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

[Thalassa]

Fe says "The company has decided to follow a new procedure and with all of us working together as a team and we anticipate it will be a great success." so dont complain or you arent part of our team.

Yes, this bugs me too. That's exactly what bugs me.

Ti is another language-no shit. Te cant follow down Ti's path for more than a few steps, then it starts to get filled in with "blah, blah, blah". I read my entps emails to her aloud and fill them in with spoken blah, blah, blahs. She almost killed me.

OMG it does...it does begin to look like blah, blah, blah...it's the part of academia that annoys me to no end, even in texts I've studied, because it strikes me as pretentious.

The next time you and OMT start a lovemaking session, after each post take about an hour to think over what he wrote-you have to translate his i into your Te, which is hard without getting pissed.

Ewww, yeah, no. That's not going to happen.

Try this-ask your Fe users to be totally honest and give you critique about things that they find irritating. When Proteo will do this here, I learn amazing stuff that I never would have thought to question. "Really, I do that? Really, it's irritating?"

I don't have to ask. I already have an ENFJ sister who is more than happy to describe what personality traits I have which bug her:

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."

2) Dramatic emotional outbursts if I'm severely depressed or angry. "Do you have to do this here? Now?"...but let me just say I was in my mother's home, at midnight, in my nightgown, when she decided to bring her friend over. So it was less about me being "inappropriate" and all about her wanting be able to bring her friend ...to her mother's house...at midnight...without warning anyone first...and impress the friend with our family's exquisite manners? This is a big part of the reason why her lectures tend to fall on deaf ears much of the time.

3) Just generally telling me how to "behave myself" in situations. "Why do you take things so personally? Our other sister does it too!" (who is also an ENFP! lol) I will say, in my ENFJ sister's favor, that she has helped me tremendously in dealing with my mom.

It's hard to do this with ENTPs as it is such a visceral response from them, and it can be really hard to identify specific things to change, but ENFJs are awesome.

I think INFJs are awesome.

P.S. nothing you said sounded bossy to me

 

[uumlau]

Wow. So much to respond to, here. ...

U, I think Fe and Fi are different languages. I think this is due to the functions being inherent, individualized neural modules that program how we communicate with the outside world. The voice, eye movements, facial expressions-even on a micro musculature level, the cadence of speech, where the emphasis is placed in a sentence words all differs. The words used will differ.:

Fe: tends to use group words, we, us, the team, together (which can feel very manipulative and controlling to an Fi user "we should do...." implying what "I" SHOULD do..)

Fi: speaks it terms of "I". i feel this, I did that. Watch Fi users interact. Fi user 1: I did this. Fi user 2: I did something like that-tells us what they did. On the surface this looks self centered. In reality is Fi-mirroring. "I have felt what you feel" then typically followed by Te advice "Thus you might try this approach to solving this problem which worked for me in the past"

I mostly agree. I think there's something more to it on the Fi side. There's an intuitive interplay that lends to the sense of "sincerity" when both people prefer Fi.

For Fe, it's really kind of weird: on the one hand, it's manipulative and controlling (because we hear it more with our Fi), but if you just push back a little bit, the Fe will want to adapt to you, usually. The trick is to not push back hard (i.e., don't be mean, or express what you want too hard); rather, just suggest an alternative, with a follow-up logic/reason like "I think more of us would have fun doing X, and you-know-who won't whine so much."

Te: Very blunt-"you should do this..." "This needs to be done.." "Do this next" "This is the problem" yeah, kinda bossy.

It's "kind of bossy", but it's the same deal as Fe. Two Te users quickly arrive at agreement (or agree to disagree-ment), because they'll quickly agree on the facts of the matter, without any weird Ti internal inconsistencies you can't see stuff going on. If you have the facts, you can easily make a Te user change his or her mind. The usual problem with that approach, for most people, is that most people don't have the facts, and wouldn't know the facts if they bit 'em in the ass. To the ignorant, strong Te users will seem especially bossy, because they can't see the logic behind it all.

Ti: I think it is sort of all in third person but not blunt like Te-"The problem consists of these variables, this flaw, this aspect. " I'd have to let the Ti users chime in though. I think it sort of mirrors the way Fi does, but is mirroring data/analysis/information-rethinking their thoughts maybe????, not another's emo, thus doesnt speak in the first person. I dunno on this one.

Sort of. I've a fairly strong Ti, and I can go into that mode without too much pain or mind-twisting. Ti, especially abstract Ti like INTP, often reads like a math textbook. Instead of explaining addition as, "Here, take one stick. How many sticks? (One ... ) OK, now let's put down another stick. How many sticks is that? (Two ...) OK ... so addition is like that: one and one is two, " a full-out Ti version would list all the commutative and associative and whatever else properties of addition, slowly listing everything that is true about addition, building off of core axioms, until one had a full understanding of addition ... except for losing most folks on "what does commutative mean?"

wrt to the ex ISTP:

He was kinda screwed honestly, poor guy. I grew up with a family that used Fi manipulatively as a tool and weapon. They show you their Fi pain (ie whining), understanding inherently another Fi user will mirror that pain and be forced to help them. This only lasts so long before you build Te walls-that force the other Fi user to be accountable.

Interesting: I built up Te walls (nevermind Fi stubbornness) to deal with my Mom's INFJ guilt trips.

So he would try and use Fe to structure his own needs, plan a situation, or seek my support. He would say "we need to do this or that". I would translate that to "Fi speak", and see whiny or hear "You should have done this or that and didnt...". Thus I would respond with Te to try and force him to be accountable and responsible or defend my own actions.

Didnt lead to fights, just a cool approach where he used Ti and I used Te. A functional partnership.

As for emotional expression-I think Fe is much more likely to say "I feel this and need this emotional response from you" (I cant even speak Fe so that sounds all Te flavored ). Fi doesnt speak. You can see Fi by the things never said, the pauses. It is difficult to enunciate Fi. Not the silly NeFi us ENFPs use to play with, or how I can speak about Fi using Te. Really speaking with Fi-well thats kinda mute.

Yes, Fi doesn't speak. It is so hard to describe, but you can feel it.

Fe does speak.

One good friend of mine described Fe and Fi this way: Fi is a lake, Fe is a river. Fi is still and deep, difficult to dive in and understand. Fe is always moving, always changing, always adapting its course to the environment.

In regards to uumlau. Recently I have had a conversation with an Fe user where she wanted something and tried to convince me. I responded "I dont want it, but if you want it I am fine with it" her response was "I want you to want it though". This is possibly Fe feeling selfish and wants the group to want something to keep from feeling selfish.

Absolutely. My ESFJ ex-wife gave me exactly this: she wanted me to want to do what she wanted me to do. That I'd do it, however willingly, because I loved her, wasn't good enough for her. I had to like it, without respect to whether or not I loved her.

Proteo pointed out the "I" thing. I really had no idea how much it annoys the Fe users. It's just the way I speak and think when using Fi. Using Te will switch to a very third person directive written or spoken language for me. So I am either selfish or bossy. What's a girl to do?

I think this is getting to close to the core difference between Ti/Fe and Fi/Te.

What I actually did is took Proteo's advice and watch how I used speech. I stopped mirroring with Fe doms and auxs, and I try to ask them how they are doing. I try and communicate with Te with them as it seems more effective. Now when I interact with Fi users-even ISTJs-I very consciously mirror them, to the point they seek me out for emotional comfort.

Yeah, I find myself using Te to fake Fe. At least this is what I think I am doing. It's like a computer game for me: "Oh, if I say what I really want, I'm going to have to deal with a bunch of crap, but if I just smile and say 'Oh, how wonderful, thank you so much!' they'll get out of my face and I can go about what I really want to do all that much sooner." The thing is, until I had MBTI to show me what the signals were, I couldn't figure out when such politeness was really necessary, and when someone wanted me to be more honest about my feelings.

(Hmmm, I gave Amar a hard time about nudging, but I do it with the ISTJs for sure-just pure Fi blasts of appreciation and caring. I have had one get a little flirty but well, we were flirting a little. With the ISTJs the message seems to not get confused with sexual innuendos of any sort. This is not true with NTPs.)

Sorry I'm going a bit S on you, but what does a "just pure Fi blasts of appreciation and caring" look/sound like?

The Fe doms do drive me nuts with "group terms". Te says "Do this because it is the new way to do it." followed by a silent shut the fuck up and quit complaining. Fe says "The company has decided to follow a new procedure and with all of us working together as a team and we anticipate it will be a great success." so dont complain or you arent part of our team.

However the take home is to ignore the discomfort the "we" terms induce and ask them very directly for what deliverables I owe. The other aspect is to be able to say clearly-No, I cannot do that for you-and not let the group "we" guilt induced make me change my mind.

Good points. This actually helps me a lot.

IXTJs are a riot. I bring out the Ne in my ISTJs and make them all act kind a nuts honestly, although workplace stress and age may be a factor. Te just says stuff. Blunt, rude, offensive, harsh critical, fucked up shit. Then we all laugh our asses off. All of my INTJs are older and more reserved as well as more rare. (INTJs are weird)

Yes we are (rare and weird). I managed to meet a fellow INTJ this past weekend, and her reaction was, "Wow, guys like this really exist!" Usually, I try to be witty and pun ... but what was really making her laugh was my showing how I faked Fe: I'd say something very kind to the wait staff where we were having lunch, and translated it to her, in Te terms, that it was the fastest way to make them go away and leave us the hell alone. (And I had to do that several times.)

As my ENTPs and I get old, I find I offend their growing Fe, thus it can be hard to keep many of them close. It's sad as there is nothing more fun than Te no holds barred debate and discussion.

Ti is another language-no shit. Te cant follow down Ti's path for more than a few steps, then it starts to get filled in with "blah, blah, blah". I read my entps emails to her aloud and fill them in with spoken blah, blah, blahs. She almost killed me.

I am at the point where I can pick up a journal article and tell if it was written by Ti or Te, depending upon how I can follow it. On the converse, Ti cant think like Te either, so the ENTPs I work with can get so caught up in theory and a multitude of ideas but never get the Te big picture objective.

It's interesting that you equate Te with "big picture". xNTP have Ne/Ti for the "big picture." It's a different big picture, is all.

I completely understand how you can read articles and see whether it's Te or Ti. I can do the same, except I can think in both Te and Ti. (I just have to, for what I do.) Te works much better for explaining things to people (even to Ti, who will then nitpick it to death, but they understand it, first, then nitpick). Ti is better for formalizing, making sure that you know exactly what you're talking about. It's best if I can use them both to a degree: I define a problem very precisely (Ti), then I analyze it functionally (Te), then I draw conclusions (very much Te).

It's hard to do this with ENTPs as it is such a visceral response from them, and it can be really hard to identify specific things to change, but ENFJs are awesome.

Actually, this might be a good general rule. That is, when the function is tertiary or inferior, it's a bit more "raw." Ironically, the INTJ's Te is probably a bit more "mellow" than the ENFP's Te, precisely because the INTJ uses it all the time and it has matured to be a bit more diplomatic, while the ENFP's Te will be a bit more biting when it surfaces because it's only needed when NeFi is failing. Similarly, the INTJ's Fi is going to be more intense than that of an ENFP, precisely because the INTJ's Fi only rarely comes into play.

Similar logic would hold for ENFJ and ENTP, but moreso, since Fe would be primary for the ENFJ.

 

[sculpting]

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."

2) Dramatic emotional outbursts if I'm severely depressed or angry. "Do you have to do this here? Now?"...but let me just say I was in my mother's home, at midnight, in my nightgown, when she decided to bring her friend over. So it was less about me being "inappropriate" and all about her wanting be able to bring her friend ...to her mother's house...at midnight...without warning anyone first...and impress the friend with our family's exquisite manners? This is a big part of the reason why her lectures tend to fall on deaf ears much of the time.

3) Just generally telling me how to "behave myself" in situations. "Why do you take things so personally? Our other sister does it too!" (who is also an ENFP! lol) I will say, in my ENFJ sister's favor, that she has helped me tremendously in dealing with my mom.

1.yes I do this as well. I do feel a huge sense of group love towards many of my coworkers-I feel the need to protect them and make sure long term decisions made are in the best interest of the group-which I try and convince myself makes the best sense for the profit of the company. But individuals? I dont feel obligated to be nice to everyone or love them.

2. What about PMS? Just sayin...not that I know anyone that gets bitchy at PMS time.

3. Thank god I work with so few Fe users. It's the only thing that saves me.

It's "kind of bossy", but it's the same deal as Fe. Two Te users quickly arrive at agreement (or agree to disagree-ment), because they'll quickly agree on the facts of the matter, without any weird Ti internal inconsistencies you can't see stuff going on. If you have the facts, you can easily make a Te user change his or her mind.

yes to the two Te users quickness to conclusion. My entp says it looks like Te is ALWAYS right-both with me and Te auxs and doms. I think this is the way the words are said and the tone that accompanies it. So then when I get a bit more data, change the Te decision, then am "always right" again, it is very annoying to her, yet it just seems to be how the words come out. I have started qualifying the words I say to try and make the Te judgment seem less absolute and more open to discussion.

Interesting: I built up Te walls (nevermind Fi stubbornness) to deal with my Mom's INFJ guilt trips.

Yes, Fi doesn't speak. It is so hard to describe, but you can feel it.

Fe does speak.

One good friend of mine described Fe and Fi this way: Fi is a lake, Fe is a river. Fi is still and deep, difficult to dive in and understand. Fe is always moving, always changing, always adapting its course to the environment.

As for the Te walls-I have a very cute video of my presumed INTJ toddler I'll post. I'd like the get you guys thoughts about what he is thinking.

Fe-100% with you. When I cheated with Fe, I could feel this. I cant emphasize how much I envy the Fe users this open, soft, gentle, malleable yet distinct barrier. Interacting with other Fe users-like waves that lap against each other but dont mix. A give and take. Fi has its unspoken language but Fe does as well.

Yeah, I find myself using Te to fake Fe. At least this is what I think I am doing. It's like a computer game for me: "Oh, if I say what I really want, I'm going to have to deal with a bunch of crap, but if I just smile and say 'Oh, how wonderful, thank you so much!' they'll get out of my face and I can go about what I really want to do all that much sooner." The thing is, until I had MBTI to show me what the signals were, I couldn't figure out when such politeness was really necessary, and when someone wanted me to be more honest about my feelings.

I posted this elsewhere-but this layering effect-using one function to mimic another, seems learned but very natural to most people. I see it all the time. Very often the discussion here turns to nontraditional function usage. I wonder how much if this is really using different function orders verses how much is this layering/mimicing effect.

I cant emphasize how important this might be in terms of understanding people who seem a bit unusual-like an ESTP who wore a heavy Te facade or even seem false-like my ESTJ female boss who faked Fe or an ISFJ who fakes Te with Fe.

I need to observe in much more depth.

Sorry I'm going a bit S on you, but what does a "just pure Fi blasts of appreciation and caring" look/sound like?

It's interesting that you equate Te with "big picture". xNTP have Ne/Ti for the "big picture." It's a different big picture, is all.

I'm sorry it would incinerate your eyes. No can do.

As for big picture-about ten pages back Poki had a different version of big picture that was opposite to the typically ENTP big picture. So two folks side by side, both unhappy that the other cant see the big picture...Those silly perceiving functions...

Actually, this might be a good general rule. That is, when the function is tertiary or inferior, it's a bit more "raw." Ironically, the INTJ's Te is probably a bit more "mellow" than the ENFP's Te, precisely because the INTJ uses it all the time and it has matured to be a bit more diplomatic, while the ENFP's Te will be a bit more biting when it surfaces because it's only needed when NeFi is failing. Similarly, the INTJ's Fi is going to be more intense than that of an ENFP, precisely because the INTJ's Fi only rarely comes into play.

Similar logic would hold for ENFJ and ENTP, but moreso, since Fe would be primary for the ENFJ.

By biting do you mean rude, incinerating, acerbic, bitchy, callous, and combative? None of these words ever apply to me. Really....

This is actually a big problem for ENFPs, especially women, but I have a male VP who does it as well. We show so much facial expression plus we are can be quick and biting when we "think" thus it can be a little scattered yet combative at the same time-in both written and spoken form. It offends people. The assumption is that there is underlying emotion and our argument is not based in logic or fact. Doesnt help that Ne skips steps.

I wonder if being extroverted makes it worse. You see some of this in Te doms, they have just learned to fake Fe a bit more than us ENFPs. I have had two ESTJ bosses and two ENTJ bosses. The ESTJs fake Fe, but people still hate them. The ENTJs dont fake anything, they just brutally trample others, then seem confused by the response.."Who me?" I kinda liked them honestly, but they made few friends.

Not sure how to deal with this as an ENFP. Am collecting data on ENFPs in management around me, and I see different techniques being employed so no particular "right" answer yet. I often compare using Te to shoving my hand in a running garbage disposal for this reason. I cant help be blunt and direct, yet I alienate people which eliminates the more primary need for emotional affirmation. Yet I know the truth has to be addressed and dealt with.

Truth now, pain later.

 

[Poki]

That sounds like TiSe working together to feel like Te? Sound right? I dunno..

Yes. The majority of the time I like to just do it myself because I am so used to my perception that I am half blind in doing things when I have to rely on others perception.

This is where me and Fe part ways-I dont even understand her response here. If I want something I just say so, recognizing it may make the other person angry. When younger I would also just Fi clam up and then pout, but with an ISTP this was VERY pointless as he didnt see the Fi withdraw at all, thus my immature pouting was all in vain.

Growing up with Fi, my Se picks things up so easily in what I see. I just dont know how to always respond. I understand the Fe response that I posted, but I go about things way different. Their are lots of things "I want my people to want in a relationship, but its the things that is relative to that relationship" Take marriage, there are somethings that my wife has boundaries on. The things I am not allowed to do outside of marriage I want her to want those things from me and I take it upon myself to figure out how to make that activity enjoyable for both. If we are friends I want you to want to spend time together doing things. The things dont matter, but the desire to hang out is key to a friendship.

Proteo pointed out the "I" thing. I really had no idea how much it annoys the Fe users. It's just the way I speak and think when using Fi. Using Te will switch to a very third person directive written or spoken language for me. So I am either selfish or bossy. What's a girl to do?

What I actually did is took Proteo's advice and watch how I used speech. I stopped mirroring with Fe doms and auxs, and I try to ask them how they are doing. I try and communicate with Te with them as it seems more effective. Now when I interact with Fi users-even ISTJs-I very consciously mirror them, to the point they seek me out for emotional comfort.

(Hmmm, I gave Amar a hard time about nudging, but I do it with the ISTJs for sure-just pure Fi blasts of appreciation and caring. I have had one get a little flirty but well, we were flirting a little. With the ISTJs the message seems to not get confused with sexual innuendos of any sort. This is not true with NTPs.)

The Fe doms do drive me nuts with "group terms". Te says "Do this because it is the new way to do it." followed by a silent shut the fuck up and quit complaining. Fe says "The company has decided to follow a new procedure and with all of us working together as a team and we anticipate it will be a great success." so dont complain or you arent part of our team.

However the take home is to ignore the discomfort the "we" terms induce and ask them very directly for what deliverables I owe. The other aspect is to be able to say clearly-No, I cannot do that for you-and not let the group "we" guilt induced make me change my mind.

A more Dom Te and Fe will use a psuedo for of statistics on you. Its called majority. This is how the majority thinks, this is normal, this is expected. It is really about the group as the group supports their wants. They use it as a backing.

Fi will use Te as a backing also. I see this alot in my son. When his Fi makes an internal judgement(Fi) he will logically search for every reason he can think of(Te). They key here is that they are not related directly to his wants, but objective external reasons that support his Fi. I have seen an INTJ search for reasons to not do things as his Fi doesnt want to and he goes looking for external things to back up Fi. There is alot of cases in which this is very helpful, but they also do this when they just dont want to do something and look for excuses. I on the other hand, just decide if I want to or not. I dont use Te to find external logical reasons. In regards to my wife sometimes she thinks I go searching when I really dont do things based on my fuzzy logic. This is where Te and Ti both have the same reasoning and its not really that good. This is where intent come into the picture as you attack Te and its like Te is like "man I just got busted", attack Ti and you just told a judgment that it was wrong. It would be the same as me telling an Fi user that their judgement of a person or of some idea they want is wrong. Not a good thing, caused that feeling in an Fi person before.

IXTJs are a riot. I bring out the Ne in my ISTJs and make them all act kind a nuts honestly, although workplace stress and age may be a factor. Te just says stuff. Blunt, rude, offensive, harsh critical, fucked up shit. Then we all laugh our asses off. All of my INTJs are older and more reserved as well as more rare. (INTJs are weird) As my ENTPs and I get old, I find I offend their growing Fe, thus it can be hard to keep many of them close. It's sad as there is nothing more fun than Te no holds barred debate and discussion.

I cant maintain a IJ debate for to long as I bug the crap out of them. And yes tertiary Fe people can be really sensitive.

Ti is another language-no shit. Te cant follow down Ti's path for more than a few steps, then it starts to get filled in with "blah, blah, blah". I read my entps emails to her aloud and fill them in with spoken blah, blah, blahs. She almost killed me.

I am at the point where I can pick up a journal article and tell if it was written by Ti or Te, depending upon how I can follow it. On the converse, Ti cant think like Te either, so the ENTPs I work with can get so caught up in theory and a multitude of ideas but never get the Te big picture objective.

The next time you and OMT start a lovemaking session, after each post take about an hour to think over what he wrote-you have to translate his Ti into your Te, which is hard without getting pissed.

I do the same thing with N. Half the stuff flies out the window. Especially when its combined with Si. To much detail is used to actually make it useful. If the thing they are discussing has stuff missing, they will introduce all these possibilities. Then they get in a debated argument about things that arent even true. I guess this is how they figure out what they like and dont. It just doesnt seem to hold up in regards to real life as we may not be in the same point in life when that thing actually happens.

Fi feels the same with me. I sit their trying to turn it into Fe. Its like I have to search for what you really want. Its the Te that confuses it as it will use external objective things to try to come up with logic to support Fi and I have to dig through it. If marm would allow me to use her blog I can give an example of the problems I have being able to understand when Te becomes to strong. This will be the total honesty like it says below. I dont use Fe or Ti as tertiary defense so you dont have to worry about any visceral response from me. I can tell Te when its used as it hits a nerve in me as they search for logical reasons and look for external logical validation, when they need an Fi "I feel for you response". IRL my response is not naturally "I feel for you", but I will leave it up to you to decide what you want to do and will support your internal decision 100%.

Try this-ask your Fe users to be totally honest and give you critique about things that they find irritating. When Proteo will do this here, I learn amazing stuff that I never would have thought to question. "Really, I do that? Really, it's irritating?"

It's hard to do this with ENTPs as it is such a visceral response from them, and it can be really hard to identify specific things to change, but ENFJs are awesome.

Take the identified "issue", try and detach yourself from the emotional response and really figure out why you do it. When is it good? When is it bad? Is it close enough to your core that you can't not do it-like the emo emissions that drive the ENTPs nuts. Or is it something you can tone down recognizing it is not productive with everyone-the Fi mirroring for instance.

Just my two cents though, bout how I use all this stuff. All just suggestions, so sorry if it seems bossy.

As an ENFJ becomes more comfortable this will come out without asking for the critique. I start to wonder if Se as a defense mechanism is tuned to pick these things up both within what they do and become super critical of themselves as well as with others. When they care about you they let it out so you can become a better person(Just a high level thought).

 

[uumlau]

yes to the two Te users quickness to conclusion. My entp says it looks like Te is ALWAYS right-both with me and Te auxs and doms. I think this is the way the words are said and the tone that accompanies it. So then when I get a bit more data, change the Te decision, then am "always right" again, it is very annoying to her, yet it just seems to be how the words come out. I have started qualifying the words I say to try and make the Te judgment seem less absolute and more open to discussion.

Actually, I think what's going on here is that Te/Fi vs Fe/Ti divide. In particular, I've found that Te often sounds like Fe (and vice versa), so in generally, Te users interpret both Te and Fe with the same filters on, and Fe users are listening to both Te and Fe as if it were all Fe.

So Fe users hear a good deal of rudeness from Te: when you tell the truth, for instance, it embarrasses people, so Fe users try to skim the truth or focus on the desired result all the while trying to avoid that embarrassment. Fe taken to an extreme becomes a "politically correct" kind of speech. Fortunately, skilled (i.e., primary and secondary) Te users and Fe users usually become good at navigating this breach as they mature: Te users learn to use polite turns of phrase, and Fe users read the body language and tone of voice in order to realize that the Te user doesn't intend offense.

The "always right" is just how Fe users read Te users, and it particularly annoys tertiary and inferior Fe users because their Fe perception is often not as mature.

(More on this below.)

As for the Te walls-I have a very cute video of my presumed INTJ toddler I'll post. I'd like the get you guys thoughts about what he is thinking.

That'd be cool.

I posted this elsewhere-but this layering effect-using one function to mimic another, seems learned but very natural to most people. I see it all the time. Very often the discussion here turns to nontraditional function usage. I wonder how much if this is really using different function orders verses how much is this layering/mimicing effect.

I cant emphasize how important this might be in terms of understanding people who seem a bit unusual-like an ESTP who wore a heavy Te facade or even seem false-like my ESTJ female boss who faked Fe or an ISFJ who fakes Te with Fe.

I need to observe in much more depth.

I think it's wrong to consider it a "facade". I'll continue to use terms like "Fe user" and "Te user" as a convenient shorthand, but I will always strive to emphasize that judging functions only indirectly affect behavior: one doesn't "use Fe" to choose what to say, one "uses Fe" (with Ni or Si as a perceiving function) to understand a situation and come up with several options of what to say ... and then one chooses what to say.

When a Te user is "using an Fe facade", what is really going on is that one is using Te to analyze things objectively, and then choosing to express oneself in the most effective means possible. If being very blunt means that the receiver gets offended and doesn't listen to the message, that's a failure, whether one is Fe or Te. So Te learns how to say things "nicely" so that the messages are actually received as intended. This dovetails into my later point about how primary/secondary Te/Fe users can accommodate each others' mode of expression, with some effort. You're reading this as using a facade, which is a legitimate way of looking at it. I just think it's easier to recognize that it's still Te (or Fe), but just more experienced/matured.

I'm sorry it would incinerate your eyes. No can do.

Awww.

(Really, I don't mean to pry, but I am very curious, because I am without a context.)

As for big picture-about ten pages back Poki had a different version of big picture that was opposite to the typically ENTP big picture. So two folks side by side, both unhappy that the other cant see the big picture...Those silly perceiving functions...

Exactly. In a weird way, it's all the same big picture, BUT ... each side is trying to fill in different pieces, due to a different priority. Ni fills in the blanks and makes a partial portrait a complete portrait, for example, while Ne fills in the background of the portrait, with trees and leaves and sky and clouds and sun and shadow.

By biting do you mean rude, incinerating, acerbic, bitchy, callous, and combative? None of these words ever apply to me. Really....

Nope. This is where my prior answers in this post dovetail to these comments. You can say something completely honestly, openly, in good faith, with nothing but good intentions, with caring and love and the warmest of warm fuzzies, but because it is the plain, unadulterated truth, a more immature Fe user will take what you say as a personal offense, reading into your words any of:

• You think I'm stupid?!
• Why do you think I don't care?!
• How can you possibly be so certain?! (This is often combined Fe/Ti reading Te ... Ti knows it doesn't understand, and distrusts the Te version.)
• How dare you characterize me that way!
• And so on ...

The Fe user might hear any number of things that you never said nor intended to say, but yet, if you read/listen to your own words from their perspective, you'll get hints of what they're getting at.

For me, the most common example when I was growing up was offering to help friends with their homework, and they'd be insulted that I thought that they needed help. I'm thinking I'm being nice and helpful, but because I didn't follow the Fe-style protocol, instead of offering help in a face-saving way, I effectively insulted them for being too stupid to do their own homework.

And this leads me to finally addressing this bit:

This is actually a big problem for ENFPs, especially women, but I have a male VP who does it as well. We show so much facial expression plus we are can be quick and biting when we "think" thus it can be a little scattered yet combative at the same time-in both written and spoken form. It offends people. The assumption is that there is underlying emotion and our argument is not based in logic or fact. Doesnt help that Ne skips steps.

I wonder if being extroverted makes it worse. You see some of this in Te doms, they have just learned to fake Fe a bit more than us ENFPs. I have had two ESTJ bosses and two ENTJ bosses. The ESTJs fake Fe, but people still hate them. The ENTJs dont fake anything, they just brutally trample others, then seem confused by the response.."Who me?" I kinda liked them honestly, but they made few friends.

Not sure how to deal with this as an ENFP. Am collecting data on ENFPs in management around me, and I see different techniques being employed so no particular "right" answer yet. I often compare using Te to shoving my hand in a running garbage disposal for this reason. I cant help be blunt and direct, yet I alienate people which eliminates the more primary need for emotional affirmation. Yet I know the truth has to be addressed and dealt with.

Truth now, pain later.

What I end up doing these days is phrasing things far more diplomatically, yet my message remains the same. For instance, when correcting "Dave", I could say one of two things:

1. That's wrong. It really works like this: <give detailed logical example>.
2. That's a good analysis, Dave, but there are a couple of things going on here of which you are unaware, namely <point out facts>. Given those facts, then that leads us to <my conclusion>.

The first, even though I don't even say "You are wrong," but rather "That is wrong," will be interpreted as an insult by many people. (I suspect that for Fe/Ti, because Ti is introverted, one's ideas are taken more personally, and require the same respect as you would give the person. Just a theory. Similarly, for Te/Fi, one's feelings require that level of respect.)

The second includes two levels of affirmation, and then follows with Te logical presentation. The first level is that I show respect for Dave's ability to reason, which works well both on Fe and Fi users, I think. The second is that I provide a face-saving reason for him to be incorrect, so it isn't as if he's being called to task for presenting an incorrect version of the facts (this is more for the Fe users, I believe). Then I am allowed to be blunt and factual, because I made it verbally clear that not only do I respect him and his ideas, but I also show that I'm not just trying to force my thinking onto the group.

Thus it isn't a matter of "truth now, pain later." It's more, "a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down (in a most delightful way)."

 

[Poki]

Actually, I think what's going on here is that Te/Fi vs Fe/Ti divide. In particular, I've found that Te often sounds like Fe (and vice versa), so in generally, Te users interpret both Te and Fe with the same filters on, and Fe users are listening to both Te and Fe as if it were all Fe.

So Fe users hear a good deal of rudeness from Te: when you tell the truth, for instance, it embarrasses people, so Fe users try to skim the truth or focus on the desired result all the while trying to avoid that embarrassment. Fe taken to an extreme becomes a "politically correct" kind of speech. Fortunately, skilled (i.e., primary and secondary) Te users and Fe users are usually become good at navigating this breach as they mature: Te users learn to use polite turns of phrase, and Fe users read the body language and tone of voice in order to realize that the Te user doesn't intend offense.

The "always right" is just how Fe users read Te users, and it particularly annoys tertiary and inferior Fe users because their Fe perception is often not as mature.

(More on this below.)


That'd be cool.


I think it's wrong to consider it a "facade". I'll continue to use terms like "Fe user" and "Te user" as a convenient shorthand, but I will always strive to emphasize that judging functions only indirectly affect behavior: one doesn't "use Fe" to choose what to say, one "uses Fe" (with Ni or Si as a perceiving function) to understand a situation and come up with several options of what to say ... and then one chooses what to say.

When a Te user is "using an Fe facade", what is really going on is that one is using Te to analyze things objectively, and then choosing to express oneself in the most effective means possible. If being very blunt means that the receiver gets offended and doesn't listen to the message, that's a failure, whether one is Fe or Te. So Te learns how to say things "nicely" so that the messages are actually received as intended. This dovetails into my later point about how primary/secondary Te/Fe users can accommodate each others' mode of expression, with some effort. You're reading this as using a facade, which is a legitimate way of looking at it. I just think it's easier to recognize that it's still Te (or Fe), but just more experienced/matured.



Awww.

(Really, I don't mean to pry, but I am very curious, because I am without a context.)



Exactly. In a weird way, it's all the same big picture, BUT ... each side is trying to fill in different pieces, due to a different priority. Ni fills in the blanks and makes a partial portrait a complete portrait, for example, while Ne fills in the background of the portrait, with trees and leaves and sky and clouds and sun and shadow.



Nope. This is where my prior answers in this post dovetail to these comments. You can say something completely honestly, openly, in good faith, with nothing but good intentions, with caring and love and the warmest of warm fuzzies, but because it is the plain, unadulterated truth, a more immature Fe user will take what you say as a personal offense, reading into your words any of:

• You think I'm stupid?!
• Why do you think I don't care?!
• How can you possibly be so certain?! (This is often combined Fe/Ti reading Te ... Ti knows it doesn't understand, and distrusts the Te version.)
• How dare you characterize me that way!
• And so on ...

The Fe user might hear any number of things that you never said nor intended to say, but yet, if you read/listen to your own words from their perspective, you'll get hints of what they're getting at.

For me, the most common example when I was growing up was offering to help friends with their homework, and they'd be insulted that I thought that they needed help. I'm thinking I'm being nice and helpful, but because I didn't follow the Fe-style protocol, instead of offering help in a face-saving way, I effectively insulted them for being too stupid to do their own homework.

And this leads me to finally addressing this bit:


What I end up doing these days is phrasing things far more diplomatically, yet my message remains the same. For instance, when correcting "Dave", I could say one of two things:

1. That's wrong. It really works like this: <give detailed logical example>.
2. That's a good analysis, Dave, but there are a couple of things going on here of which you are unaware, namely <point out facts>. Given those facts, then that leads us to <my conclusion>.

The first, even though I don't even say "You are wrong," but rather "That is wrong," will be interpreted as an insult by many people. (I suspect that for Fe/Ti, because Ti is introverted, one's ideas are taken more personally, and require the same respect as you would give the person. Just a theory. Similarly, for Te/Fi, one's feelings require that level of respect.)

The second includes two levels of affirmation, and then follows with Te logical presentation. The first level is that I show respect for Dave's ability to reason, which works well both on Fe and Fi users, I think. The second is that I provide a face-saving reason for him to be incorrect, so it isn't as if he's being called to task for presenting an incorrect version of the facts (this is more for the Fe users, I believe). Then I am allowed to be blunt and factual, because I made it verbally clear that not only do I respect him and his ideas, but I also show that I'm not just trying to force my thinking onto the group.

Thus it isn't a matter of "truth now, pain later." It's more, "a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down (in a most delightful way)."

I agree with the Te and Fe in regards to speech and writing. Te is very blunt and objectively logical. An inferior Te user will tend to slip in much more Fi then a dom/aux user.

Fe is very politically correct, but this causes it to be read into. That seems to be peoples natural response to politically correct speeches.

Both Fe/Te want things taken at face value, but a different face value. I cant escape Ti so I end up using a subjective filter to figure out what I need to objectively include. Its a different task then going from Fe to Te or Te to Fe. Te to Fe is more shifting. Ti/Fi to Te/Fe is alot harder, especially when we dont feel like we can be completely open. Somethings that are a work in progress will always slip into Fe/Te and the more closed we have to be the harder it is for Fe or Te to come out.

I am curious if Fe and Te do this by being blind as in perception, not N vs S. By limiting subjectivity they are able to be objective. Or by taking things at face value they are able to relay things at face value by not digging into them. Hence, knowledge is evil.

 

[onemoretime]

For instance, when correcting "Dave", I could say one of two things:

1. That's wrong. It really works like this: <give detailed logical example>.
2. That's a good analysis, Dave, but there are a couple of things going on here of which you are unaware, namely <point out facts>. Given those facts, then that leads us to <my conclusion>.

The first, even though I don't even say "You are wrong," but rather "That is wrong," will be interpreted as an insult by many people. (I suspect that for Fe/Ti, because Ti is introverted, one's ideas are taken more personally, and require the same respect as you would give the person. Just a theory. Similarly, for Te/Fi, one's feelings require that level of respect.)

Yeah... that second one would offend me more. Comes across as veeeerrrry patronizing (especially the "unaware" part). To be honest, while both would get a combative response in return, the second would go from caring about the object (and grudgingly admitting a point) to simply proving you wrong, no matter the outcome (aka why I'm in law school).

"I see what you're saying, but if you take x, y, and z into account, doesn't it end up like this?" - what I would consider the least offensive.

 

[sculpting]

btw, U, I was being terribly sarcastic regarding the "biting". I can be exceptionally biting in written form at times and quite bitchy.

I agree with the Te and Fe in regards to speech and writing. Te is very blunt and objectively logical. An inferior Te user will tend to slip in much more Fi then a dom/aux user.

Fe is very politically correct, but this causes it to be read into. That seems to be peoples natural response to politically correct speeches.

Both Fe/Te want things taken at face value, but a different face value. I cant escape Ti so I end up using a subjective filter to figure out what I need to objectively include. Its a different task then going from Fe to Te or Te to Fe. Te to Fe is more shifting. Ti/Fi to Te/Fe is alot harder, especially when we dont feel like we can be completely open. Somethings that are a work in progress will always slip into Fe/Te and the more closed we have to be the harder it is for Fe or Te to come out.

I am curious if Fe and Te do this by being blind as in perception, not N vs S. By limiting subjectivity they are able to be objective. Or by taking things at face value they are able to relay things at face value by not digging into them. Hence, knowledge is evil.

I am lost-but much like K's stuff I feel I need to print this out and read it 15 times, because you are getting at a point and my Ne brain is befuddled. Make no mistake-like Te and Ti speaking a different language, Ni/Se and Ne/Si do as well.

I think-this is a guess-this is part of having inferior Fe, maybe for an ISTP? My Te gets all tangled up with Ne or with Si. I can have two different ways to perceive information and judge it -based upon historical or future possibilities. I get two options. Perhaps with your Fe being inferior-well I dunno...maybe the perceptions become more similiar???

(Btw-what does an Ni defensive wall look like-you mentioned it the other day)

Yeah... that second one would offend me more. Comes across as veeeerrrry patronizing (especially the "unaware" part). To be honest, while both would get a combative response in return, the second would go from caring about the object (and grudgingly admitting a point) to simply proving you wrong, no matter the outcome (aka why I'm in law school).

"I see what you're saying, but if you take x, y, and z into account, doesn't it end up like this?" - what I would consider the least offensive.

See I get all screwed here by Fi. Fi says "Be authentic". Te says "Be blunt and logical" Authentic + logical + blunt= being a total argumentative bitch. Which is great fun with younger ENTPs who are pretty blunt and argumentative I guess I take path one and we bludgeon each other for a bit...

OMT-what if it isnt about the x y, z Ti details-what if the end point objective is just flawed? Or irrelevant? Let me think up some examples.

I find my ENTP gets totally pissed when I fuck with her Ti systems, but I get totally pissed when her Ti systems prohibit my progress to a final measurable Te objective. She says I am Duct Tape for everything, and can accomplish miracles, but I totally short circuit a systems approach which is more sustainable in the long term.

 

[sculpting]

What I end up doing these days is phrasing things far more diplomatically, yet my message remains the same. For instance, when correcting "Dave", I could say one of two things:

1. That's wrong. It really works like this: <give detailed logical example>.
2. That's a good analysis, Dave, but there are a couple of things going on here of which you are unaware, namely <point out facts>. Given those facts, then that leads us to <my conclusion>.

hmmmmm, I see how you guys play..... I totally eat that second one up myself. "ooooo, reallllyyyyy, you think I am clever...awwwww" That's so funny! ENFPs are kinda slow, me thinks. just pat our heads and we will be happy...

Yet I am more likely to look like version 1 in my own communications. It takes effort to use Te productively for me-not just idea generating but analytically. To then have to apply sugar or take time explaining details, is very draining.

It induces a mental state some what akin to "God damn it I found the truth for you, what the hell else do you people want from me. Just fucking fix it!!!!!". Not kidding, very frustrating for me. Very hard to make the Te pretty even if I really like the other person. Often it is easy to give up then try and keep pushing the idea. Likely a combo of Ne impulsive/impatience there as well. I'll have to figure out a way to deal with this.

 

[uumlau]

Yeah... that second one would offend me more. Comes across as veeeerrrry patronizing (especially the "unaware" part). To be honest, while both would get a combative response in return, the second would go from caring about the object (and grudgingly admitting a point) to simply proving you wrong, no matter the outcome (aka why I'm in law school).

"I see what you're saying, but if you take x, y, and z into account, doesn't it end up like this?" - what I would consider the least offensive.

^^^ See what I mean? Even when you TRY to be polite with Te, it offends. It's too damn direct.

I forgot the part where one has to phrase everything as a question, and that which cannot be a question liberally carpeted with "maybe" "perhaps" or "for instance", therefore you offend no one.

[CAVEAT: using "you" as a pronoun of convenience, hereafter, doesn't mean "you personally" but as more general class of tendencies, not necessarily shared by all of a given MBTI type ...]
However, for those of you who rely on Ti, when talking with those who rely on Te, and trying to get along with them, that "phrase everything as a question" mode gets VERY annoying. We think, "Get to the point, please."

We want to deal with whatever it is you think is wrong and address it directly: you won't offend us. We'll either agree or disagree. We don't want to discuss what the issue maybe is, or perhaps is or hypothetically is. That feels like your trying to lead us down your logical path (in a "veeeerrrry" tendentious manner) which we find remarkably unpersuasive, since we aren't allowed to use any reasoning to which you currently object, leaving us stuck arguing about some side issue that leads to your conclusion, rather than comparing our logical structures as a whole.

The tendentious phrasing of the question, "I see what you're saying, but if you take x, y, and z into account, doesn't it end up like this?" is just as patronizingly insulting to us, as our direct statement of the facts as we see them is patronizingly insulting to you. The "doesn't it end up like this?" often appears to be a conclusion drawn from the circular logic of assuming that "x, y, and z" are not only true, but that they must imply your conclusion. It takes forever to deconstruct that argument, and the argument feels like deliberate obfuscation to one who prefers Te, and is saying "Look, X is true. We both agree X is true. If X is true, Y cannot be true." However, you don't buy this argument, and keep on insisting, for example, that Y might be true, and keep on making me prove and re-prove to you that Y cannot be true.

We'd rather see both paths (yours and ours) of logic, instantaneously, side-by-side, and compare their relative strengths and weaknesses out in the open. We believe that this lets us perceive the foundational axioms of both points of view and work from there. (This is a very Ni-biased perspective, btw, switching out axioms in order to determine which axioms are the best hypothesis, and disproving falsifiable axioms in the Karl Popper sense.)

That endless phrasing of everything as a question means that you can seem (to a "Te user") to always place the burden of proof on others to convince you, rather than on you to convince others. When the cycle of questioning ends, a "Te user" feels empty, unsure whether you have finally agreed or have simply given up out of sheer frustration. It also feels as if you simply ignore all our points, since every point is answered with yet another question, without any declarative statements indicating agreement or disagreement.

I realize that it is simply a differing perspective. For logic, I prefer to be to-the-point and direct, while others prefer to be indirect and actually perceive issues as questions to be asked, rather than as points to be made. The point I'm making here, however, is that with many listeners (perhaps about half? how do the statistics work out?), your carefully polite "questioning" mode might not only fail to persuade, but in fact be so unpersuasive as to bias others to disregard your opinion.

 

[Lady_X]

i don't know any intjs but i saw this while looking at something else and thought it was kinda cuteish so i'm sharing.
Dating and Your Myers-Briggs Personality Type - Associated Content - associatedcontent.com

 

[SillySapienne]

i don't know any intjs but i saw this while looking at something else and thought it was kinda cuteish so i'm sharing.
Dating and Your Myers-Briggs Personality Type - Associated Content - associatedcontent.com

Love it!

And, finally, some shit that actually pertains to this thread!!!

 

[uumlau]

btw, U, I was being terribly sarcastic regarding the "biting". I can be exceptionally biting in written form at times and quite bitchy.

Nawwww!

See I get all screwed here by Fi. Fi says "Be authentic". Te says "Be blunt and logical" Authentic + logical + blunt= being a total argumentative bitch. Which is great fun with younger ENTPs who are pretty blunt and argumentative I guess I take path one and we bludgeon each other for a bit...

OMT-what if it isnt about the x y, z Ti details-what if the end point objective is just flawed? Or irrelevant? Let me think up some examples.

Unsurprisingly, I think we have the same perspective on this, hence my comments about "tendentious" reasoning.

The problem is opening the other person up to the possibility that one is wrong. For a Te person, the best way to open them up is be as blunt and direct as they are. For a Ti person, the best way would seem to be being as indirect and circular as they are.

I find my ENTP gets totally pissed when I fuck with her Ti systems, but I get totally pissed when her Ti systems prohibit my progress to a final measurable Te objective. She says I am Duct Tape for everything, and can accomplish miracles, but I totally short circuit a systems approach which is more sustainable in the long term.

I'm quite familiar with this dynamic, though I have it with an INTP. It isn't that I'm "duct tape", so much as it annoys him that my duct tape is most always preferred by management to his more extensive fix.

hmmmmm, I see how you guys play..... I totally eat that second one up myself. "ooooo, reallllyyyyy, you think I am clever...awwwww" That's so funny! ENFPs are kinda slow, me thinks. just pat our heads and we will be happy...

Note a couple of things, here:

1. When said by an xxTJ, you read his "honesty" vibe. You know he isn't being patronizing, instinctively. He truly is happy that you demonstrated a good grasp of the facts, and only a lack of info led to an incorrect conclusion. That is so much easier to deal with than other alternatives. That you "eat it up" is just serendipitous icing on the cake, for us.
2. OMT found the latter one to be very patronizing, implying that he is somehow inferior for not noticing other facts. I suspect I was using too much Fi to come up with that second statement. (FWIW, I was presuming that the object of my statement had presented all the facts as he knew them, and thus it would be "plain fact" that he ignored other items, or possibly that I just came across new facts, whereas before I initially agreed with him.)

Yet I am more likely to look like version 1 in my own communications. It takes effort to use Te productively for me-not just idea generating but analytically. To then have to apply sugar or take time explaining details, is very draining.

It induces a mental state some what akin to "God damn it I found the truth for you, what the hell else do you people want from me. Just fucking fix it!!!!!". Not kidding, very frustrating for me. Very hard to make the Te pretty even if I really like the other person. Often it is easy to give up then try and keep pushing the idea. Likely a combo of Ne impulsive/impatience there as well. I'll have to figure out a way to deal with this.

I believe you'll find this perspective quite useful, when you turn it around and try to read INTJs using Fi: "Goddammit! I just told you what I felt! I didn't lie. What the hell else do you want from me?" This is especially where I'll get hit by the FJ perspective: they'll ask me how I feel, and telling the truth turns out to be the "wrong answer," because they'll interpret every feeling as a demand. (Especially had this problem with my ex. My feelings are intense and passionately expressed, but to her they were bullying her to do things for me that I didn't even want her to do.)

 

[onemoretime]

See I get all screwed here by Fi. Fi says "Be authentic". Te says "Be blunt and logical" Authentic + logical + blunt= being a total argumentative bitch. Which is great fun with younger ENTPs who are pretty blunt and argumentative I guess I take path one and we bludgeon each other for a bit...

OMT-what if it isnt about the x y, z Ti details-what if the end point objective is just flawed? Or irrelevant? Let me think up some examples.

I find my ENTP gets totally pissed when I fuck with her Ti systems, but I get totally pissed when her Ti systems prohibit my progress to a final measurable Te objective. She says I am Duct Tape for everything, and can accomplish miracles, but I totally short circuit a systems approach which is more sustainable in the long term.

If the end objective is flawed, then show the factors that make it flawed. Ti is the hypercompetitive function - it sees any assertion of "wrongness" to be a challenge to be defeated. Portraying the flawed objective as a new challenge, rather than an incorrect conclusion, more effectively harnesses its competitive energy toward the group objective, rather than focusing it on the messenger.

Ti wants to win. Always. Telling it that it's wrong is akin to telling it that it loses... and it's not going down without a fight.

^^^ See what I mean? Even when you TRY to be polite with Te, it offends. It's too damn direct.

I forgot the part where one has to phrase everything as a question, and that which cannot be a question liberally carpeted with "maybe" "perhaps" or "for instance", therefore you offend no one.

It's not about "offending", it's about redirecting the energy of the challenge toward the object, rather than the person.

[CAVEAT: using "you" as a pronoun of convenience, hereafter, doesn't mean "you personally" but as more general class of tendencies, not necessarily shared by all of a given MBTI type ...]
However, for those of you who rely on Ti, when talking with those who rely on Te, and trying to get along with them, that "phrase everything as a question" mode gets VERY annoying. We think, "Get to the point, please."

Yeah, that's a problem - we're trying to get you to get to the point, so we both conquer the challenge and feel good about ourselves. This might be preaching the secondary here, but I hold as a core belief that everyone, if given the right information and nudged in the right direction, can figure anything out, and that it's better to teach a man to fish than simply give him the fish.

We want to deal with whatever it is you think is wrong and address it directly: you won't offend us. We'll either agree or disagree. We don't want to discuss what the issue maybe is, or perhaps is or hypothetically is. That feels like your trying to lead us down your logical path (in a "veeeerrrry" tendentious manner) which we find remarkably unpersuasive, since we aren't allowed to use any reasoning to which you currently object, leaving us stuck arguing about some side issue that leads to your conclusion, rather than comparing our logical structures as a whole.

And what you see as "remarkably unpersuasive", we see as opening up to mutual learning and understanding. When I seemingly reject your line of reasoning, that's an opportunity to explain to me why it makes sense, so I can come to the same conclusion that you do, and we both can walk away happy, since we both figured it out, and I walk away happier, since I can look ahead to the next set of problems that I've previously overlooked.

As I type this, I realize this is the Ti equivalent to Amar's Fi-nudging. Think of it in those terms, and you might find that it's not as annoying as you think.

(NOTE: I can become Te-direct when frustrated, but as you may have noticed, this often directs toward the person with the aim of defeating them, than toward the issue)

The tendentious phrasing of the question, "I see what you're saying, but if you take x, y, and z into account, doesn't it end up like this?" is just as patronizingly insulting to us, as our direct statement of the facts as we see them is patronizingly insulting to you. The "doesn't it end up like this?" often appears to be a conclusion drawn from the circular logic of assuming that "x, y, and z" are not only true, but that they must imply your conclusion. It takes forever to deconstruct that argument, and the argument feels like deliberate obfuscation to one who prefers Te, and is saying "Look, X is true. We both agree X is true. If X is true, Y cannot be true." However, you don't buy this argument, and keep on insisting, for example, that Y might be true, and keep on making me prove and re-prove to you that Y cannot be true.

It seems both of us are arguing from the same position: "you don't know that." It's not intended to be obstinate - it's just that if X = 1 and Y = 1, then the problem's solved and we can move on. It takes a lot more effort to modify the logical chain than to modify the variables, so I'll see if there's any way to modify the variables so we can be finished with the issue.

"Y cannot be true" - my problem is that unless it logically follows that Y cannot be true, and I understand why this is the case, then I cannot ignore the possibility that Y is true, especially if it makes the solution much more elegant. We're meticulous in our internal thought in much the same way a person who highly values cleanliness is in their external interaction.

We'd rather see both paths (yours and ours) of logic, instantaneously, side-by-side, and compare their relative strengths and weaknesses out in the open. We believe that this lets us perceive the foundational axioms of both points of view and work from there. (This is a very Ni-biased perspective, btw, switching out axioms in order to determine which axioms are the best hypothesis, and disproving falsifiable axioms in the Karl Popper sense.)

I'd like the same thing too. The problem is that I can't portray my logical pattern instantaneously (Ne perspective) - since it's a continual chain of connections, and each time I run through the permutation of it, I'm evaluating it, looking for things to improve. Ti's a tinkerer - I remember as a child that whenever I played with Lego blocks, I could never leave a creation "finished." There was always something more to add on.

So in a sense, the inducement into following our logical chain has a self-serving purpose as well - I want to see you go through it to make sure I haven't left anything out.

That endless phrasing of everything as a question means that you can seem (to a "Te user") to always place the burden of proof on others to convince you, rather than on you to convince others. When the cycle of questioning ends, a "Te user" feels empty, unsure whether you have finally agreed or have simply given up out of sheer frustration. It also feels as if you simply ignore all our points, since every point is answered with yet another question, without any declarative statements indicating agreement or disagreement.

Think of it this way - if you were designing a car, wouldn't you want to run the brake system through countless stress tests to make sure it operates as intended? That's the way I approach seemingly completed logical chains. I'm inclined to run it through as many variable factors to make sure it works before considering it a given component of a larger logical framework. If it's gotten to that point, sometimes I'll fail to outwardly accept it as valid, because if we've both come to the same conclusion, mentioning that I accept it is as pedestrian as saying that water is wet.

I realize that it is simply a differing perspective. For logic, I prefer to be to-the-point and direct, while others prefer to be indirect and actually perceive issues as questions to be asked, rather than as points to be made. The point I'm making here, however, is that with many listeners (perhaps about half? how do the statistics work out?), your carefully polite "questioning" mode might not only fail to persuade, but in fact be so unpersuasive as to bias others to disregard your opinion.

I see what you're saying. I'm disinclined to be that direct, because to me, it seems like I'm lording my intelligence over the other person, which I personally would resent in their shoes.

If I were to be more direct in my answer to your scenario, it would come out like "The way I see it, because of x, y and z, this is the way things are. (You sure about that?) One hundred percent."

 

[onemoretime]

It induces a mental state some what akin to "God damn it I found the truth for you, what the hell else do you people want from me. Just fucking fix it!!!!!". Not kidding, very frustrating for me. Very hard to make the Te pretty even if I really like the other person. Often it is easy to give up then try and keep pushing the idea. Likely a combo of Ne impulsive/impatience there as well. I'll have to figure out a way to deal with this.

You see, the problem with this is that we on the other end get to take no pleasure in helping find the solution, and as a result this feels very oppressive. It's the same reason I can't stand dogmatic religion.

It makes me feel like a cog in the machine, and that you feel I am inferior to you. This is a challenge - at this point, I'm inclined to demonstrate that I know the machine better than you do by dismantling the whole thing from within, because you've shown that you're not interested in both of us winning by working together as a team, and so, I've got to make sure you lose.

 

[sculpting]

You see, the problem with this is that we on the other end get to take no pleasure in helping find the solution, and as a result this feels very oppressive. It's the same reason I can't stand dogmatic religion.

It makes me feel like a cog in the machine, and that you feel I am inferior to you. This is a challenge - at this point, I'm inclined to demonstrate that I know the machine better than you do by dismantling the whole thing from within, because you've shown that you're not interested in both of us winning by working together as a team, and so, I've got to make sure you lose.

Typically I tag team with my NTPs-I use NeTe as a troubleshooting tool then drag the broken thing back to them and say "something is broken, I think it might be this." Then I leave them to it, to find a solution or see if my first guess was right..I'm like that dog that drags in your neighbors garbage. I have seen the "I know my machine better than you" phenomenon at work. Nowdays my NTPs will actually seek me for info and advice, so I guess I passed some competency test. Or maybe they pick up on the authenticity of my interest-it isnt about me getting any recognition or proving them wrong, it really is about my customer and a better instrument, so they respect it.

NeTe is some weird shit-I can see trends in data a thousand miles away. Trends other people just dont see-even NTPs. It's like i can step outside of the details, see massive underlying trends, then recognize very early on there is a problem/trend/Ne connection. It comes with only about an 80% accuracy rate though. So I can just SEE the problems coming a lot sooner than most people-I may be utterly unsuited to resolve them.

Warning NeTe potential garbage: I think Fi is really like Ti but looking for exceptionally complex data sets to analyze via a mirror effect. Maybe because my Fi is still sort of primitive compared to amar's, marm and SS-I can feel this mirroring of very complex systems-I have a distinct emotive response to complex patterns, waves, galaxies, an emotive desire to Ne blend with them. Not just appreciate their beauty but some how make them part of me? I think Fi is meant to mirror people's emotive state as an evolutionary empathic mandate, but it can be used for other stuff too. Maybe it contributes to the above as ENFPs are prolific in strategic marketing.

 

[uumlau]

Just so you know, right of the bat: all of your answers here are quite clear and compelling. I very much appreciate them. My replies are not intended as contradictions or counterexamples, so much as a sharing of my alternative perspective (a very Fi thing to do, where you say "this is what it is like for me", and I say "Oh, OK, this is what it's like for me").

(and just so you know, Fi/Te needs the kind of statements as above to indicate that you actually listened and there isn't any more arguing to be done)

If the end objective is flawed, then show the factors that make it flawed. Ti is the hypercompetitive function - it sees any assertion of "wrongness" to be a challenge to be defeated. Portraying the flawed objective as a new challenge, rather than an incorrect conclusion, more effectively harnesses its competitive energy toward the group objective, rather than focusing it on the messenger.

Ti wants to win. Always. Telling it that it's wrong is akin to telling it that it loses... and it's not going down without a fight.

Yeah, we Te folks sense that. However, I've observed some Ti/Fe people like that fight, and admit to deliberately starting arguments that way, (by saying, effectively, "you are wrong" and giving very few terse reasons (if any) as to why. I think this ties into your statements about wanting to share in the discovery: some people want it to be a mutually friendly discovery, while others want it to be adversarial, just for the fun of it.

It's not about "offending", it's about redirecting the energy of the challenge toward the object, rather than the person.

From the Te point of view, it's about "offending." As in, "OK, wtf did I say this time to piss you off?" We actually direct the energy toward the object or the idea, but as in the Ti competitiveness you express above, "them's fightin' words."

Yeah, that's a problem - we're trying to get you to get to the point, so we both conquer the challenge and feel good about ourselves. This might be preaching the secondary here, but I hold as a core belief that everyone, if given the right information and nudged in the right direction, can figure anything out, and that it's better to teach a man to fish than simply give him the fish.

True, and we share that philosophy, but our styles are different. Ti seems very tempted to be precise and nitpicky, when Te wants to, for example, start with the "training wheels" explanation, suitable for beginners, and then gradually go into more depth. I.e., teach the guy to put worms on a hook, first, rather than tell him to buy a boat with huge nets to tug through feeding/breeding grounds.

And what you see as "remarkably unpersuasive", we see as opening up to mutual learning and understanding. When I seemingly reject your line of reasoning, that's an opportunity to explain to me why it makes sense, so I can come to the same conclusion that you do, and we both can walk away happy, since we both figured it out, and I walk away happier, since I can look ahead to the next set of problems that I've previously overlooked.

Which from the Te point of view turns a simple question of correct vs incorrect into a long, tedious lesson (which, from the Te, and especially the NiTe, perspective has already been learned).

As I type this, I realize this is the Ti equivalent to Amar's Fi-nudging. Think of it in those terms, and you might find that it's not as annoying as you think.

(NOTE: I can become Te-direct when frustrated, but as you may have noticed, this often directs toward the person with the aim of defeating them, than toward the issue)

I'm wondering whether this is Te-direct or Fe-mimicking-Te. Both are possible, but I suspect that if it feels "personal," it's Fe. This is a vibe I get from various INTPs and especially INFJs with a strong Ti.

I believe that "directness" makes {Ti/Fe} invoke Fe, due to the synergy with being direct, and thus become personal. The same "directness" makes {Fi/Te} invoke Te, which is actually quite impersonal, but is perceived as personal through an Fe lens.

It seems both of us are arguing from the same position: "you don't know that." It's not intended to be obstinate - it's just that if X = 1 and Y = 1, then the problem's solved and we can move on. It takes a lot more effort to modify the logical chain than to modify the variables, so I'll see if there's any way to modify the variables so we can be finished with the issue.

Yes, except that for IxTJ, especially INTJ, it is easier to switch out the logical chain than to modify the variables. It's how our brains work. That's why it seems so fast and mysterious: we switch out patterns as fast as you switch out variables, and in some cases, this leads to "miraculously" finding solutions very quickly with a single functional/logical change, while changing the values of variables often turns out to be rather slow in comparison.

"Y cannot be true" - my problem is that unless it logically follows that Y cannot be true, and I understand why this is the case, then I cannot ignore the possibility that Y is true, especially if it makes the solution much more elegant. We're meticulous in our internal thought in much the same way a person who highly values cleanliness is in their external interaction.

Yeah, I understand this bit. Where Te and Ti conflict here is that Te cannot read which particular piece of logic you have wrong, so we're stuck fishing through your logic with you, and we often aren't aware when we come across it and finally fix it (often, Ti will just phrase more questions in its style, rather than say, "Oh, OK, I think I've got it, now.")

I'd like the same thing too. The problem is that I can't portray my logical pattern instantaneously (Ne perspective) - since it's a continual chain of connections, and each time I run through the permutation of it, I'm evaluating it, looking for things to improve. Ti's a tinkerer - I remember as a child that whenever I played with Lego blocks, I could never leave a creation "finished." There was always something more to add on.

Right. It's almost as much Ne vs Ni as Ti vs Te.

So in a sense, the inducement into following our logical chain has a self-serving purpose as well - I want to see you go through it to make sure I haven't left anything out.

Wanna know what this feels like to an INTJ? It feels like you're stealing our thought processes for your own selfish purposes. Usually, for the first few iterations, it can be cool. After that, however, it becomes tiresome. We have our own projects, or perhaps even OUR project, to finish, and that's being postponed as you refine your understanding. Something to watch out for in your communication style.

Think of it this way - if you were designing a car, wouldn't you want to run the brake system through countless stress tests to make sure it operates as intended? That's the way I approach seemingly completed logical chains. I'm inclined to run it through as many variable factors to make sure it works before considering it a given component of a larger logical framework. If it's gotten to that point, sometimes I'll fail to outwardly accept it as valid, because if we've both come to the same conclusion, mentioning that I accept it is as pedestrian as saying that water is wet.

I fully understand stress tests and testing ideas. INTJs (NiTe) are all about that. Ni throws all sorts of random ideas at us, and Te tests them against the real world. What's left over is really very solid, empirically tested. You're doing a different kind of stress test: it's testing Ti against Ne (as opposed to Ni against Te). Ni/Te fully vets an idea for functionality, while Ti/Ne fully vets an idea for logical consistency.

Still, it helps to mention that you accept it. One of the harder lessons to learn as an INTJ was to often state the obvious, because it is so often not obvious to many people. (Of course, this then insults everyone to whom it was obvious, but that's another topic ...)

I see what you're saying. I'm disinclined to be that direct, because to me, it seems like I'm lording my intelligence over the other person, which I personally would resent in their shoes.

If I were to be more direct in my answer to your scenario, it would come out like "The way I see it, because of x, y and z, this is the way things are. (You sure about that?) One hundred percent."

Yeah, like I said above, I think this is because of the Fe effect. Really and for true, when a Te talks directly, it really really is objective and impersonal. It just sounds personal to those who prefer Fe to Te.

Similarly, the Te user needs to realize how "personal" his direct statements sound to some people, and if people get distracted by that, then it's time to be more indirect.

 

[sculpting]

onemoretime-do use Te? If so how and when do you feel you use it and does it come with Ni or Fi?

Both Q, Jeno and my ENTP all say they feel as though they can or have used Te in the past at times.

 

[SillySapienne]

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.

 

[uumlau]

NeTe is some weird shit-I can see trends in data a thousand miles away. Trends other people just dont see-even NTPs. It's like i can step outside of the details, see massive underlying trends, then recognize very early on there is a problem/trend/Ne connection. It comes with only about an 80% accuracy rate though. So I can just SEE the problems coming a lot sooner than most people-I may be utterly unsuited to resolve them.

I'm fairly sure this is NiTe (INTJ-ness), not NeTe. And yes, it is like that. NTPs don't see it because it is NiTe, which spots functionally predictive patterns rather easily.

Just so you know, I have an empirically different interpretation of the perceiving functions. I believe that if an INTJ uses Fi, it will invoke either Se or Ne, not Ni at all. That is to say, it is the orientation of the judging function that is "set in stone", and the perceiving function "adjusts" to the judging function. In this perspective of mine, MBTI is just I/E, N/S, and then Te/Ti/Fe/Fi.

So my interpretation is that just as Fi invokes Ne for me, Te invokes Ni for you. Your description of the predictive power of "NeTe" supports my hypothesis, I think.