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.
As I said in an above post: most other types feel *way* more comfortable plowing forward when they catch a whiff of unbalanced power dynamics- I think that INFJs are exceptionally sensitive to it whilst having the least amount confidence that we know we’re Right about the gut feelings we get. I think that probably more doorslams than not are because the INFJ has a gut feeling they can’t get rid of, whilst being totally and completely unsure about whether it really is the other person or if it’s them- and (we're so absolutely and completely bombarded with Ni possibilities that) figuring out where and how to draw a boundary starts looking like one of Gödel's theorems.
INFPs have an advantage in that they seem to inherently feel an importance of their personal viewpoint that we struggle to justify. On the downside, it can make them sound "me me me"- but on the plus side, they are ABLE to say "me me me" in a pinch, when backed into that corner where it becomes necessary; when INFJs get backed into that corner......*crickets and tumbleweeds*. And while I think a great many INFPs are too humble to actually say "me me me" lightly, my point is rather that they have more access to it than we do in the first place.
I think that INFJs don't want to say anything until they are relatively certain (1) they aren't being controlling (many have expressed loathing about forcing their ideals onto other people) and that the need they are to assert is completely reasonable and (2) the person in question would prefer they assert that need rather than simply back away and disappear. [It's rather ironic- people who show up and say that backing away/"doorslamming" is a form of "controlling" are inadvertently locking in any suspicion they are indeed 'incompatible'. I think it appears outwardly as some need to control the external environment, but it's more like a need to be able to know what to expect in the external environment because it's so entirely taxing to have our focus dragged out there (least Se). The more someone else needs to perceive this as 'control'- they more I feel the need to distance them because they clearly see the world so absolutely differently from me that perceptions are likely irreconcilable.]
eta: Actually- I think this is something totally germaine to the discussion- if someone around me expresses the opinion that they think I'm "controlling", I am absolutely going to back away from them......not because it's unflattering, but because I'm not interested in "controlling" anyone. The notion that I'm backing away because it's not flattering is.....a very petty assumption to me. It presumes I could change if I wanted to- and that I'm simply dismissing the opinion because I don't want to believe it. On the contrary, it's because I believe that's their experience- and if the best I can do at being malleable is still coming across as 'controlling', then that person is incompatible with me because I have no interest in making someone feel controlled.
I think that- because J types tend to have a more forceful tone- Ps project *a lot* of certainty into what we're saying that truly isn't there. I suspect many Ps are so certain of their perception of it that they don't believe it's projected- it maybe seems like there's no way someone can have that tone and not be certain.....but I believe the reason most INFJs back away from acquaintanceships is because there's so much uncertainty surfacing about the interpersonal dynamics with someone that it gets overwhelming. There's this "I don't know if it's you or if it's me, but something about this has become more effort than it's worth" element to it, I don't know how else to describe it. I think that everyone experiences that feeling every now and then- but we seem to experience it at the drop of a hat.
I think the reciprocate may be the 'manipulation' and 'playing stupid' it seems like NFPs do- it's really hard to imagine not having access to those parts of my memory that prevent me from even attempting to put forward the kinds of 'raw batter'* that NFPs do. I could either trust it really is their blind spot- even though I can't imagine what that would be like to not remember details that would render what I'm putting forth obsolete- or I can assume they really do remember the details and they're just trying to see if they can get away with it/checking to see if I'm stupid enough to buy what they're saying (which is how it appears).
i know plenty of ep and ip types who jump to feeling attacked rather quickly.
[...]
it's only realistic and productive to acknowledge that in protective mode, the ego can't really do a great job of empathizing and taking on others' realities. that's a fact that transcends type. the conflicts we are discussing are a result of that fact more than a result of the types themselves simply conflicting out of their own inherent nature (and nfp/nfj can be difficult when trust is lost because we don't have a lot of cognitive common ground, even if our values and ego-types are often deeply overlapping).
Yep. The inability to take in criticism and allow for realities that aren't flattering- though the exact manifestation may vary according to 'type' (with some 'type' commonalities that surface)- is not, in itself, type related. While Ni may back away without being able to say anything, Ne tends to blast people with self-serving shape-shifty logic (without much concern for how it's making people on the other end feel, because empathy has been shut off).
*eta: Because people have asked, my original 'raw batter' analogy under spoiler:
This is the point I was trying to make earlier. This is something Ni does internally- we compare contexts first, then apply our own judgment (which is *why* the processing is so slow), whereas Ne does this work aloud- focusing instead on applying introverted judgment to the isolated and immediate context and then bouncing the product of that off others. It can come across (at times) as hypocritical, like they are trying to propose some half-assed, self-serving resolution because putting forth raw theories without attempting to put it in context first is foreign to us; we *see* someone presenting raw batter and ‘trying to pass it off as cake’ because it’s so hard to imagine not ‘cooking’ things before saying them aloud.
I’m not quite sure how to reconcile this. I think on our end, at least part of this reconciliation means trying to remember that what looks like *playing stupid* (or ‘trying to enforce a really self-serving, short-sighted pov’) is actually just ‘presenting raw batter where we would be presenting finished cake’. Getting offended by it is, I believe, projecting a tendency to prioritize doing that work internally (I suspect seeing Fe’ers as ‘believing we are RIGHT’ is similarly about projecting a tendency to prioritize introverted judgment about an immediate/isolated context….and expecting us to be able to share brand new judgment immediately- which we can’t do because it isn’t our priority to investigate new judgment immediately.....eta: and the truth is rather that we've just put judgment completely on hold). So we can try to keep this in mind, but it really doesn’t make it any less taxing to be pummeled by someone needing to work through raw Pe aloud (especially overzealous Pe’ers).
/might be making things up (TM Kalach)
eta: The thing is though, some Pe'ers really are just trying to relentlessly enforce a self-serving, short-sighted pov as 'the whole truth'.....just like some Je'ers really do believe they are RIGHT. How do people of the opposing team learn to tell the difference? I can generally tell with Je'ers- the difference between someone being slow on the uptake and someone being completely resistant to new information.....but with Pe, I have a hard time knowing.
what exactly are you referring to? i think zbuck is stating that the flattering/unflattering aspect is central in the critique as a whole. that infjs only accept flattery, and they reject unflattery, blaming the other person and doorslamming them as a result.
so to me, it sounds like the question is whether infjs automatically, always, in any circumstance in which they are not seen as positive, interpret that as if they are being attacked. and that they do this uniquely, based on how their cognition works in general. that doesn't make much sense.
i know plenty of ep and ip types who jump to feeling attacked rather quickly. i notice that 4, 6, and 8 are all kind of finicky, mercurial, and difficult. they make up like, the dark triad. but 4 is especially unique in terms of withdrawing, which is think is kind of what we're going for here. and you see 4s in ep (3w4), ip (4w3, 4w5, 5w4), ij (4w5, 5w4), ej (3w4). i think 4 is the best to focus on because there would be more of a tendency for a withdrawn type to withdraw, but this would depend on other factors. for instance, say, how 4 expresses itself in conjunction with 3 in 3w4 which presents more of a borderline personality disorder disintegration pattern than with a 5 that has more of a paranoid disintegration pattern.
i also know that in the past, i've definitely been one of those sensitive people. i've cut ties, altho unlike many others, i've never done so permanently. but i've also gone through huge phases of withdrawal in general, so the line does not seem entirely clear to me. the angry part of me, the resentful part of me, might feel some blame towards them for "making me feel this way," (which is setting a person up not to own their own feelings), but in general there was just a lot of my own issues and repressed emotions that i didn't know how to truly see, truly feel, and truly work with directly.
but it, "doorslamming," has so much to do with so many things. i've seen it in less snarky but equally nose-up, hypercritical versions with an enfp so/sp friend of mine. an infp 9w1 sx/sp. an enfj 1w2 sx/so. maybe a connection to 1 is part of it, this sense of self-righteousness that accompanies the decision to cut ties in a clearly ego-mediated, self-protective move. for me it had to do with self-shaming that compounded what i was feeling while, at the same time, locating not only the judgment but the feeling itself outside of me, in the other person. and then not recognizing how to cleanse myself of that, so carrying it around and having that feel like i was being suffocated by this person's influence on my world, because i did not know how to own my own feelings and both observe and work with them directly, to really dive into them so i can release the energy they have wound together within me. but if your tendency is to disconnect because if you observe yourself, your self-shaming tendency will likely run amok, you just create a kind of neurotic split where you don't truly know how to be with your own emotions and own them as yours. without doing this, there's no way of using these emotions as information that can help lead you back to a deeper understanding of your own needs.
finally, a lot of the time the "doorslamming" witch hunt thing comes from people who are obviously hurting and not really sure how to own their own shit either. "doorslamming" as an accusation or evidence of character flaw is completely unproductive and a really obvious lack of empathy, which is generally both a result of and an influence that makes more likely these kinds of relational splits in the first place. accusing someone of being childish or condemning them as "self-destructive" and "selfish" for leaving or needing to take responsibility for their own boundaries and/or personal space isn't a really fair move to make. but as a communication breakdown problem, it's complicated to assess. it's only realistic and productive to acknowledge that in protective mode, the ego can't really do a great job of empathizing and taking on others' realities. that's a fact that transcends type. the conflicts we are discussing are a result of that fact more than a result of the types themselves simply conflicting out of their own inherent nature (and nfp/nfj can be difficult when trust is lost because we don't have a lot of cognitive common ground, even if our values and ego-types are often deeply overlapping).
i mean, i love cognitive functions as much as anyone, but to me they are helpful for socio-cognitive things. trying to pin down the nature of shared experience, what we can observe, the modality of information for each other, etc. concpetualizing the structure of information. and as information about ourselves i do think it has a predictive quality for who we are and how we work, sure, especially in terms of systems and concrete tasks in career and whatnot.
but ultimately, in relational conflict, a more psychosocial, psychoanalytic, ego focus is more helpful to understand personal differences that result in different needs and the patterns that emerge that reciprocally reinforce and result from those needs. especially in terms of how we interpret them. these are more helpful in terms of the "who someone is" humanistically, what their relationship with themselves is likely to be like.
Perhaps it is the case that you are just making use of my quote and getting a message out... but if you are truly lecturing me in this regard then you do not understand my views on doorslamming at all.
Anyone is allowed to depart from my life at anytime they please. My ex is not the first person to cut-off all communication with me. He is the first person to cut-off all communication with me without providing me an explanation as to why. Prior to this I took 'the explanation' part for granted. I didn't recognize how dependent I am on that piece for recovery. And having first feared for him for several months...then wondered forever what it was that I did...and on and on and on... I'm here because I'm interested in making sure this never happens to me again. That's all.
with that said...I'm sick and I'm going to grab a cup of coffee and see if there is anything else I care to add after reading Z Buck's subsequent post.
[MENTION=7842]Z Buck McFate[/MENTION]: I'm pretty sure you have me on ignore (I mean, who could miss the dozen or so references to IGNORING people in this thread) but I need to ask you a question anyway. I mean, I know you don't actually read many other posts either, which in the internet forum world is akin to not listening, but I would appreciate it if you could help me with a definition at this point in time. Maybe some kindly person could quote me and then Z Buck can see? Bonus points if an INFJ quotes me since Z will more likely read that.
What in the world is "raw batter" - you've used that expression so many times now it's become utterly ambiguous to me. I mean, my bikini tops aren't matching my bottoms, but after all, spaghetti sauce did spill everywhere last time I invited you over for dinner. I had to change into something!
P.S. This question is not me 'playing stupid', it's legitimate, but the rest is me being a smart-ass.
Perhaps it is the case that you are just making use of my quote and getting a message out... but if you are truly lecturing me in this regard then you do not understand my views on doorslamming at all.
Anyone is allowed to depart from my life at anytime they please. My ex is not the first person to cut-off all communication with me. He is the first person to cut-off all communication with me without providing me an explanation as to why. Prior to this I took 'the explanation' part for granted. I didn't recognize how dependent I am on that piece for recovery. And having first feared for him for several months...then wondered forever what it was that I did...and on and on and on... I'm here because I'm interested in making sure this never happens to me again. That's all.
with that said...I'm sick and I'm going to grab a cup of coffee and see if there is anything else I care to add after reading Z Buck's subsequent post.
only the first part was a response to what you said. i should have used a couple of line breaks after, because you're right, it was just my overall response and not to you.
i'm sorry you had such a shitty experience. i wouldn't know how to handle that myself. i'd probably self-shame, be extremely resentful, and be terrified that it would happen again. it would be hard to trust myself enough to let it go and find my bearings, accept where i'm at, and just do my best from then on out. that's at least a difficult process that i have struggled with when feeling rejected in general.
Anyone is allowed to depart from my life at anytime they please. My ex is not the first person to cut-off all communication with me. He is the first person to cut-off all communication with me without providing me an explanation as to why. Prior to this I took 'the explanation' part for granted. I didn't recognize how dependent I am on that piece for recovery. And having first feared for him for several months...then wondered forever what it was that I did...and on and on and on... I'm here because I'm interested in making sure this never happens to me again. That's all.
I'm not sure if I'm breaking my rule to not generalize by the way I'm going to write this, but I couldn't think of a way to say this using my own experiences.
My best guess? Your ex is thinking that you already should know the explanation. He probably expected you to pick up on the subtle clues and interpret them the way he meant them. And if you say you don't know, or you didn't pick up on those subtle clues, well, he'll tell himself that you must be lying about that. How could you not notice and correctly interpret subtle body language and emotional clues? And if you don't know, well, he's not going to tell you. You need to figure it out for yourself. Especially if you really cared.
If you are referring specifically to what Z Buck presented (minus the 'flattery' factor) then I strongly disagree. That is not how xxxPs structure information in their brains in an effort to navigate the world...that is quite distinctly xxxJ. Whether that structure leads to doorslamming...this I do not believe.
I will suggest here that the self concept of the NP is possibly the strongest of any type's self-concept, and because of this it is much more traumatic to a sense of self to accept information that undermines their foundational assumptions about who they are. If they consider self to be logical and objective, then you will not convince them otherwise. If they consider self to be empathetic and kind, they will not be convinced otherwise. It isn't about action, but about being. For the Te and the Fe it is about doing and not being, so to present criticism is to recommend a change in action and not to undermine a sense of self. When NPs do intake conflicting information about a sense of self it can cause them to fall into a deep confusion and self-loathing. It is also difficult for NP types to distance themselves from criticism and take it in as something that is not undermining of self. The Fi-Si and Ti-Si loops create a stronger absolute sense of being based on experience and strong, conclusive internal frameworks of reality. There can be a unique level of clarity in this combination, but it does tend towards projection and dismissal of information that falls outside of it. I think you have the constructs backwards.
Ni and Si people can be absolutely distorted in their thinking, but at least for Ni, it is not dismissal of external data, but rather poor internal processing that results in faulty conclusions. Perhaps I am mistaken, but can explain why I am?
only the first part was a response to what you said. i should have used a couple of line breaks after, because you're right, it was just my overall response and not to you.
i'm sorry you had such a shitty experience. i wouldn't know how to handle that myself.
Thanks. Yah, I'm absolutely NOT on an INFJ witch hunt. If anything my experience has expanded my compassion for the INFJ...and all types for that matter. <-I don't imagine this always shines through in how I communicate though.
[MENTION=7842]Z Buck McFate[/MENTION]: I'm pretty sure you have me on ignore (I mean, who could miss the dozen or so references to IGNORING people in this thread) but I need to ask you a question anyway. I mean, I know you don't actually read many other posts either, which in the internet forum world is akin to not listening, but I would appreciate it if you could help me with a definition at this point in time. Maybe some kindly person could quote me and then Z Buck can see? Bonus points if an INFJ quotes me since Z will more likely read that.
What in the world is "raw batter" - you've used that expression so many times now it's become utterly ambiguous to me. I mean, my bikini tops aren't matching my bottoms, but after all, spaghetti sauce did spill everywhere last time I invited you over for dinner. I had to change into something!
P.S. This question is not me 'playing stupid', it's legitimate, but the rest is me being a smart-ass.
from my perspective, sounding angry or a bit spiteful is more than just being honest with how you feel. it's asking the other person to take on the responsibility to help deal with your anger directly, rather than with your vulnerability. it's asking them to offer their vulnerability rather than you offering your own. while tinging their vulnerability with a feeling of blame. it just almost always brings out the worst in me, and i'm often not strong enough to focus on what would be best and move on. it also makes me feel responsible for someone else's needs without feeling like my needs have been heard. at times i can own up to that challenge and do that. a lot of the times, i don't.
the raw batter thing i presume to mean the unfilteredness of experience. for us, we identify with that less; that's less of who we are, and we're more of our interpretation of that, how we organize that into an intention that feels worth it or not worth it. we're not so attached to holding on to our experience. we're much more attached to holding on to a sense of the value of our intention. an attitude that we can believe in. that's how we see that our aim can harmonize with the aim of others and feel like we can truly accomplish something together.
at the same time, i agree that sometimes it is worth it, in relationships that you are committed to, to really stay through the conflict and work through the conflict rather than run away from it. but to do that, i personally would need reason to commit, and to feel like i had a chance to be heard eventually, and that it would be part of what i need to grow as well. i know i need a lot of support to work through issues that have been made cold by shame. or i need a lot of investment and a lot of trust, a lot of attachment that helps me feel why it could be worth it to do the work now, in this situation, with this person. there just needs to be a belief in the spirit of us (and i have not been very good throughout most of my life at really steadying this sense of belief; also, see: e4, existential angst, self-esteem, depression, etc).
there may be more to this, or a way of communicating what the needs we actually have (or i actually have) to understand how to allow others to feel like they know where we are at more. i totally am on board with this idea, because even marginal improvements for me have changed a lot in my relationships.
I'm not sure if I'm breaking my rule to not generalize by the way I'm going to write this, but I couldn't think of a way to say this using my own experiences.
My best guess? Your ex is thinking that you already should know the explanation. He probably expected you to pick up on the subtle clues and interpret them the way he meant them. And if you say you don't know, or you didn't pick up on those subtle clues, well, he'll tell himself that you must be lying about that. How could you not notice and correctly interpret subtle body language and emotional clues? And if you don't know, well, he's not going to tell you. You need to figure it out for yourself. Especially if you really cared.
My ex didn't really have a problem telling me off haha. What happened was he came to believe I had done something I had not...and told me off. <-Once he figured-out I was innocent in that regard he really fell apart (stopped eating, stopped sleeping...stopped talking.)
I think I no longer belong in the doorslamming thread. I think I belong in the 'Shame for Dummies' thread.
My ex didn't really have a problem telling me off haha. What happened was he came to believe I had done something I had not...and told me off. <-Once he figured-out I was innocent in that regard he really fell apart (stopped eating, stopped sleeping...stopped talking.)
I think I no longer belong in the doorslamming thread. I think I belong in the 'Shame for Dummies' thread.
Raw batter means the tendency of some types to offer up unprocessed data as it comes to them, vs assembling it into a final form and presenting it. Both methods have pros and cons.
Often, those who are in the habit of cake baking either assume that they are being offered what appears to be batter but it is being called cake, or else get frustrated that the other person expects them to wait with them through the whole baking process.
Those who are in the habit of mixing batter and consulting throughout the baking process often feel that being offered a cake without any chance for submitting the other parties ideas, preferences, suggestions, input or helpful outside information going into the batter mix is a recipe for unsatisfactory results.
At least that is my interpretation of it all. Z Buck can correct me if I'm wrong. (The last two paragraphs are just my own expansion.)
Raw batter means the tendency of some types to offer up unprocessed data as it comes to them, vs assembling it into a final form and presenting it. Both methods have pros and cons.
Often, those who are in the habit of cake baking either assume that they are being offered what appears to be batter but it is being called cake, or else get frustrated that the other person expects them to wait with them through the whole baking process.
Those who are in the habit of mixing batter and consulting throughout the baking process often feel that being offered a cake without any chance for submitting the other parties ideas, preferences, suggestions, input or helpful outside information going into the batter mix is a recipe for unsatisfactory results.
At least that is my interpretation of it all. Z Buck can correct me if I'm wrong. (The last two paragraphs are just my own expansion.)
I will suggest here that the self concept of the NP is possibly the strongest of any type's self-concept, and because of this it is much more traumatic to a sense of self to accept information that undermines their foundational assumptions about who they are. If they consider self to be logical and objective, then you will not convince them otherwise. If they consider self to be empathetic and kind, they will not be convinced otherwise. It isn't about action, but about being. For the Te and the Fe it is about doing and not being, so to present criticism is to recommend a change in action and not to undermine a sense of self. When NPs do intake conflicting information about a sense of self it can cause them to fall into a deep confusion and self-loathing. It is also difficult for NP types to distance themselves from criticism and take it in as something that is not undermining of self. The Fi-Si and Ti-Si loops create a stronger absolute sense of being based on experience and strong, conclusive internal frameworks of reality. There can be a unique level of clarity in this combination, but it does tend towards projection and dismissal of information that falls outside of it. I think you have the constructs backwards.
^^I had to read this over a few times merely because as an ENFP e7...words like 'traumatic' and 'self-loathing' don't readily compute in my mind...but other than that...you've got it all right as far as I'm concerned.
Ni and Si people can be absolutely distorted in their thinking, but at least for Ni, it is not dismissal of external data, but rather poor internal processing that results in faulty conclusions. Perhaps I am mistaken, but can explain why I am?
It has never been my experience that Ni dismisses external data. To the contrary. That is where I believe the protest comes from. A protest that people are interpreting as a dismissal.
My ex didn't really have a problem telling me off haha. What happened was he came to believe I had done something I had not...and told me off. <-Once he figured-out I was innocent in that regard he really fell apart (stopped eating, stopped sleeping...stopped talking.)
1) When I was younger, I used to actually believe that if I suffered it would somehow either relieve or make up for the suffering of others. Perhaps he thought that he was somehow atoning for telling you off and being wrong. I realized that this type of thinking wasn't very realistic, but it's still kind of there.
2) I can get very attached to my explanations of what's going on. Add to that, that something in me makes me feel that I have to be perfect and right. To admit to being wrong can be embarrassing and shameful to me. To have hurt someone can also be embarrassing and shameful to me. Unfortunately, the shame from the former (being wrong) can actually overwhelm the shame from the latter (hurting someone), and I will selfishly nurse my own feelings instead of prioritizing the feelings of the person I hurt.
[MENTION=7842]Z Buck McFate[/MENTION] I haven't been following the intricate details of the dialogue this is part of, but you articulate a lot of stuff here that meshes with my experience (as an INFJ and specifically an INFJ in a relationship with an INFP).
I think that INFJs are exceptionally sensitive to it whilst having the least amount confidence that we know we’re Right about the gut feelings we get. I think that probably more doorslams than not are because the INFJ has a gut feeling they can’t get rid of, whilst being totally and completely unsure about whether it really is the other person or if it’s them- and (we're so absolutely and completely bombarded with Ni possibilities that) figuring out where and how to draw a boundary starts looking like one of Gödel's theorems.
Other than wanting a better phrase than "Ni possibilities" (for me the problem is the translation of Ni and Ni-Se information into consciously understandable material, not possibilities), the above really resonates for me.
figuring out where and how to draw a boundary
^ ^ This phrase in particular pings for me as something true in myself that I don't quite understand yet. I really appreciate this
*thinking*
INFPs have an advantage in that they seem to inherently feel an importance of their personal viewpoint that we struggle to justify. On the downside, it can make them sound "me me me"- but on the plus side, they are ABLE to say "me me me" in a pinch, when backed into that corner where it becomes necessary; when INFJs get backed into that corner......*crickets and tumbleweeds*. And while I think a great many INFPs are too humble to actually say "me me me" lightly, my point is rather that they have more access to it than we do in the first place.
I agree with this 100% given my INFJ-INFP experiences, especially the bolded parts.
I think that INFJs don't want to say anything until they are relatively certain (1) they aren't being controlling (many have expressed loathing about forcing their ideals onto other people)
I am absolutely repulsed by any role in which I am controlling and forcing anything onto other(s).
and that the need they are to assert is completely reasonable and (2) the person in question would prefer they assert that need rather than simply back away and disappear.
Though in my case, I first put considerable effort into trying to adapt to whatever the environment is as a first step. This may also be an enneagram thing. I say this because I did a questionnaire once that accurately pinpointed the priority order of my response to external threats and I feel like it's relevant here even if it's not specifically about threats.
My first response is to try to adapt/comply with what the others do or want. If that isn't possible or effective, I withdraw. And if THAT isn't possible/effective, I'll fight back. By the time I get to that third one, fighting back, whoa, watch out. I try to (and generally manage to) avoid that last (fighting back) because when I unleash that, I can rip someone's soul to shreds using scary-accurate information and insight.
In contrast, my 9w8 INFP partner's first response is to withdraw. If that's not possible or effective, she fights back. And her third and last response would be to comply/adapt. And even that - for her, the comply/adapt response retains her sense of self and her needs intact - she doesn't allow the process to get into her like it does for me.
[It's rather ironic- people who show up and say that backing away/"doorslamming" is a form of "controlling" are inadvertently locking in any suspicion they are indeed 'incompatible'. I think it appears outwardly as some need to control the external environment, but it's more like a need to be able to know what to expect in the external environment because it's so entirely taxing to have our focus dragged out there (least Se). The more someone else needs to perceive this as 'control'- they more I feel the need to distance them because they clearly see the world so absolutely differently from me that perceptions are likely irreconcilable.]
eta: Actually- I think this is something totally germaine to the discussion- if someone around me expresses the opinion that they think I'm "controlling", I am absolutely going to back away from them......not because it's unflattering, but because I'm not interested in "controlling" anyone. The notion that I'm backing away because it's not flattering is.....a very petty assumption to me. It presumes I could change if I wanted to- and that I'm simply dismissing the opinion because I don't want to believe it. On the contrary, it's because I believe that's their experience- and if the best I can do at being malleable is still coming across as 'controlling', then that person is incompatible with me because I have no interest in making someone feel controlled.
This makes so SO much sense to me! I really appreciate the distinction between "not flattering" (which, yes, seems extremely petty to me as a priority) and the other person's experience and not wanting to (my words) play that role in relationship with the other person given their experience of interaction.
I think that- because J types tend to have a more forceful tone- Ps project *a lot* of certainty into what we're saying that truly isn't there.
Actually, in our case, it's the INFP who speaks with force and certainty, not me the "J" (unless you're talking about dominant function here, which would make my INFP a J-dom and me a P-dom. In which case that is true.)
I suspect many Ps are so certain of their perception of it that they don't believe it's projected- it maybe seems like there's no way someone can have that tone and not be certain.....
I have a somewhat different arrangement of these elements. Yes, my INFP is very certain of her perception - even when she's wrong, she's internally and externally convinced at the time that she's 100% correct. In contrast, I am ALWAYS questioning (internally and/or externally) any conclusions I come to at some level, and am always at some level open to a given situation being different from what I see going on at the moment.
I find my INFP's tone when stating her assessments and conclusions to be very forceful. Internally, I "code" her kind of tone as indicating a very rigorous process of taking in lots of data and painstakingly detailed analysis. Such a forceful tone, to me, means that the assessment or conclusion is the tip of a very large iceberg composed of masses of data inflow and analytical analysis of that data from the ground up.
But in terms of her actual information processing, my INFP will make very forceful assessments and conclusions with very little actual information about the situation at hand, and little analysis other than "This reminds me of [a pattern from my past] so therefore this is what's happening" or "[My values say X and this is inside/outside those values so it is true/not true, okay/not okay."
edited to add: I just remembered this! Another layer of those interactions. I will often use possible conceptual keys or frameworks as jumping-off material to help me to understand what's going on. I'm not particularly attached to the frameworks when I do this, I'm just trying to get some sort of useful anchor as I try to understand and articulate the information flowing in through Ni-Se. But when I do this, my partner assumes I am "making an argument" by using whatever concept or framework I'm using.
So for example (behind a spoiler for length):
we once had a discussion about why a certain musician's vocal sound makes me uncomfortable. I brought up cultural appropriation as a framework that seemed somehow related to what I was picking up. I was using this framework as a way to sort of "think through" the Ni-Se response I have to the sound. But my partner got all upset that I was "accusing" this musician of cultural appropriation and wanted to have an argument about that and telling me I was getting off topic when I didn't want to focus on whether or not I was (unfairly, in her eyes) "accusing" this musician of cultural appropriation. And I kept saying, "I'm not making an argument about that" and she kept telling me I was going off topic when I didn't want to have that framework be the central point of the discussion. But for me, the central concern was, "I have this sense-response to the sound of this musician, how can I consciously understand or articulate that sense-response in the most clear and accurate way?"
This discussion was notable because it was the one in which we finally realized the dynamic for what it was. She told me that she feels like she can't help but focus on the "argument" that I take so lightly as a starting point. She said that for her, it's like a moth to a flame kind of thing, I am making what she experiences as a judgement and that becomes the primary focus for her at an almost instinctive level. IMO this comes back to the difference between judging-dom and perceiving-dom. As a judging-dom, she processes most everything through judgements (Fi), and so any conceptual stuff or frameworks I use can seem like judgements.
But for me, I'm just grabbing at material that might, if used well in-process, help me to more accurately pinpoint what's actually going on coming to me from my perception. In the example above, "cultural appropriation" was for me a stepping-stone perspective that helped me to further articulate what I was actually perceiving at the sense level - kind of like using the concept as a metaphor that points the way toward more clarity. Certainly not an argument or conclusion for me.
but I believe the reason most INFJs back away from acquaintanceships is because there's so much uncertainty surfacing about the interpersonal dynamics with someone that it gets overwhelming. There's this "I don't know if it's you or if it's me, but something about this has become more effort than it's worth" element to it, I don't know how else to describe it. I think that everyone experiences that feeling every now and then- but we seem to experience it at the drop of a hat.
Interesting point about acquaintanceships. Never thought of it like that, but it make sense to me.
I think the reciprocate may be the 'manipulation' and 'playing stupid' it seems like NFPs do- it's really hard to imagine not having access to those parts of my memory that prevent me from even attempting to put forward the kinds of 'raw batter' that NFPs do. I could either trust it really is their blind spot- even though I can't imagine what that would be like to not remember details that would render what I'm putting forth obsolete- or I can assume they really do remember the details and they're just trying to see if they can get away with it/checking to see if I'm stupid enough to buy what they're saying (which is how it appears).
I'm not sure what this is about because I haven't been following the details of the conversation really closely. But I have had many experiences with my INFP where she will make a definitive statement and I will ask for concrete data/examples to back it up, and she says she can't remember any concrete examples and doesn't do the details like I do. Is that related at all to what you're saying here?
And on this topic, I've also had the experience of her mis-remembering certain concrete details in ways that seem tailored to proving a point that her Te-inf is trying to make in relation to Fi. But when she does this, she is 100% certain she is correct in her memory and I am wrong, despite the fact that I have a scary-accurate memory for the details of human interaction (linked in part to some of my professional work). I can certainly be wrong, but many times I am not.
Overall, my INFP partner seems to truly hate the Ti-heavy analysis of lived experience that comes up for me when I am trying to figure out what's actually going on between us. It makes her angry. And I find myself really really frustrated with what I experience as the faux-logic of her Te-inf because its logic seems to be about justifying her Fi and Fi-Se conclusions and judgements.
more eta:
Yep. The inability to take in criticism and allow for realities that aren't flattering- though the exact manifestation may vary according to 'type' (with some 'type' commonalities that surface)- is not, in itself, type related. While Ni may back away without being able to say anything, Ne tends to blast people with self-serving shape-shifty logic (without much concern for how it's making people on the other end feel, because empathy has been shut off).
I really don't think that "self-serving shape-shify logic" is Ne, at least not in the INFP configuration. I really think that's Fi-Te (with Te-inf serving Fi). Ne has a much lighter and more playful feel, and is not hardcore judgmental like that Fi-Te combination. And yes, "self-serving shape-shify logic" is a good description of that Fi-Te thing, in my experience. Basically, Te finds plausible arguments that justify what Fi has already concluded. Attempts to track that logic as if it really is objective (as Te-inf fancies itself to be in this context) yields exposure of that self-serving shape-shifty dynamic. Though it's like tying to pin down smoke to address it directly.
Seems to me that healthy infusion of Ne could be really useful to break the pattern when the INFP Fi-Te thing gets going.
INFJs - Less rigid (weak) ego boundaries hence a more malleable ego/sense of self...More susceptible to being hurt by external emotional fluctuations hence more rigid exterior structures/gateways/armor...From outside appears as authoritarian/unyielding...as well as less adaptable
INFP - More rigid (strong) ego boundaries hence a less malleable ego/sense of self...Less susceptible to being hurt by external emotional fluctuations hence less rigid exterior structures/gateways/armor...From outside appears as whimsical/capricous/flighty...as well as more adaptable
So INFPs' (or Fi-doms'/auxes') way of making themselves more vulnerable may be, based on these descriptions, letting more criticism by the partner seep into their ego (making their ego more malleable for the partner) and trying to consciously regulate the surges...
To me, it feels like INFP has this fuzzy Fi framework and is trying to scan the entire framework so that INFP can get a focus on and pinpoint where the answer to the issue at hand lies in the framework...
On the other hand, I already have some certain definite parameters of the issue decided in my mind that I believe would serve as cornerstones for the INFP (or any other party) so that the INFP can pin them on his/her Fi-framework and just concentrate on the area lying inbetween rather than making an entire (lengthy) scan of the framework...
So I have been basically limiting the area to be focused (hence shortening evaluation duration) but, OTOH, allowing the INFP to come to his/her own conclusions inside that limited area...This I guess may make INFP (or Fi-dom/aux) uneasy and may seem as I am forcing them to leave certain parts of the framework out of evaluation so may feel to them as being forced/channeled towards a certain conclusion...
Yes, I can see the value it that. And yes, that is how it feels on the receiving end. It feels like you only want to give me the perception of choice, but not an actual choice.
Ne, OTOH, may voice out several possibilities and Ni would shoot them down leaving the only viable option (from Ni perspective) alive...This may feel as invalidation to Ne...
I do not know what it takes for INFPs to reduce many possibilities/options in their mind down to a single conclusion...how or do you zoom into the relevant part of the framework to arrive at a single conclusion/decision to your satisfaction regarding any given issue? Back and forth Ne banter?
It's a combination of mental trial and error and an intuition for what will and won't work. It's like how Se physically/tangibly wants to test things out, before they can come to a conclusion, but Ne wants to try on the different options and combinations in theoretical terms to see which fits. Ji gives us a fuzzy, intuitive picture of the conclusion (which is distinct and clear in flavour - ie. I'll know it when I see it) and we try to feel our way to get to that place.
I think Lenore Thomson used the metaphor of NFPs finding the perfect spaghetti sauce. We can imagine clearly in our heads what the perfect spaghetti sauce will taste like, but we don't know how to create that exact taste. Si will give us some background on what sorts of basic ingredients are useful, so we try to sample and combine those in certain approaches, guided by the Fi ideal image and the Ne intuitive nose for things, until we get there. Someone else might offer up their spaghetti sauce recipe and allow us to taste it. It might not be 'right' but it might provide some Si data (even if it's completely 'wrong') that provides a Ne spark of ideas that advances things. We can then factor this into the mix and allow us to refine our work-in-progress sauce. This is not just a metaphor; I literally cook just like this. I have a strong idea of how I want the meal to taste, and will repeatedly test and make subtle additions until it tastes like I imagined it would in my head.
Note: we don't try on every option - like PB says below, we quickly eliminate a large amount, and then narrow things down from there. Ask any NP if they like(d) doing group brainstorming at school or work. We seriously HATE it. It's so friggin slow and labourious, and insists that we write down and consider every, goddamn option. Ugh! One group brainstorming session in school, and the following refinement/selection of options, took anywhere from 10-100 times longer than it would if I did it in my head. It just feels like torture, because I'm having my arms and legs bound then being forced to crawl at snail's pace when all I want to do is run.
I am interested to hear more about this. Can you expand on it?
Agreed. It was surprising to me that we had to define doorslam to such a degree of minutia. To me, it seemed obvious that the doorslam was an acceptable option in cases of abuse, etc. I'd already mentally trimmed out the extremes.
I think that Pi in alliance with Je can be quite directive though. It's a shortcut but it comes at a cost of limiting scope to self-serving purpose. Because it does not wish to discuss the off-limit portion, and most people can sense that portions have been intentionally left out, it can seem disingenuous too. Still, I do understand the why. Fleshing out a fully-realized Fi answer takes forever. I've literally spent hours at times looking at every internal space and trying to account for every single variable contained within.
Agreed. I see it as a spectrum and it feels unique to me inside each person as I contemplate the energies of all involved.
Indeed. By not making an effort to look for the cause, you are affecting my internal landscape with your emotions. You are making the proverbial "white noise" for me and I cannot focus on much else when I sense heavy, strong emotions inside you that are brushed off, patently avoided or denied. All that's necessary is to say, "Yes, I feel something, not sure what" but to have it denied is just difficult since you're sending out all these signals that interfere with the smooth functioning of my feeling-radar.
It does seem to me that Fe types get very good though at bouncing blame all around to everyone else, to varying degrees of course.
And how do you discern intent? Can you flesh that out for me?
As for the rest ... I find it interesting that you feel INFP's are less likely to be hurt. We are frequently injured in an emotionally broken world that doesn't pay much attention to emotional health. We learn that the world really doesn't value emotions like we do from a very young age and we naturally turn to the internal processing of them since we are wired that way. Me personally, I historically have exuded very little negative emotion so that it cannot be used in any way against me or to influence other people into action. I dislike emotions being used as tools.
At the moment though, I feel annoyed discussing things with INFJ's these days. I know some of that impatience leaks through and it makes it harder for you to hear me. But I want to be more true to how I am wired on the forum, so I don't sanitize everything. Oh, I sanitize most of it out. But I want to be heard at least a little bit from that emotional truth perspective.
You just don't see the sanitation happening. I've personally been very hurt on this forum, but you'd never know that from my posts. In fact, when you assumed that I must not have encountered difficult people in my life (from an earlier transaction between us) that was fairly insulting too actually. Not hurtful, just rather invalidating to make that assumption.
You limit the scope to focus on it in an Ni - Fe way. To focus on it in a healthy Fi - Ne way, I need to see the scope as widely as possible.
Well, I think it's more about Fi doing what it needs to do more than anything. When you leave stuff off-limits, it's like asking me to drive the car with one eye closed. You are limiting my perceptive abilities.
We often leave Fi judgements as balls in the air until real-life points us in-the-moment to adapt. We have to trust that our Ne will help us adapt.
I liked your post. This is of interest because from my perspective, as an Fi dom, you not paying attention to that emotion is the same as not taking care of your emotional health. If I was around you in real-life (and to a limited degree here on the forum) I would sense your inner emotional construct and will realize you are ignoring it. Now granted, to you it's not pressing and indeed, 80% of it is transient and not of huge import. But when you ignore it, I can sense you're not tending to it and it feels like you have a crying baby in there that you're not paying attention to. (cred to Seymour for the crying baby analogy!)
So, just sharing that so you can see it from my vantage point too. That's the kind of "white noise" that I hear all the time. Like a radio always playing.
Just got in from grocery shopping. Mind in the clouds, came up with the following:
Ji highly manages the internal world in response to powerlessness / insecurity with the outside world.
Je highly manages the outside world in response to powerlessness / insecurity with the inner world.
ie "I cannot control what the outside world does but at least I can manage my response to it inside."
and similarly, "I cannot control what the inside world does but at least I can manage my response to it outside."
For me personally, it means I massively manage my inner world, process difficult emotions on my own daily, examine how I can better avoid problems in the outside world and try to create systems to address this. For my husband (to use a full Je dom example) it means to massively manage the external world logistically, since this avoids inner world distress. For him, this includes both objects (to a greater extent) and people (to a lesser extent). Switch that for Fe.
If my inner world is tidy, the external world can be messy and it doesn't affect me much. For him, if the external world is tidy the inner world doesn't affect him much. But, when you mess with my outer world in a way I didn't predict, it rattles the inner world and gives me work to do. For him, when the outer world gets messed with, he just pushes and shoves the outer world back. I retreat from the outer realm, but he gives it attitude. But mess with his inner space ... make him doubt his sense of self, it really messes with him. (His last job, those EI people spouting the EI crap, they really manipulated his self-concept. It's not that he can't benefit from the soft skills at times, but boy. Anyway, story for another day.)
Similarly, you mess with my inner space, I will push back hard and I will slap the internal world around. Mostly mine and sometimes yours too.
And here we are. This is so distressing to INFJs because it messes with the inner realm. Perhaps you feel powerless to push back in there. The work one would do in there is just so messy in your inner space that it's especially not fair to ask you to do it in this venue. And to stop me from poking it, you give me back some boundaries to say, "Hey, I'm not comfortable" and basically put me in a tier where I can have less capability to affect that inner space.
When an INFP is faced with an inner space turmoil, it's not easy either. Heck, it's like torture. But the work is known to us and we are familiar with having to manage that space all the time. The same corollary holds true for the opposite no doubt. Like March said, if she goes and has a snack, a cup of tea, often times the attention to the outer has managed the inner. Magic!
I think overall, INFP's have more affect and control over the outer world than they realize, and INFJ's have more affect and control over the inner world than they realize. In some key way our approach to managing these areas is in utter opposition and this is the cause of our clash. But I can't articulate the feeling of it in words. Both our types can tend to feel more powerless than we are, and tend to throw up our hands in a powerless way. I want to say, you have affect there, you are not powerless inside. Just like I can stand up and push the outer world around, you can do the same inside too. You do not have to blame the vectors who affect the inner world for disturbing it. Just like I do not have to blame the outer vectors for messing with me.
Take my example above. I was angry at having my inner space disturbed by someone basically suggesting if I did not do what they wanted, I would be deemed an inconsiderate person. SO WHAT, eh? That emotion is not about her, it's about me. Just like, if you don't want your world disturbed by me saying I see something that's more hidden to you, that emotion is not about me. It's about you.
There's a universality to this that's very elegant.
What causes you to be irritated with other people's strong emotions? What feelings do they invoke in you? Fear, anger etc.? Is there a relation there with childhood and parenting style?
It basically comes down to a lack of self-awareness and personal responsibility when emotionally throwing your weight around. I don't always react negatively to strong emotions, only when I feel like the person is playing games with emotions (intentionally or carelessly). Sensing strong feeling in others evokes different emotions depending on the context. In positive usage I can experience the deepest of empathy. If it's a negative usage, common possible feelings are: betrayal, a sense of injustice, that I'm being driven away (the anti-thesis of intimacy), helplessness, outrage or frustration with the hypocrisy/inconsistency of it, like I'm not being considered, that I can't think straight and want to get away from it. I'll go back to that metaphor of the crying baby: I feel the variety of emotions much like another person present (depending on the circumstances and my level of intimacy with that person).
One possible situation could be that the crying baby and it's mother are in a cafe, and I'm another customer. The mother is just sitting there and leaving the baby crying (because it doesn't bother her or she's just used to it), and it's seriously disrupting me. I can feel pretty unforgiving in that situation, because IMO the mother should either get the baby under control or leave. She should not just leave it crying without consideration of the impact to the other patrons - because her baby, and her choice to do nothing about it, are dictating the conditions that everyone else must endure. It's selfish and inconsiderate. In another situation, I could be in the supermarket and see a flustered mother at the check out trying to do her shopping, whilst attempting to hold (and calm) her screaming baby. She has to do her shopping and doesn't have much choice about being there. In that case, I feel empathy for her troubles, and may go up and try to help her with the baby (eg. hold it while she's busy or try to comfort/distract it) so she can get her things finished. Hey, even a joke about how much kids seem to hate the supermarket might make her feel a little less embarrassed.
What do you mean when you say that about childhood? Do you mean my childhood or the other persons? Can you expand on that?
I thought they can wield/control their emotions much better than others therefore would be less susceptible to other people's emotional surges/outbursts...I may have been mistaken...perhaps INFPs are hurt more by lack of (any kind of) emotional feedback so in such cases they try invoking emotions in others? I don't really know...
We're more adaptable to those fluctuations but not impenetrable. We can naturally go with the flow, but we are hurt just as much by people unleashing on us or ignoring us.
OTOH, why the need to keep emotions (safe?) inside...? Have externally expressed emotions been used against you (to humiliate you etc.) in the past? Does that have something to do with your childhood and your parenting?
I think every INFP has had their emotions used against them when they were young. It has less to do with their upbringing and more to do with their naturally sensitivity to that. After it happens enough (usually by about age 13 or so), we get a bit more 'hard' externally, maybe even a little cold at times. You know that Beatles song, You've Got to Hide Your Love Away? That's like the INFP anthem. If you feel intensely and with great depth, don't let people see it, because it leaves you so incredibly vulnerable.
What can INFJs here to do to make themselves more comprehensible to a Fi user? What can we do to expedite the process? What kind of interaction/reasoning style do Fi users respond better to? Some tools to employ other then analogies?
Don't be afraid to tell us your experiences or what your ideas and opinions are. This will allow us to understand you and figure out what we thing ourselves. If you need specific things from us, or want to know something specific, be more direct about it - we're not good at picking up Fe hints or signals. I think this is part of what Fi-users find difficult about the doorslam stuff - it's like you're ending things with us before we've been given a chance to change and/or give you what you need. The idea that someone might cut us off because we unknowingly screwed up, really freaks us out.
I think it originates in that thread, INFPs, what do INFJs do that drives you nuts?. It was about how Ne presenting unfinished ideas to Ni was like giving them raw batter rather than a cake. There can be an expectation then that the other person has to do the work of cooking the cake themselves before figuring out how it's meant to taste.
Just got in from grocery shopping. Mind in the clouds, came up with the following:
Ji highly manages the internal world in response to powerlessness / insecurity with the outside world.
Je highly manages the outside world in response to powerlessness / insecurity with the inner world.
ie "I cannot control what the outside world does but at least I can manage my response to it inside."
and similarly, "I cannot control what the inside world does but at least I can manage my response to it outside."
For me personally, it means I massively manage my inner world, process difficult emotions on my own daily, examine how I can better avoid problems in the outside world and try to create systems to address this. For my husband (to use a full Je dom example) it means to massively manage the external world logistically, since this avoids inner world distress. For him, this includes both objects (to a greater extent) and people (to a lesser extent). Switch that for Fe.
If my inner world is tidy, the external world can be messy and it doesn't affect me much. For him, if the external world is tidy the inner world doesn't affect him much. But, when you mess with my outer world in a way I didn't predict, it rattles the inner world and gives me work to do. For him, when the outer world gets messed with, he just pushes and shoves the outer world back. I retreat from the outer realm, but he gives it attitude. But mess with his inner space ... make him doubt his sense of self, it really messes with him. (His last job, those EI people spouting the EI crap, they really manipulated his self-concept. It's not that he can't benefit from the soft skills at times, but boy. Anyway, story for another day.)
Similarly, you mess with my inner space, I will push back hard and I will slap the internal world around. Mostly mine and sometimes yours too.
And here we are. This is so distressing to INFJs because it messes with the inner realm. Perhaps you feel powerless to push back in there. The work one would do in there is just so messy in your inner space that it's especially not fair to ask you to do it in this venue. And to stop me from poking it, you give me back some boundaries to say, "Hey, I'm not comfortable" and basically put me in a tier where I can have less capability to affect that inner space.
When an INFP is faced with an inner space turmoil, it's not easy either. Heck, it's like torture. But the work is known to us and we are familiar with having to manage that space all the time. The same corollary holds true for the opposite no doubt. Like March said, if she goes and has a snack, a cup of tea, often times the attention to the outer has managed the inner. Magic!
I think overall, INFP's have more affect and control over the outer world than they realize, and INFJ's have more affect and control over the inner world than they realize. In some key way our approach to managing these areas is in utter opposition and this is the cause of our clash. But I can't articulate the feeling of it in words. Both our types can tend to feel more powerless than we are, and tend to throw up our hands in a powerless way. I want to say, you have affect there, you are not powerless inside. Just like I can stand up and push the outer world around, you can do the same inside too. You do not have to blame the vectors who affect the inner world for disturbing it. Just like I do not have to blame the outer vectors for messing with me.
Take my example above. I was angry at having my inner space disturbed by someone basically suggesting if I did not do what they wanted, I would be deemed an inconsiderate person. SO WHAT, eh? That emotion is not about her, it's about me. Just like, if you don't want your world disturbed by me saying I see something that's more hidden to you, that emotion is not about me. It's about you.
There's a universality to this that's very elegant.
What causes you to be irritated with other people's strong emotions? What feelings do they invoke in you? Fear, anger etc.? Is there a relation there with childhood and parenting style?
It basically comes down to a lack of self-awareness and personal responsibility when emotionally throwing your weight around. I don't always react negatively to strong emotions, only when I feel like the person is playing games with emotions (intentionally or carelessly). Sensing strong feeling in others evokes different emotions depending on the context. In positive usage I can experience the deepest of empathy. If it's a negative usage, common possible feelings are: betrayal, a sense of injustice, that I'm being driven away (the anti-thesis of intimacy), helplessness, outrage or frustration with the hypocrisy/inconsistency of it, like I'm not being considered, that I can't think straight and want to get away from it. I'll go back to that metaphor of the crying baby: I feel the variety of emotions much like another person present (depending on the circumstances and my level of intimacy with that person).
One possible situation could be that the crying baby and it's mother are in a cafe, and I'm another customer. The mother is just sitting there and leaving the baby crying (because it doesn't bother her or she's just used to it), and it's seriously disrupting me. I can feel pretty unforgiving in that situation, because IMO the mother should either get the baby under control or leave. She should not just leave it crying without consideration of the impact to the other patrons - because her baby, and her choice to do nothing about it, are dictating the conditions that everyone else must endure. It's selfish and inconsiderate. In another situation, I could be in the supermarket and see a flustered mother at the check out trying to do her shopping, whilst attempting to hold (and calm) her screaming baby. She has to do her shopping and doesn't have much choice about being there. In that case, I feel empathy for her troubles, and may go up and try to help her with the baby (eg. hold it while she's busy or try to comfort/distract it) so she can get her things finished. Hey, even a joke about how much kids seem to hate the supermarket might make her feel a little less embarrassed and alone.
What do you mean when you say that about childhood? Do you mean my childhood or the other persons? Can you expand on that?
I thought they can wield/control their emotions much better than others therefore would be less susceptible to other people's emotional surges/outbursts...I may have been mistaken...perhaps INFPs are hurt more by lack of (any kind of) emotional feedback so in such cases they try invoking emotions in others? I don't really know...
We're more adaptable to those fluctuations but not impenetrable. We can naturally go with the flow, but we are hurt just as much by people unleashing on us or ignoring us.
OTOH, why the need to keep emotions (safe?) inside...? Have externally expressed emotions been used against you (to humiliate you etc.) in the past? Does that have something to do with your childhood and your parenting?
I think every INFP has had their emotions used against them when they were young. It has less to do with their upbringing and more to do with their naturally sensitivity to that. After it happens enough (usually by about age 13 or so), we get a bit more 'hard' externally, maybe even a little cold at times. You know that Beatles song, You've Got to Hide Your Love Away? That's like the INFP anthem. If you feel intensely and with great depth, don't let people see it, because it leaves you so incredibly vulnerable.
What can INFJs here to do to make themselves more comprehensible to a Fi user? What can we do to expedite the process? What kind of interaction/reasoning style do Fi users respond better to? Some tools to employ other then analogies?
Don't be afraid to tell us your experiences or what your ideas and opinions are. This will allow us to understand you and figure out what we think ourselves. If you need specific things from us, be more direct about it - we're not good at picking up Fe hints or signals. I think this is part of what Fi-users find difficult about the doorslam stuff - it's like you're ending things with us before we've been given a chance to change and/or give you what you need. The idea that someone might cut us off because we unknowingly screwed up, really freaks us out.
I think it originates in that thread, INFPs, what do INFJs do that drives you nuts?. It was about how Ne presenting unfinished ideas to Ni was like giving them raw batter rather than a cake. There can be an expectation then that the other person has to do the work of baking the cake themselves before figuring out how it's meant to taste.
What do you mean when you say that about childhood? Do you mean my childhood or the other persons? Can you expand on that?
We're more adaptable to those fluctuations but not impenetrable. We can naturally go with the flow, but we are hurt just as much by people unleashing on us or ignoring us.
I think every INFP has had their emotions used against them when they were young. It has less to do with their upbringing and more to do with their naturally sensitivity to that. After it happens enough (usually by about age 13 or so), we get a bit more 'hard' externally, maybe even a little cold at times. You know that Beatles song, You've Got to Hide Your Love Away? That's like the INFP anthem. If you feel intensely and with great depth, don't let people see it, because it leaves you so incredibly vulnerable.
I meant INFPs' childhood and the attitude of their parents...I think I learnt relying on Ni because the environment I had been brought up had conflicting appearant and underlying information (inconsistency in what is said and what is done, I do not know how to put this) so I had to learn how to smell and recognize what is not said (subtext/undertone) and adapt to the subtext rather than the actual text so that I could satisfy my parents and not feel bad...So I am trying to use that as a pattern for Fi...
So in INFPs case, could it be possible that in INFPs environment, there had been an inconsistency in what is said about how one felt and how one actually felt, due to which INFPs had to learn how to smell and recognize how one (parents?) actually felt despite declaring otherwise?
So could it be that when someone does not own up to his/her feelings and declare/acknowledge them outright, xNFPs interpret that as dishonesty (or blind spot?) and therefore as a threat, or a sign that the other does not trust INFP? I may be really off here I am just brainstorming and offering up ideas as they come to me...
I am also under the impression that xNFPs feel more at ease in environments where feelings are not held back and are expressed in a more lively fashion...that they can swim and navigate inside the emotionally rich/abundant environment...whereas emotionally scarce environments (where emotions are held back or not relinquished) make them feel like they are navigating in the dark and that makes them afraid...they cannot read the emotions (Fe external front gives the impression that all is well?) and cannot maneuver themselves out of harms way in time so that they won't be hurt...(but why then INFPs are drawn to ENTJs or ESTJs? Common Ne or Te language does not leave INFPs' in the dark?)
So basically, in case of relationships with INFJs, xNFPs cannot see the doorslam coming therefore cannot maneuver and avoid getting out of its (hurt's) way...?
Don't be afraid to tell us your experiences or what your ideas and opinions are. This will allow us to understand you and figure out what we think ourselves. If you need specific things from us, be more direct about it - we're not good at picking up Fe hints or signals. I think this is part of what Fi-users find difficult about the doorslam stuff - it's like you're ending things with us before we've been given a chance to change and/or give you what you need. The idea that someone might cut us off because we unknowingly screwed up, really freaks us out.
Likewise, INFPs should give unaltered Si narratives of the things that left them in the dark in the past...Ti can breakdown and integrate Si material much faster than Ne material (i.e. raw banter)...
Werebudgie said:
....In contrast, my 9w8 INFP partner's first response is to withdraw. If that's not possible or effective, she fights back. And her third and last response would be to comply/adapt. And even that - for her, the comply/adapt response retains her sense of self and her needs intact - she doesn't allow the process to get into her like it does for me.
....
I find my INFP's tone when stating her assessments and conclusions to be very forceful. Internally, I "code" her kind of tone as indicating a very rigorous process of taking in lots of data and painstakingly detailed analysis. Such a forceful tone, to me, means that the assessment or conclusion is the tip of a very large iceberg composed of masses of data inflow and analytical analysis of that data from the ground up.
But in terms of her actual information processing, my INFP will make very forceful assessments and conclusions with very little actual information about the situation at hand, and little analysis other than "This reminds me of [a pattern from my past] so therefore this is what's happening" or "[My values say X and this is inside/outside those values so it is true/not true, okay/not okay."
If Fi doms/auxes are in relationship with an INFJ, asbuilding on what [MENTION=20789]Werebudgie[/MENTION] said, they should not put forward "raw banter" i.e. assumptions as facts in a forceful tone (i.e. regulate emotional surges)...check facts with INFJ...and try to give more credit (and time) to statements INFJ makes (because they do not come easy to us)...and try to really integrate what the INFJs say in to your framework (i.e. let it seep into your ego)...I guess that requires enormous trust for INFPs and am not sure if that's possible...
Or perhaps Fi doms/auxes and Fe doms/auxes are not really meant for each other...I do not know...
One group brainstorming session in school, and the following refinement/selection of options, took anywhere from 10-100 times longer than it would if I did it in my head. It just feels like torture, because I'm having my arms and legs bound then being forced to crawl at snail's pace when all I want to do is run. 
