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

[SillySapienne]

INTJs can be scary, sometimes.

Like, aggressive, smoldering temper kinda scary.

This observation/opinion of mine can be due, in part, to the fact that the one that I am currently with is an XNTJ, really an INTJ, but he's far more extroverted than most introverts I know.

Regardless, sometimes I wish he'd not be so goddamn serious, and intimidating, it makes me fear confrontation with him, which I know is unhealthy.

This is where I prefer/feel more comfortable with Ps.

We're just more chill.

 

[Moiety]

INTJs can be scary, sometimes.

Like, aggressive, smoldering temper kinda scary.

This observation/opinion of mine can be due, in part, to the fact that the one that I am currently with is an XNTJ, really an INTJ, but he's far more extroverted than most introverts I know.

Regardless, sometimes I wish he'd not be so goddamn serious, and intimidating, it makes me fear confrontation with him, which I know is unhealthy.

This is where I prefer/feel more comfortable with Ps.

We're just more chill.

Fear confrontation? Wth. One should never fear confrontation in a relationship.

 

[onemoretime]

This is where I should tap into Si and reassure you with lengthy concrete descriptions and caring facial expressions that, don't worry so much, the world really does exist.

But I'll plow forward with some, well, I'll call it logic:

The particular part of the earlier thesis I noticed was the suggestion that Te is used to impose something on external variables. Te efforts are rightly called an imposition if all truth is subjective. If, like all e functions are supposed to be, it is, or aims to be, objective, then Te efforts are better called conclusions. But if Te isn't objective, indeed if as it seemed you were suggesting, all i functions either end up or just are more important than e functions, all e functions must fail to be objective, either some of the time, or all of the time, owing to the primacy of all i subjectivity.

Truth is subjective. Life and death are not. Fe deals with issues of life and death, as they relate to human survival strategy. That's not to say that they can't or don't change. But they do objectively exist.

Te does solve problems. However, it isn't the only approach.

That means your Ne too. And your Fe. That social order you've been perceiving? It isn't there. And while I'm happy to be free of that, the cost is too high because not only is the social order not there, the world isn't either. And that subjectivity of the i functions is so totally justified it doesn't need to be questioned anymore. Except that [etc and so on and philosophical arguments about the nature of reality].

Yes it is. It's there because you're alive and relatively safe. It's there because within your ingroup, no one has a gun to your head, no one's stealing your things, and no one's raping your wife. Now you can go into those philosophical questions, but they have nothing to do with what we observe and can incontrovertibly agree on as actually existing.

Do e functions access an objective reality? If they do, then individuals sticking too hard to an i subjectivity are making a mistake. And further to that, if e functions do access an objective reality, then sticking to an i subjectivity is OKAY!!! Where, if it's a judging i, did that i function get its data? Where did a perceiving i gets its structured conclusions?

A combination of external data and internal survival/reproduction motivations.

But if e functions don't generally access an objective reality, then [insert Wittgenstein's Private Language Argument, or whatever modern variation actually works] and don't worry anyway.

Which is utterly useless as far as understanding the world we live in.

 

[SillySapienne]

Fear confrontation? Wth. One should never fear confrontation in a relationship.

I know!!!!

I admit that I can be a bit avoidant, sometimes, but certain people make me feel more fearful than others.

I don't like being bulldozed, or attacked.

I tend to shut down or submit when this happens, which I hate.

And, yes, I realize this is no one's problem but my own.

 

[SillySapienne]

My previous post only pertains to my intimate relationships.

When I am attacked or bulldozed, dozerd? by people who are not my SO, that definitely elicits a different response.

rawr!

 

[Kalach]

Truth is subjective.

Ti values: all truth is subjective.
Te values: there's something out there.

Life and death are not. Fe deals with issues of life and death, as they relate to human survival strategy. That's not to say that they can't or don't change. But they do objectively exist.

They do? So that'd be, like a, what do they call those things--objective truths?

Yes it is. It's there because you're alive and relatively safe. It's there because within your ingroup, no one has a gun to your head, no one's stealing your things, and no one's raping your wife. Now you can go into those philosophical questions, but they have nothing to do with what we observe and can incontrovertibly agree on as actually existing.

That's exciting. I shall thank an ENFJ today.

 

[SillySapienne]

wtf has happened to this thread!?!?



I'm currently in a relationship with an INTJ and this thread is apparently NOT the place to go to get some pertinent input.

 

[Uytuun]

INTJs can be scary, sometimes.

Like, aggressive, smoldering temper kinda scary.

This observation/opinion of mine can be due, in part, to the fact that the one that I am currently with is an XNTJ, really an INTJ, but he's far more extroverted than most introverts I know.

Regardless, sometimes I wish he'd not be so goddamn serious, and intimidating, it makes me fear confrontation with him, which I know is unhealthy.

This is where I prefer/feel more comfortable with Ps.

We're just more chill.

It's because they're hurting on the inside. Don't be afraid. They're probably more afraid of you than you are of them.

 

[Moiety]

Ti values: all truth is subjective.
Te values: there's something out there.

Really? I'd think it would be the other way around. Logic depending on the context for Te, and logic being inherent for Ti.


Silly : Independence breeds courage. Just saying

 

[SillySapienne]

It's because they're hurting on the inside. Don't be afraid. They're probably more afraid of you than you are of them.

I agree.

But they, or he tends to attack/manipulate me into feeling/being wrong!

I don't know if it is a Te-driven attack, regardless, confrontation with him, whenever I am truly upset about something that implicates him in some wrong doing leads to very bad things!!!

 

[SillySapienne]

Silly : Independence breeds courage. Just saying

Absolutely!

Outside of a relationship, I am pretty fucking confident and secure, but within my relationships I become a big fat pathetic pussy.

 

[sculpting]

Absolutely!

Outside of a relationship, I am pretty fucking confident and secure, but within my relationships I become a big fat pathetic pussy.

When I first was with my ISTP I would let him run me over. I let him know not to yell at me as I watched that happen far too often with my mom, but otherwise I never argued back or tried to change his mind on anything.

As I got older Te became much more dominant. I would confront or challenge him on select items. But he never, ever saw Fi at any point in our relationship.

However to open up with Fi, well I sort of understand what you are saying. It's like Fi and Te sort of fight with each other. If you let Fi win, then you are totally honest, open and beautiful with that person. But at the same time it makes you incredibly vulnerable to what they think and easily hurt.

Yet pushing back with Te seems to interfere somewhat with that open Fi beauty. It feels defensive, thus evokes defensive reactions.

My Te side says make a list of exactly specifically what actions hurt you bother and emphasize the emotional pain they put you in.

 

[Poki]

Yeah... I'm looking at it with the bias that Ti generally handles abstract information in my experience. Of course it doesn't follow your experience exactly; that much should be so obvious that it isn't even worth mentioning. At that point, it's better for you, rather than accepting or rejecting it forthright, to modify what I'm saying or add your experiential understanding to it, because for me, it absolutely is true. I understand that it may not be true for you. To say that I'm wrong is to accuse me of lying to you.

This is your assumption. Lying is done purposely, being wrong is not. I accused you elsewhere of other tactics, but I dont believe I accused you of purposely lying in regards to that post. If I did you can call me out on it and I will publicly apologize. Sorry, I only hit this one point, this seems to be the sore spot.

Its the whole intention thing. I dont believe you are "purposely" trying to mislead, but it does have an effect as you are essentially speaking to the world. That is why it rubbed me the wrong way and I explained why. It is only true as long as you hold it true, your wording of "for me" just personalized the trueness from being part of this world to an internal thing. You are walking back and forth between subjective truth and world truth. Possibly going between Ti and Fe.

It doesn't work that way. I'm not speaking to an individual on an open thread. I'm speaking to that person and everyone else who reads this thread. Trying to speak that person's internal language in that context would be incomprehensible to everyone else reading the thread, making my post essentially useless. I'll be happy to personalize my approach in a PM or other non-public forum, but in threads, I'm going to talk as if I'm addressing the world... because I am.

While you are adressing the world, we still respond to threads which are written by individuals all at different levels of comprehension and trying to understand. If you take this approach then I can see why it would feel like beating your head against a wall. A blog is created to adress the world, not a forum. A speech is created to address the world, not a conversation.

Thank you for this insight, it helps me to understand where you come from and what you are trying to accomplish. It also reinforces my internal perception that ENTPs are natural teachers.

 

[onemoretime]

This is your assumption. Lying is done purposely, being wrong is not.

Don't tell me the sky is green and expect me to believe you. I don't play that shit. I'm telling you something about myself, a person I know a hell of a lot better than you do. You'd be wise to listen to me.

I accused you elsewhere of other tactics, but I dont believe I accused you of purposely lying in regards to that post. If I did you can call me out on it and I will publicly apologize. Sorry in this whole statement, this seems to be the sore spot.

No but you're essentially doing the same thing. You're saying that because it doesn't comport to your version of Ti, that my version of Ti isn't true, and that portraying my experience of Ti as such is a lie. Which offends me because A. you're calling me a liar and B. you're portraying yourself as the ultimate arbiter of what Ti is, which is arrogant as hell.

Its the whole intention thing. I dont believe you are "purposely" trying to mislead, but it does have an effect as you are essentially speaking to the world. That is why it rubbed me the wrong way and I explained why. It is only true as long as you hold it true, your wording of "for me" just personalized the trueness from being part of this world to an internal thing. You are walking back and forth between subjective truth and world truth. Possibly going between Ti and Fe.

We are talking about models here. This is Ne-speak. I'm sorry you see this as claiming absolute truth rather than expressing a possibility. However, if that's your perception, then you couldn't be further from understanding my intentions. Which in turn, makes it even more offensive that you comport to have any understanding of my internal motivations. You're doing the very thing Ti users countless times on this board have excoriated Fi users for doing. Don't talk about me, talk about the logic.

While you are adressing the world, we still respond to threads which are written by individuals all at different levels of comprehension and trying to understand. If you take this approach then I can see why it would feel like beating your head against a wall. A blog is created to adress the world, not a forum. A speech is created to address the world, not a conversation.

So is a public message board. That's why they're colloquially called a "forum", that is, open space. I take this approach because it's the one the format calls for, in my estimation. If you don't understand it, then don't be so supercilious as to assume that the problem is on my end.

You're using yourself as the locus of validation for everything. If it hits you wrong, it is wrong, rather than perhaps you misinterpreting it. If you don't like the approach, the approach is wrong, rather than you misunderstanding the purpose behind it. There is no justification for thinking this way. It reeks of the worst kind of solipsistic tunnel-vision that claims to be wisdom, but in the end, is nothing but skewed reality.

Thank you for this insight, it helps me to understand where you come from and what you are trying to accomplish. It also reinforces my internal perception that ENTPs are natural teachers.

You're welcome. I can't respond in kind right now because you're really pushing some buttons, but I hope to be able to in the future.

 

[Thalassa]

The neverending threeeeaaaaddd ...aaaaahhhah ahh

 

[Poki]

Don't tell me the sky is green and expect me to believe you. I don't play that shit. I'm telling you something about myself, a person I know a hell of a lot better than you do. You'd be wise to listen to me.

No but you're essentially doing the same thing. You're saying that because it doesn't comport to your version of Ti, that my version of Ti isn't true, and that portraying my experience of Ti as such is a lie. Which offends me because A. you're calling me a liar and B. you're portraying yourself as the ultimate arbiter of what Ti is, which is arrogant as hell.

We are talking about models here. This is Ne-speak. I'm sorry you see this as claiming absolute truth rather than expressing a possibility. However, if that's your perception, then you couldn't be further from understanding my intentions. Which in turn, makes it even more offensive that you comport to have any understanding of my internal motivations. You're doing the very thing Ti users countless times on this board have excoriated Fi users for doing. Don't talk about me, talk about the logic.

So is a public message board. That's why they're colloquially called a "forum", that is, open space. I take this approach because it's the one the format calls for, in my estimation. If you don't understand it, then don't be so supercilious as to assume that the problem is on my end.

You're using yourself as the locus of validation for everything. If it hits you wrong, it is wrong, rather than perhaps you misinterpreting it. If you don't like the approach, the approach is wrong, rather than you misunderstanding the purpose behind it. There is no justification for thinking this way. It reeks of the worst kind of solipsistic tunnel-vision that claims to be wisdom, but in the end, is nothing but skewed reality.



You're welcome. I can't respond in kind right now because you're really pushing some buttons, but I hope to be able to in the future.

Did I offend you because you used yourself as part of the xxTP and when I slammed it I essentially slammed you and the way you go about things along with having screwed up logic? Also when I didnt want that image portrayed onto me I offended you as well? What am I going up against?

edit: yes I need simplistic in this regard.

 

[onemoretime]

Did I offend you because you used yourself as part of the xxTP and when I slammed it I essentially slammed you and the way you go about things along with having screwed up logic? Also when I didnt want that image portrayed onto me I offended you as well? What am I going up against?

edit: yes I need simplistic in this regard.

No. You held yourself up as the universal standard. I think Ni has a tendency to do this, when paired with a dom/aux T function. When I questioned your legitimacy as a source for this, you started to attack my credibility as a commentator. I don't appreciate that.

 

[Poki]

No. You held yourself up as the universal standard. I think Ni has a tendency to do this, when paired with a dom/aux T function. When I questioned your legitimacy as a source for this, you started to attack my credibility as a commentator. I don't appreciate that.

I am sorry for attacking your credibility....no I will not hug you

 

[onemoretime]

I am sorry for attacking your credibility....no I will not hug you

Do you think it was wrong for you to do that?

 

[Poki]

Do you think it was wrong for you to do that?

I stand by the way I think, but it was wrong to attack your credibility. Do you agree that its wrong to attack others credibility?