[ENFP] ENFP+INTJ=Disasterous Combo o' love

[uumlau]

My entp and I have started thinking in terms of organizational triads:

ENTP-ENFP-ISTJ is especially productive on the same management level. ENTP-INTJ-ENFP is another especially productive one. Interestingly ENTP-ISFJ-INTJ in a management structure isnt ideal but can be productive. ENTP-ISFJ-ENTP was a nightmarish disaster.

Be careful of confirmation bias, here. I suspect most of what your observing is personal skill and maturity of individuals, not types ... not without lots of samples.

2. U: No Ni for me wrt to your comment a few pages back about NeTe. Ni is a whole different beast I have tasted on occasion, but I live in a sea of Ne. Noigmn-a physicist-also mentions feeling like I do-Like you are flying over a landscape with eyes half closed, "feeling" the problem with your hands/chest looking for "lumps" that pop out. I am a human lump detector, albiet with about a 20% failure rate. I dunno..

You know yourself better than I do, and none of what I am about to say is intended to invalidate your self-perception. It still "feels like" you are using Ni, to me. To me, Ni is subconscious pattern matching. Rather than Si-recalling specific details, Ni memorizes patterns, which arise from memory absent details. Those patterns are then matched against what one observes. When the pattern matches really closely, we get our predictive power - we are aware of what was, what is, and what will be, because the pattern says it happened that way before.

Ne feels more to me like an exploration of hypotheticals: using Ti or Fi as the anchor, one builds an understanding (intellectual or emotional/spiritual) of what is beyond oneself based on what one already understands within oneself. Ni, in contrast, works with Te or Fe, supplying learned patterns for Te/Fe to match against the external world. When the match is made, Te/Fe use Ni to fill in the blanks (past/present/future), based on what is immediately apparent.

Ne-possibilities?
Fi-complex pattern matching?
Te-a desire to structure what the top two feed me?

Ne- yes, possibilities. Your Ne is probably working with your Fi, not your Te.
Fi - one's emotional/spiritual self-understanding. I would say Ni is "complex pattern matching". Note that your self-understanding, if evolved, can potentially work with Ne to provide predictive power, of a sort.
Te - an objective interface with the outer world, by which one evaluates one's very subjective inner world (Ni, Fi, Ti, Si)

[Interesting analysis of Fi/Te social organization mostly deleted for brevity ... I really like the whole thing, but I still need to digest it and grok it]

... she thinks Fi/Te users are all fucking crazeeee ...

Thinks? You mean to imply we aren't?

although I wonder-do they realize how dominating they are actually being? ... INTJs just dominate.)

The ESTJs, if Keirsey is mostly correct, might be aware of the social structure, but in an abstract, objective way. I suspect that for all of the types you mention, none of it "feels like fighting" nor "feels like dominating". It feels like "doing what must be done, because no one else sees that it needs doing."

INTJs just dominate? Yes, if one is rather mature. I think INTJs just do what they do to accomplish the goals they see. Some of those goals are based on actual desires (by which I mean Fi-style desires, whether to accomplish something that "makes me happy", or in a slightly larger Fi sense, wanting to "support my family.") Most of the goals are not based on desires, but are actually intermediary logistical goals. E.g., an INTJ might have a general desire to "succeed," and yet follow oddly disparate paths on that journey, such as becoming a champion body builder, a real estate mogul, a state governor [cf. Ahnold.].

I think there is a core INTJ drive to simply become really good at whatever it is we do, because that is the only way we gain the confidence to move on to something more.

To build these layers requires some overt dominance and aggression, challenges between the Te users, but once stable the really cool thing seems to happen.

The whole unit starts to function in concert. If the leader is highly dominant and MOST IMPORTANTLY-TRUSTED, the other Te users stop challenging each other, shelf the ego (mostly) and work together. Trust=Fi affirmation/validation/loyalty. They trust the leader's vision. Without that trust, the other Te users-especially the ISTJs-will balk and obstruct the mission via procedural barriers. It's how they fight.

I think you're onto something here. Trust is the big part. Speaking again from my INTJ perspective, I want people to trust that what I say is true, to trust that I am reliable. That sounds kind of ISTJ, but it has a practical reason: if people trust my judgment, then on those occasions I need something that seems odd or impractical done, that trust gets it past others' objections. I don't have the skill to trade favors in that Ti/Fe way you describe, and navigate that Fe network, but if I spend a long time gaining people's trust, no matter their MBTI type, that is "social capital" that I understand. I've many FJs and TPs in my life, both personal and work. They trust me, if based on their standards and not mine.

How does the xxTJ dominate? By demonstrating to the other Te types that one's judgment is trustworthy. If I keep on proffering unrealistic scenarios that never come to pass, my judgment is deemed untrustworthy. An INTP in this environment is at a severe disadvantage, because the INTP will continually muse aloud about possibilities (TiNe), and those possibilities rarely seem to pertain to what the xxTJs see in play. So I remain silent unless I have something worthwhile to contribute. I spend my silent time listening and figuring out worthwhile things to do/say/plan.

There is a strong sense of loyalty to the group and the dominating leader, purpose, integrity, honesty, trust, taking each other at face value, open direct communication, doing what is best for the tribe, and self sacrifice as needed. The group relies upon the dominating leader to be able to predict and prevent crisis before it happens-aka strategic management. The dominating leaders seem to feel a sense of responsibility and intense need to protect the group. They dont say "love" or "caring" but I think this need is grounded in tert and inferior Fi but carried out via Te.

Good observations, here. There is indeed love and caring, but it's shown by doing "what is necessary" to make things work for everyone, not by overtly huggy ego-coddling.

Perhaps that "self-sacrifice" notion is that "martyrdom" OMT was alluding to, earlier? I should note that it's not "self-sacrifice" in the extreme sense, but rather giving up that which makes one happy right now, in order to gain something of greater value.

Where are the IXFPs? I dunno.

Handling the emotional/artistic/creative side of the equation, which isn't always obvious in a work-based social hierarchy. I would say that the IXFPs (and you XXFPs in general) are very much why we XXTJs are motivated to do what we do, and why we're willing to give up what we give up.

Fe has whole different mechanisms-
The ENTPs often talk about teamwork and competitiveness, but it ongoing, never ending competition via Ti. Everyone needs to be at the same level?? The Fe doms/auxs seem to establish social reciprocality networks. These are not honest, open communication networks about how you really feel-they seem to be safety nets, layers of connections, unspoken requests for assistance/recognition of those requests, an emotional display equals a demand for a deliverable perhaps??? I dunno, I can only see it from the outside.

Yeah, this is something I'd like to understand better. And moreover, I'd like to understand how the Fi/Te and Ti/Fe sets work out their differences.

 

[Poki]

Your assertions don't answer my point. Why don't *I* feel that gut reaction ... or rather, why do I react to your Fe "oppressing my Fi", but not to other's Te oppressing my Ti? There's some sort of duality here that is being left uninvestigated.

I feel the same way about Te not ever opressing Ti. My Ti is as stubborn as an IxFPs Fi. You can throw all the Te at it you want and only whats logical passes through.

I do get the impression alot that Fi easily puts blinders on Te. I faced this with my son yesterday and no matter how hard I tried to show him the logic he was stubborn to the point of tears.

This was a conversation yesterday.

Son: "Today is the 2nd."
Me: "No today is the first, tomorrow is the second"
Son: "Yesterday at school we learned about frogs so that was the first of the month"
Me: "Yesterday was sunday, you didnt go to school"
Son: "Its the second because the calendar said so"
Me: "Wednesday is your birthday right"
Son: "Yes"
Me "Your birthday is on the third right"
Son: "Yes"
Me: "What day would that make tuesday"
Son: "Second"
Me: "So today is the first"
Son: "No its the second"
Me:
...
We did this for about 15 minutes before I just gave up and told him he could believe whatever he wants to believe. This to me is the only real issues I have with Te and when it becomes stubborn. Ti cannot deny logic.

I would possibly think he was messing with me, but he started crying and when I asked him why he wanted it to be the second so bad he wouldnt say anything. Te is all fine and dandy until Fi comes in and starts playing with it.

I run through this same things with my INTJ dad in regard to questions when I sense his Fi taking control of his Te. Eventually Fi comes out and says that he wants to believe because he doesnt want to face this other problem.

This kinda plays into my Ni wall. I basically build a wall where I accept dealing with the worst case scenario before I put myself in vulnerable situations. Sometimes things catch me off guard and I have to step back and rebuild that wall with the new variables. It would be like a contingency judgement instead of a contingency plan.




It is very hard for a dom Ti to use Te because no matter how much I read something I wrote it always makes sense to me. I dont know what I miss until I come back at a later point when I am out of that thought chain, reread what I wrote and then I can finally see the missing pieces.

 

[onemoretime]

You know yourself better than I do, and none of what I am about to say is intended to invalidate your self-perception. It still "feels like" you are using Ni, to me. To me, Ni is subconscious pattern matching. Rather than Si-recalling specific details, Ni memorizes patterns, which arise from memory absent details. Those patterns are then matched against what one observes. When the pattern matches really closely, we get our predictive power - we are aware of what was, what is, and what will be, because the pattern says it happened that way before.

Ne feels more to me like an exploration of hypotheticals: using Ti or Fi as the anchor, one builds an understanding (intellectual or emotional/spiritual) of what is beyond oneself based on what one already understands within oneself. Ni, in contrast, works with Te or Fe, supplying learned patterns for Te/Fe to match against the external world. When the match is made, Te/Fe use Ni to fill in the blanks (past/present/future), based on what is immediately apparent.

Ne can do this too. It is, like you say, strongly influenced by Si. It also builds understanding based on observation (Ji generally processes extraverted sensory information, though it can double back upon introverted information when necessary). Ne can seemingly end in an array of hypotheticals; however, it sees those hypotheticals to their conclusions more than perhaps seemingly apparent. It just depends on that Si store of variables.

The ESTJs, if Keirsey is mostly correct, might be aware of the social structure, but in an abstract, objective way. I suspect that for all of the types you mention, none of it "feels like fighting" nor "feels like dominating". It feels like "doing what must be done, because no one else sees that it needs doing."

I could see this.

Perhaps that "self-sacrifice" notion is that "martyrdom" OMT was alluding to, earlier? I should note that it's not "self-sacrifice" in the extreme sense, but rather giving up that which makes one happy right now, in order to gain something of greater value.

Basically. Fe/Ti ranks by value to the group. Fi/Te ranks by commitment to the cause. The former sees the latter as myopic, the latter sees the former as pedestrian.

Yeah, this is something I'd like to understand better. And moreover, I'd like to understand how the Fi/Te and Ti/Fe sets work out their differences.

Think of it through the hunter paradigm. We're a team; a hunting party. Ti gets the kill, and Fe shares it with everyone. Through the gift of extended life, the group bonds as a whole. Each member cannot live without the others, and through this, we find value in our relationships. This is altogether just and right.

How to work out the differences? I think it's easier than we may think. Fe/Ti needs to remember that some people need to be individuated, and at times, it needs to be individuated itself. Fi/Te needs to remember that though it may feel distinct and individual, humans are social creatures, and group dynamics define far more in life than individual dynamics.

 

[Poki]

Think of it through the hunter paradigm. We're a team; a hunting party. Ti gets the kill, and Fe shares it with everyone. Through the gift of extended life, the group bonds as a whole. Each member cannot live without the others, and through this, we find value in our relationships. This is altogether just and right.

How to work out the differences? I think it's easier than we may think. Fe/Ti needs to remember that some people need to be individuated, and at times, it needs to be individuated itself. Fi/Te needs to remember that though it may feel distinct and individual, humans are social creatures, and group dynamics define far more in life than individual dynamics.

Here is how Ti/Fe sees Fi/Te.

1) Selective about who I love. "You seem to think that only certain people - or a certain kind of people - are worthy of your reverence. It's not that you're rude to other people, but it's pretty clear who you prefer."

It comes across like packs within the group that must stick together to guard against others within the group.

I am curious if Fe/Ti comes across as the group says you are being outcasts and the group rules because we are majority and majority rules. This is how society operates.

 

[uumlau]

I feel the same way about Te not ever opressing Ti. My Ti is as stubborn as an IxFPs Fi. You can throw all the Te at it you want and only whats logical passes through.

This makes a lot of sense to me in my experience. I beginning to think that one's Ji is how one regards one's ego.

I do get the impression alot that Fi easily puts blinders on Te. I faced this with my son yesterday and no matter how hard I tried to show him the logic he was stubborn to the point of tears.

I regret that I can't regard that as a valid demonstration of your principle, due to age and the uncertainty of how MBTI types react at young ages. MBTI does not properly describe irrational behavior. It could just be a game of pretend, or a need to express one's willpower.

In particular, Te in an INTJ is very responsible for suppressing Fi, not usually catering to it, which is indeed the very source of most INTJ problems. I believe that Ti/Fe types "read" the Fi, because they use Fe to do the reading, and the Fi is what (subconsciously) sends out certain signals. I believe this leads Ti/Fe to conclude (usually erroneously) that the utter certainty radiating from an INTJ is the cause of what he thinks, rather than the reality that it is caused by having thought things through completely and having achieved a full understanding of a particular topic/item/idea.

I run through this same things with my INTJ dad in regard to questions when I sense his Fi taking control of his Te. Eventually Fi comes out and says that he wants to believe because he doesnt want to face this other problem.

Yeah, this is more legitimate. INTJ's aren't without feelings, and due to suppressing them, they can make us do weird stuff. If you're reading the Fi changing, then it may well be driving things (largely subconsciously).

It's rather interesting, however, in those INTJs more in touch with their Fi. Instead of Te oppressing Fi most of the time, and Fi occasionally rebelling, they start working in harmony, as each is used in the regimes to which it is suited.

 

[uumlau]

Basically. Fe/Ti ranks by value to the group. Fi/Te ranks by commitment to the cause. The former sees the latter as myopic, the latter sees the former as pedestrian.

This doesn't ring true for me. I'd be more tempted to say that Te ranks by "competency" or at least "perceived competency," and that Fi is more about establishing trust rather than commitment.

Think of it through the hunter paradigm. We're a team; a hunting party. Ti gets the kill, and Fe shares it with everyone. Through the gift of extended life, the group bonds as a whole. Each member cannot live without the others, and through this, we find value in our relationships. This is altogether just and right.

How to work out the differences? I think it's easier than we may think. Fe/Ti needs to remember that some people need to be individuated, and at times, it needs to be individuated itself. Fi/Te needs to remember that though it may feel distinct and individual, humans are social creatures, and group dynamics define far more in life than individual dynamics.

So Ti/Fe is collectivist, and Fi/Te individualist? I think that's a good starting paradigm for refinement, but it feels rather rough around the edges.

[Hypothesizing here, please excuse the active voice:]
Perhaps "objective (Te) hierarchy" vs "social (by which I mean Fe) hierarchy"? This would perhaps help identify the sources of conflict. For example, Te users sends the wrong signals on the Fe hierarchy, so Te sounds bossy, unreasonable, egotistical, etc. To the Te hierarchy, the Te user is simply doing his job. The Fe user sends similarly wrong signals to the Te hierarchy: it sounds whiny, placating, overly concerned with social (Fe) reputation and perceived transgressions. To the Fe hierarchy, Fe sounds sociable, cooperative, team-oriented, like a member of the group.

 

[onemoretime]

This doesn't ring true for me. I'd be more tempted to say that Te ranks by "competency" or at least "perceived competency," and that Fi is more about establishing trust rather than commitment.

What's that competency based on? What is being trusted in?

Devotion to the cause, whatever it is.

So Ti/Fe is collectivist, and Fi/Te individualist? I think that's a good starting paradigm for refinement, but it feels rather rough around the edges.

Not quite, like you noticed. Ti/Fe can be fairly individualist if that's the group's values. It's more a commitment to others compared to a commitment to self.

[Hypothesizing here, please excuse the active voice:]
Perhaps "objective (Te) hierarchy" vs "social (by which I mean Fe) hierarchy"? This would perhaps help identify the sources of conflict. For example, Te users sends the wrong signals on the Fe hierarchy, so Te sounds bossy, unreasonable, egotistical, etc. To the Te hierarchy, the Te user is simply doing his job. The Fe user sends similarly wrong signals to the Te hierarchy: it sounds whiny, placating, overly concerned with social (Fe) reputation and perceived transgressions. To the Fe hierarchy, Fe sounds sociable, cooperative, team-oriented, like a member of the group.

Maybe, but "objective" vs. "social" might not be the best words for it. A better conceptualization would be "process hierarchy" vs. "systems hierarchy." The process hierarchy demands that the process be completed, without regard to the systemic effects. To the systems hierarchy, this seems myopic, immature, and potentially catastrophic. As far as the process hierarchy is concerned, completing the process takes priority over systemic effects ("you've got to crack some eggs to make an omelet"). The process hierarchy grows impatient with the systems hierarchy's need to maintain itself, without necessarily completing the process. To it, this seems like a waste of resources, and a hindrance from moving on. As far as the systems hierarchy is concerned, the process isn't worth completing if it destroys the system as a result ("a house divided cannot stand").

 

[Poki]

I regret that I can't regard that as a valid demonstration of your principle, due to age and the uncertainty of how MBTI types react at young ages. MBTI does not properly describe irrational behavior. It could just be a game of pretend, or a need to express one's willpower.

In particular, Te in an INTJ is very responsible for suppressing Fi, not usually catering to it, which is indeed the very source of most INTJ problems. I believe that Ti/Fe types "read" the Fi, because they use Fe to do the reading, and the Fi is what (subconsciously) sends out certain signals. I believe this leads Ti/Fe to conclude (usually erroneously) that the utter certainty radiating from an INTJ is the cause of what he thinks, rather than the reality that it is caused by having thought things through completely and having achieved a full understanding of a particular topic/item/idea.

My son is leaning towards the same functions as NFP/STJ.

Yeah, this is more legitimate. INTJ's aren't without feelings, and due to suppressing them, they can make us do weird stuff. If you're reading the Fi changing, then it may well be driving things (largely subconsciously).

It's rather interesting, however, in those INTJs more in touch with their Fi. Instead of Te oppressing Fi most of the time, and Fi occasionally rebelling, they start working in harmony, as each is used in the regimes to which it is suited.

I see what your saying

I tend to drive the change by questioning. It would be similiar to OMT directing to find a weakness, except my intention is to pull out the truth or the Fi that Te is trying to supress to see the big picture. While people may say screw intention, where intention really matters is that I have no problem trying to catch and work with things when I pull it out. My intent is not to bring it out for the world to see, or to step on to prove my own ego is correct, but for an overall understanding that benefits everyone.

Its my natural response to dig and I can easily tell when I hit a Te wall that is supressing Fi. It feels like banging my head against a wall in regard to logic.

That was more what I was attempting to show with my son. It was slightly off in example because my son aligns more with the NFP/STJ SiNeFiTe functions.

 

[uumlau]

I tend to drive the change by questioning. It would be similiar to OMT directing to find a weakness, except my intention is to pull out the truth or the Fi that Te is trying to supress to see the big picture. While people may say screw intention, where intention really matters is that I have no problem trying to catch and work with things when I pull it out. My intent is not to bring it out for the world to see, or to step on to prove my own ego is correct, but for an overall understanding that benefits everyone.
Its my natural response to dig and I can easily tell when I hit a Te wall that is supressing Fi. It feels like banging my head against a wall in regard to logic.

I fully understand. But also be sure to recognize that it is Fi, not Fe. I suspect that part of the "Te wall" you are running into is that it's running interference not against your logic, but against your Fe. Just as Ti/Fe will throw up an Fe wall, to keep Te from "bullying," even though Te is just "pursuing the truth" from its own perspective.

So even though you don't intend to hurt it, but just get at the truth, the Fi side is very scared of that approach. Usually, when I try to explain to others how to get to an INTJ's heart, I give two pieces of advice.

1. Go through his head first. You gain his trust by trusting your logic, and that you're reasonable. Unfortunately, your Ti-style logic might not work, but Fe can often sound enough like Te to get past this barrier.
2. When he trusts you enough to show you his heart, be exceedingly gentle. It is kept under lock and key for a reason. If you break his trust, it is very difficult to earn it again, if not impossible. Don't tell him what he "really feels," nor tell him what he should feel.

Be aware that when you try this with an INTJ, you are being exceedingly intimate with him, in his eyes.

 

[SillySapienne]

Of both the long hairs and the short hairs.

Best post I've read in this thread thus far.

Didn't know you had some kink in you, mister uum.

I like!

 

[INTP]

Best post I've read in this thread thus far.

Didn't know you had some kink in you, mister uum.

I like!

gentle lick on the asshole <- einstein with glasses

 

[uumlau]

What's that competency based on? What is being trusted in?

Devotion to the cause, whatever it is.

You're losing me, here. I think you're trying to describe it in your language/perception, which translates poorly into mine. "Devotion" does not compute, for me.

Not quite, like you noticed. Ti/Fe can be fairly individualist if that's the group's values. It's more a commitment to others compared to a commitment to self.

"individualist if that's the group's values" - I'm not sure whether that's a paradox or an outright contradiction. "Nonconformists" all conforming to each other, perhaps? Not really individualists, then.

I notice that you seem to focus on the Fe vs Fi ... that Ti/Fe is "commitment to others", while Fi/Te is "commitment to oneself." Also, I believe it's a slightly overloaded attribution of virtue. "Has values that are oriented" towards others or oneself, seems more appropriate. Ti/Fe might be "committed" to the social organization, or instead be very skilled at swindling others by navigating those Ti/Fe-style social constructs in deceptive ways. Fi/Te might be an entirely selfish prick, or alternatively be very spiritually enlightened (assume highly developed sense of Fi) and be a kind of spiritual teacher or counselor (just as Ti wants to instruct/teach).

Maybe, but "objective" vs. "social" might not be the best words for it. A better conceptualization would be "process hierarchy" vs. "systems hierarchy." The process hierarchy demands that the process be completed, without regard to the systemic effects. To the systems hierarchy, this seems myopic, immature, and potentially catastrophic. As far as the process hierarchy is concerned, completing the process takes priority over systemic effects ("you've got to crack some eggs to make an omelet"). The process hierarchy grows impatient with the systems hierarchy's need to maintain itself, without necessarily completing the process. To it, this seems like a waste of resources, and a hindrance from moving on. As far as the systems hierarchy is concerned, the process isn't worth completing if it destroys the system as a result ("a house divided cannot stand").

I notice that isn't an entirely balanced perspective: there's no acknowledgment that the failure of the process may well result in the failure of the system, just as the failure of the system can result in the failure of the process. Also, I see these arguments as inadvertently comparing the two as TJ vs TP, when I suspect, as hierarchies, it's more TJ vs FJ. Both are cooperative, but are differently cooperative.

Personally, I'm not getting a better distinction with the words "process" and "system." They sound very similar to me. I'll need to think about the distinction some more.

 

[Thalassa]

Note to self: fire all the ENTPs.

 

[Thalassa]

Jesus crackers, this thread gives me a headache.

Haven't caught up in a few days/pages.

WTF/H is going on?

Are we even discussing the INTJ/ENFP dynamic anymore?

I wish we could have more real-life examples.

I'm with you here.

 

[onemoretime]

You're losing me, here. I think you're trying to describe it in your language/perception, which translates poorly into mine. "Devotion" does not compute, for me.

Your desire for absolute competence is a devotion to that craft.

"individualist if that's the group's values" - I'm not sure whether that's a paradox or an outright contradiction. "Nonconformists" all conforming to each other, perhaps? Not really individualists, then.

It's called the United States of America.

I notice that you seem to focus on the Fe vs Fi ... that Ti/Fe is "commitment to others", while Fi/Te is "commitment to oneself." Also, I believe it's a slightly overloaded attribution of virtue. "Has values that are oriented" towards others or oneself, seems more appropriate. Ti/Fe might be "committed" to the social organization, or instead be very skilled at swindling others by navigating those Ti/Fe-style social constructs in deceptive ways. Fi/Te might be an entirely selfish prick, or alternatively be very spiritually enlightened (assume highly developed sense of Fi) and be a kind of spiritual teacher or counselor (just as Ti wants to instruct/teach).

You'd be better off not trying to shoehorn value judgments where there are none. A commitment to oneself would be the most virtuous thing in the world if you were the most virtuous person in the world.

I notice that isn't an entirely balanced perspective: there's no acknowledgment that the failure of the process may well result in the failure of the system, just as the failure of the system can result in the failure of the process. Also, I see these arguments as inadvertently comparing the two as TJ vs TP, when I suspect, as hierarchies, it's more TJ vs FJ. Both are cooperative, but are differently cooperative.

Oh good lord. I'm trying to keep things neutral here. Of course the failure of one or the other can lead to the failure of its complement - that's really obvious, and part of why I chose the terms systems and process, because they're inherently linked. I didn't think I had to spell it out.

Fe is just as much of an objective system as Te is. It's based on a set of rules that are universal among human beings, along with certain cultural variations, just like Te is based on rules that are universal among human beings, that may differ based on culture. It's not subjective like Fi is, so that sort of comparison is barking up the wrong tree. Ti is much more subjective than Fe is, just so you know.

Personally, I'm not getting a better distinction with the words "process" and "system." They sound very similar to me. I'll need to think about the distinction some more.

Process: software (what actually does something)
Systems: hardware (what provides the framework for things to be done)

Te acts upon Fi commands. Fe operates based on Ti determinations.

 

[sculpting]

You're losing me, here. I think you're trying to describe it in your language/perception, which translates poorly into mine. "Devotion" does not compute, for me.

devotion computes for me. Fi feels devoted to a cause. I like devoted people.

However competency is totally in the realm of Te and rings very true for me as well. I am at the point where I can tolerate really rude people, total fucking jerks-if they are competent. Meaning they show up, contribute to the team, accomplish sets of deliverable, are not ego driven, and dont fuck over the rest of my team. Gotta love the metrics eh?

Why? If they are competent their efforts will support the group and its long term objectives. Typically satisfying those objectives will mean greater happiness for the group-thus accomplishing the Fi goal.

Poki-I didnt quote your post but can you give an example of a concrete situation where you used the Ni wall to replan? I kinda get what you are saying...As for the little guy, my ISTP and his INTJ dad almost killed each other. However I notice my IXTJ little guy (OMG, I forgot you!!!) will sometimes get stuck on stuff-like if meta routines change, or facts change, he gets very upset. He developed a stutter the last time I traveled. Even with adult INTJs, I avoid going head to head arguments with them. They kinda get stuck. Instead I drop by, typically in butterfly insanity mode, dump the correct information, then run. I give them about two days of processing time. If the new data is correct, they seem to have no choice but to process and incorporate. (btw-butterfly insanity isnt planned, just natural pattern I observe. INTJs can make me hyper silly.)

Trying to go head to head without time to reprocess seems very conflicting and painful for IXTJs. I'd suggest to pick battles and ignore irrelevant stuff-like what day it is (says the Ne user)-and give him plenty of time to reprocess new info.

(nope I am all Fi-it's that fun Fi-Fe translation gap )

 

[SillySapienne]

gentle lick on the asshole <- einstein with glasses

Get out of my head, and my asshole, kind sir!!!

 

[sculpting]

I'm with you here.

ah, my sweet-salty marm! where's my bucket o' kettle corn?

ENFPs are butterflies that flutter around spastically, occasionally alighting on the shoulders on an INTJ and whispering silly secrets in his ear, then we flutter away again all meandering in crazy, lopsided Ne directions. INTJs are adorable (if a wee bit frumpy) guardian angels that sit behind us and watch our antics and silly decisions, then lean over our left shoulders and go-"What are you doing? Are you being emo again? Come here little butterfly." Then we alight on their hand with our delicate wings and big sweet eyes and they gently shield us from the wind.

They seem to tolerate incredible emo moodiness, serve as an Ne ground to give us focus, and understand innately many of our values and why we respond the way we do.

They supplement our [past-future] with the moment of now and the insight of Ni. (And based on my toddler at least, seem to be able to find the car keys better than me)

Mostly though, they protect us. They keep us safe and allow us to be honest to what I think it was we were meant to be.

They help us grow into something more and I think we may return the favor.

Just my two cents.

 

[uumlau]

devotion computes for me. Fi feels devoted to a cause. I like devoted people.

Good to know. Perhaps I do it without realizing it. I.e., it feels more like, "I made a choice," not like, "I'm blindly following some random cause."

However I notice my IXTJ little guy (OMG, I forgot you!!!) will sometimes get stuck on stuff-like if meta routines change, or facts change, he gets very upset. He developed a stutter the last time I traveled. Even with adult INTJs, I avoid going head to head arguments with them. They kinda get stuck. Instead I drop by, typically in butterfly insanity mode, dump the correct information, then run. I give them about two days of processing time. If the new data is correct, they seem to have no choice but to process and incorporate. (btw-butterfly insanity isnt planned, just natural pattern I observe. INTJs can make me hyper silly.)

Trying to go head to head without time to reprocess seems very conflicting and painful for IXTJs. I'd suggest to pick battles and ignore irrelevant stuff-like what day it is (says the Ne user)-and give him plenty of time to reprocess new info.

This is quite interesting. And the bolded is probably especially wise, if it's a huge change. There is nothing to argue about, but we're probably very frustrated if the new processes don't align with familiar patterns.

Usually, most changes don't bother me, but there is a certain level of routine I like to keep consistent. It's almost paradoxical, but INTJs both like and dislike change, but in particular ways. We want to keep the mundane aspects routine, so we can do them without having to think about them. Changing those is more difficult because we purposefully make them habitual, so it's not a matter of knowledge but of practice. The essential "what is my job now" aspects are usually a welcome change, as we'd rather think about a new problem than chew over an old one, again. The latter may be more problematic for ISTJs.

 

[Poki]

You're losing me, here. I think you're trying to describe it in your language/perception, which translates poorly into mine. "Devotion" does not compute, for me.


"individualist if that's the group's values" - I'm not sure whether that's a paradox or an outright contradiction. "Nonconformists" all conforming to each other, perhaps? Not really individualists, then.

I notice that you seem to focus on the Fe vs Fi ... that Ti/Fe is "commitment to others", while Fi/Te is "commitment to oneself." Also, I believe it's a slightly overloaded attribution of virtue. "Has values that are oriented" towards others or oneself, seems more appropriate. Ti/Fe might be "committed" to the social organization, or instead be very skilled at swindling others by navigating those Ti/Fe-style social constructs in deceptive ways. Fi/Te might be an entirely selfish prick, or alternatively be very spiritually enlightened (assume highly developed sense of Fi) and be a kind of spiritual teacher or counselor (just as Ti wants to instruct/teach).

What would you consider swindling. You used loaded words here and it would help to get some examples of swindlng and using social constructs in deceptive ways.

I notice that isn't an entirely balanced perspective: there's no acknowledgment that the failure of the process may well result in the failure of the system, just as the failure of the system can result in the failure of the process. Also, I see these arguments as inadvertently comparing the two as TJ vs TP, when I suspect, as hierarchies, it's more TJ vs FJ. Both are cooperative, but are differently cooperative.

Personally, I'm not getting a better distinction with the words "process" and "system." They sound very similar to me. I'll need to think about the distinction some more.

I try to keep a balance between failure of system and failure of process and let both bend. The thing is that an EP pushed into tertiary will become part of that Fe social construct. So really IJ,EP,EJ would all commonly use heirarchies depending on the situation. Going out on a limb with this.