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LittleV View Post
    I agree about being a 'free agent'... but I also value the 'ideal' that most people should be "as kind as we can to one another..." as I have a lot of responsibilities. I think I'm getting a sense of where my 'edge' lies, also due to the many, amazing people I have come across on my personal journey.
    Kindness is huge and usually doesn't cost a lot. Almost always worth it.
    “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”
    ~ John Rogers

  3. #1083
    Just a note... LittleV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w3
    Socionics
    IEI
    Posts
    279

    Default

    Almost always, indeed.

  4. #1084
    Senior Member Z Buck McFate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    INfJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    3,328

    Default

    [With the disclaimer that I haven’t actually been reading most of the new posts in this thread…]

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    I am assuming no power disparity, but it is irrelevant in any case. How you handle the information and how you handle the person are two separate but obviously related decisions. If I need to lose some weight, that is true regardless of the intent of the person who told me so, and I should act on it. I may take further action toward the person if I felt the remark was mean or insensitive, but that is a separate step. There are four possible combinations:

    1. Comment is valid and made with ill intent
    2. Comment is valid and made with good intent
    3. Comment is invalid and made with ill intent
    4. Comment is invalid and made with good intent

    I, for one, can more easily gauge the validity of a comment than its intent, and so prefer at least to start there. I am not going to throw away valuable input just because I do not like the messenger, or his/her intent had nothing to do with my personal development.
    So, just out of curiosity, do you perceive any difference in how much weight to give the information between options 1 & 2? It’s my experience that an ulterior motive (whether done consciously or not) actually adds quite a bit of relevance to how much weight should be placed on the information.

    There’s a difference between simply ‘not liking someone’ and suspecting a person of trying to lead perception in a self serving direction with their words (be it consciously or not- we all do the best we can with what we know, and this type of thing is far more often unconscious than not *and* far more common than most people are want to believe). There are actually quite a few people I like who I wouldn’t trust (we may have interests in common and I find their insights provocative, yet I know from experience they can be deceitful) and many people I don’t especially like but who I think have sound judgment (I sense no deceit, but would still rather stare at a white wall than have to interact with them). The point I’m trying to get at here is I think that to say “not liking someone” is a gross over-simplification and belies the extent to which it actually is pretty reliable to write off certain sources or to take previous experience of someone into account while deciding how much weight to assign what they're saying.

    There is a valuable moral to the Boy Who Cried Wolf story. It’s relatively easy to go ahead and check for a wolf if the little boy who keeps crying wolf is right outside (iow: it’s easy to check the validity of a comment instead of going by source when the work of investigating it is easy); in which case, I think Coriolis' comment above holds true. But when it requires effort- say for example the boy is two miles away and it must be traversed on foot every time you hear him cry…..that’s when it becomes more reasonable to accept/dismiss according to source.

    I’ve said before that I think Ni is something like a Rube Goldberg contraption: it can take forever for information to makes its way through the Ni filter. This is not a choice- no amount of trying to make us feel bad for being this way (which honestly, is what this thread feels like an experiment in) will change it- it’s just the way Ni is. It is not always easy to assess the validity of a comment on the spot- we certainly don't do it as quickly as Ji dom/aux (and shouldn't be expected to)- and in such situations, it actually is pretty reliable to turn to past experience of whether or not someone’s judgment ultimately jives with my own. Life is too short to spend that much time processing information from sources that have proven unproductive and/or even distressing (to me- this isn’t to say they shouldn’t be valuable to themselves, but they just aren’t valuable to me).
    Last edited by Z Buck McFate; 01-15-2014 at 12:32 PM. Reason: correct spelling
    Reality is a collective hunch. -Lily Tomlin

    5w4 sx/sp Johari / Nohari

  5. #1085
    Society
    Guest

    Default

    @Z Buck McFate raises an interesting question (probably not the one she intends): how do you measure if a mental framework is trust worthy? let's apply it here..

    and lets be more specific: you have a person whose deeply held personal beliefs about themselves stems from discrediting the perspectives of anyone who experienced it differently. do you find that belief trust worthy when it can affects you or people close to you? maybe it's a medical professional who always done a pretty decent job, and he knows this because the perspectives of those who complained about the result of his work didn't jibe with how he felt about his own work - he did not like the role they gave him in claiming he's treatments was hurting their health or resulted in the loss of loved ones. maybe it's an architectural engineer who has never done any mistake, as long as you don't count for those few insulting people claiming their floors collapsed. maybe it's a teacher who treats your kids with nothing but the best of heart, as long as you don't count those horrible parents claiming he was abusive to their children.

    would you trust any of these with your health? your home? your children?

    you have someone who determines their beliefs about how they affect others based on picking and choosing which other's experiences count and jibe's with their own self image, and now you are in the position of becoming "others", one of those people whose perspective will only count or not depending on whether it corresponds with this person's ego.

    are there beliefs about themselves reliable? is this someone trustworthy? or does it still not matter simply because it's "true for themselves"?

  6. #1086
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    15,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    So, just out of curiosity, do you perceive any difference in how much weight to give the information between options 1 & 2? It’s my experience that an alterior motive (whether done consciously or not) actually adds quite a bit of relevance to how much weight should be placed on the information.

    It is not always easy to assess the validity of a comment on the spot- we certainly don't do it as quickly as Ji dom/aux (and shouldn't be expected to)- and in such situations, it actually is pretty reliable to turn to past experience of whether or not someone’s judgment ultimately jives with my own. Life is too short to spend that much time processing information from sources that have proven unproductive and/or even distressing (to me- this isn’t to say they shouldn’t be valuable to themselves, but they just aren’t valuable to me).
    You are mixing up two different criteria. Yeghor was addressing emotional factors: the tone of the other person's comment, feeling put-down, feeling hurt or becoming depressed because of their remarks, causing you to want to avoid them. What you describe here is the person's track record in providing worthwhile information, a much more objective measure. The two may be related, but are not the same, and should not be confused with each other. As you point out, a good friend can have a poor track record of giving reliable information. Conversely someone who seems (and maybe is) determined to put you down all the time may be perceptive enough to use truth as the tool. (The truth often hurts more, too.)
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  7. #1087

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    You are mixing up two different criteria. Yeghor was addressing emotional factors: the tone of the other person's comment, feeling put-down, feeling hurt or becoming depressed because of their remarks, causing you to want to avoid them. What you describe here is the person's track record in providing worthwhile information, a much more objective measure. The two may be related, but are not the same, and should not be confused with each other. As you point out, a good friend can have a poor track record of giving reliable information. Conversely someone who seems (and maybe is) determined to put you down all the time may be perceptive enough to use truth as the tool. (The truth often hurts more, too.)
    I think the bolded part does not match with what Z Buck meant...

    I, for instance, classify the perspective/information source, not with regard to his/her reliability in terms of veracity of information/judgment but in terms of his/her hostility/friendliness towards me (friend or foe based on intent and previous rapport), as a preliminary evaluation...See below:

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate
    There’s a difference between simply ‘not liking someone’ and suspecting a person of trying to lead perception in a self serving direction with their words...
    From what I understand your preliminary evaluation consists of identifying whether the information is true or not...I do not know what further steps you take to analyze (different components of) the information...

    I guess the difference in our way of handling information coming from any source (be it friend or foe) stems from the weight we assign to different components of the information...

    Let's say my evaluation system is primitively like:

    EC = Emotional Content
    LC = Literal Content

    INFJ = 0.5 EC + 0.5 LC.... Perhaps yours is like INTJ = 0.2 EC + 0.8 LC ...which perhaps means you are much less susceptible to the emotional content of the communication/transmission...so I guess it has something to do with the difference in our internal/core framework...

    (I am still not sure if the wording "emotional content" fits here...what I meant with intent in the first place feels to me more like a charge or payload in the information, something that has the possibility to zap/burn my core, anyway...)

    Let's say a friendly transmission is like : FT= 0.4 EC + 0.6 LC and a hostile transmission is like HT = 0.8 hEC + 0.2 LC...and also remember that in the hostile transmission, hEC = negatively charged/payloaded...

    In this primitive model, INFJs framework is more inclined wrt INTJ to put more emphasis on EC...so a negatively charged hEC constitutes a much higher risk to fry my internal framework/core...

    So turning back to virus analogy:

    A negatively charged information coming from a hostile (based on intent) entity = file with a virus/trojan horse disguised as a regular software/patch

    A neutral or positively charged information = file containing a regular software/patch

    INFJ preliminary evaluation in terms of hostility/intent = antivirus software

    Accumulated Ni-Ti patterns based on past data/burns = antivirus definitions

    Doorslam = Firewall

    INFJ Secondary evaluation after preliminary evaluation = a ) Installation = a lengthy Ni-Ti evaluation process, which may not be initiated at all depending on the preliminary evaluation...may not always be worthwhile...if you initiate it for everyone you end up being a codependent...bending to everyone's whims...

    b) or as Z Buck put it...the file may be quarantined or disinfected (removing or mitigating the charge/payload by assigning a relatively low weight coefficient to the source), after which the Ni-Ti process may safely be initiated...

    Transmitter of the file with virus/trojan horse = Hacker !!!

    What happens in the event of installing negatively charged content without due diligence = System control seized by the Hacker !!! Power disparity...

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis
    I, for one, can more easily gauge the validity of a comment than its intent, and so prefer at least to start there. I am not going to throw away valuable input just because I do not like the messenger, or his/her intent had nothing to do with my personal development.
    So...how do you determine/know valuable input? in terms of content, quality, effect etc.?
    Last edited by yeghor; 01-13-2014 at 05:17 AM. Reason: Italics

  8. #1088

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mane View Post
    @Z Buck McFate raises an interesting question (probably not the one she intends): how do you measure if a mental framework is trust worthy? let's apply it here..

    and lets be more specific: you have a person whose deeply held personal beliefs about themselves stems from discrediting the perspectives of anyone who experienced it differently. do you find that belief trust worthy when it can affects you or people close to you? maybe it's a medical professional who always done a pretty decent job, and he knows this because the perspectives of those who complained about the result of his work didn't jibe with how he felt about his own work - he did not like the role they gave him in claiming he's treatments was hurting their health or resulted in the loss of loved ones. maybe it's an architectural engineer who has never done any mistake, as long as you don't count for those few insulting people claiming their floors collapsed. maybe it's a teacher who treats your kids with nothing but the best of heart, as long as you don't count those horrible parents claiming he was abusive to their children.

    would you trust any of these with your health? your home? your children?

    you have someone who determines their beliefs about how they affect others based on picking and choosing which other's experiences count and jibe's with their own self image, and now you are in the position of becoming "others", one of those people whose perspective will only count or not depending on whether it corresponds with this person's ego.

    are there beliefs about themselves reliable? is this someone trustworthy? or does it still not matter simply because it's "true for themselves"?
    This is exactly what makes me wary of you...

    You are not stating your position...by doing that you are not committing yourself...you are not putting yourself out there...not putting your hand under the rock but expect us to...you do not relinquish the inquisitor/prosecutor role and by doing that you are keeping us in the defendant position...

    You expect us to reveal our core to you...You should then first lay yourself bare...make yourself vulnerable...even the playing the field...

  9. #1089
    Society
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yeghor View Post
    You expect us to reveal our core to you...You should then first lay yourself bare...make yourself vulnerable...even the playing the field...
    again with the "us" - i already have, plenty of times, again and again. what use is it to repeat it for your sake? not "your" as in "the INFJs", those who have being part of these discussions and ready my posts before have already seen it, and the few of those who then decided to take a step further and genuinely willing to explore their core have being rather amazing. but "your" as in you @yeghor - i already described in full what is it that you offer me in continued acting out of your own ignorance, even right now your analysis of my general position based exclusively on how you experience your own position is quite likely to turn out to be an interesting puzzle piece, as is the fact you can't even answer the question above without primarily being concern with its unfortunate implications about you. what is it of higher value that you think you can offer? your self righteous justifications & portrait of your self image? i don't know if you noticed but anyone who has came here with any problem with INFJs in their lives has in return gotten samples of that in spades, and you already added to that pile. what else?

  10. #1090
    Iron Maiden fidelia's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1w2 so/sx
    Posts
    9,827

    Default

    I identify a lot with LittleV's comments. What one person finds intolerable about INFJs won't necessarily bother another person. In my own experience, Ne vs Ni creates more friction than people generally recognize. I think the suggestions offered for how to get an INFJ to be open to your perspective ring true for me.

    Along with that, Z Buck's comments about crying wolf and past track record are definitely true for me. Although I don't necessarily agree with the tone or delivery style that yeghor has used in this thread, I also find that intent and delivery make a tremendous difference for how receptive I am to hearing something that may be difficult to hear.

    I will admit though that whether in written or spoken word, I have a bad tendency to skim for generalities. Upon rereading, or talking through something, I sometimes find that I over read emotional tone that may not have been intended (probably because my emotional tone generally IS a huge part of my message and if people ignore that, they often don't get the complete picture of what I'm saying.). I also sometimes find that I have missed important details that I need to take into account. In addition to that, I am a little stubborn and need to be convinced that I really am wrong through seeing how it affects the parties involved. That works much better when it is not delivered in a sledgehammer way, but when something is said and I am left to think on it for some time. I am responsive to criticism, although sometimes I need some private time for the frustration or hurt at hearing something to wear off, and will mull something over for a long time after someone says it to see what part of it is my own reaction, what their motives for telling me are, what our history contributes to the overall picture, and to solicit reactions from others.

    This is a very minor example, but this year for lessons, I decided to have a parent meeting at the beginning and give an outline of the proposed concerts for the year that the children would need to attend. I invited parents to give me input and also to point out any conflicts etc. I figured that they needed more notice than I had given them the previous year, as everyone has very busy schedules. This was done in August. However, at Christmas time, I had all kinds of parents complaining about having to go to the only concert we were doing for Christmas - it was 15 minutes out of town, it might go until 8:30 and they figured that was late (the youngest child was 10!), the weather could be bad, they had other obligations the same day (which had been accrued long after I had given them the dates)...One family in particular publicly said the day before the concert that they just wished that teachers in the community would get together to plan dates so everything wasn't on the same day. That was the straw that broke the camel's back. I was already driving two loads of people there, I had done everything possible to give them advance notice, and I had even given them choice about which concert we would do. In addition, I had cross-referenced my date with other teachers and put it on a public list so that they could avoid that date. I also had requested parents to be at lessons, where I give weekly reminders about concerts, and they had not come for the previous few weeks as they had been in the middle of a bunch of work engagements.

    However, over the holidays, as I reflected back, I realized
    1) This was a response out of frustration at being too busy. It wasn't personal.
    2) I should have sent out monthly reminders of what dates were coming up so that people had it on their radar at all times. Part of the reaction was caused by suddenly realizing how busy they were and they didn't know how to fit everything in.
    3) This is an education process so that parents understand that we are not doing concerts just as a performance opportunity, but rather it is part of teaching the families and children how to budget time, get organized, interact together and so on. It is the work of several years.
    4) I need to communicate my vision more clearly, so that parents see that I am actually saving them time with their children in their personal lives, by developing routines and decision-making protocols. Most of the parents are at the beginning of their families, while I have seen a couple of generations of kids in music and learned a lot through that process.
    5) One comment that is not harshly delivered does not have as negative a tone as I feel it.
    6) In the future, maybe we do need to reconsider whether there is time for a concert at times of the year when people have a million other obligations.

    I think the same has been true for my personal relationships, even though it often takes even longer, the more emotionally involved I am. If I am upset, there needs to be sufficient time for me to depersonalize the situation, before I am able to sort it out more objectively. Rarely is one person's or the other's perspective 100% accurate, and so it takes some time to try to sort out all of the details and decide what makes the most sense to do.

    Another problem for me is waiting too long before voicing any frustration or resentment that is building (probably because I don't want to cause someone I care about pain) and bending too much, until it is the last straw and everything comes rushing out. I've realized over time that this is actually making the other person's decisions for them, and it is also not right to leave their input out of the equation till my mind is made up. That's something I'm working on doing differently, but it's still really hard for me to know when and how to bring something up or what is important and what is fleeting and petty. This is partially because it takes a long time for me to even know what I feel myself. I don't trust my own judgement until I have a lot of "evidence" built up to back up gut feelings. By then, I am less open to the other person's read on the situation if it doesn't seem to have any common elements with mine.

    Because I haven't always drawn firm enough boundaries in the past, I probably am more sceptical now of just accepting another person's assessment of a situation as fact, particularly if it serves their interests for me to adopt their POV. I think I did once feel that any criticism of me was fact and it was highly embarrassing, especially if it was pointed out publicly. However, I think I am learning that it is better to have conflict and have things out earlier on and then you don't get to an impasse sort of situation later where you are so emotionally involved that you need distance to be able to let things cool off and where your POV on the situation is not set in stone. Sometimes I also need my attention drawn to a situation and although it stings a bit at first, I can come up with some improvements on my part for later.

    I still would say that there are some people that I've decided it's just better to disengage with, because we are never going to see eye to eye, and nothing productive is coming out of the conflict. Sometimes that changes with time, and sometimes it doesn't.

Similar Threads

  1. When any type other than INFJ doorslams you/cuts you out of their life
    By SilkRoad in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 02-03-2014, 11:26 PM
  2. [INFJ] INFJ Daily Life: Plans, Strangers,etc?
    By plaminal in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 11-13-2011, 12:13 AM
  3. [MBTItm] INFJ negotiating mid-life
    By Immaculate Cloud in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-21-2009, 09:04 PM
  4. [INFJ] INFJ, inner life a little too rich?
    By littledarling in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 02-18-2009, 02:23 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts