User Tag List

Page 35 of 67 FirstFirst ... 25333435363745 ... LastLast
Results 341 to 350 of 663

Thread: Common INFJ issues

  1. #341
    Iron Maiden Array fidelia's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1w2 so/sx
    Posts
    9,349

    Default

    Hmm. If you had stated that information in the original post about that guy, we wouldn't have assumed that you hadn't thought of doing that stuff. (Again, if we were telling it, we'd include every possible detail so as to avoid that sort of thing. I realize that Te users would assume that would be surmised and often find the inclusion of it annoyingly extraneous. Interesting to note the differences).

    Your comparison about the red apple thing though: What if the person had been told by his Mom that he would get a yellow apple? What if he didn't think you would have had reason to see his lunch and were only trying to strengthen your point by saying you had? What if he was sure that his lunch was in a secure place and therefore didn't factor in the possibility of a nefarious apple swapper? What if last he had known, they only had yellow apples available at his house and he didn't realize his Mom had gone shopping. To me, these would be the relevant details that would need to be addressed, or at the very least, the reason why you are sure that the apple is red (how did you get a chance to see it?). Unless of course I already trusted in your competence or you had a history that had always been accurate. Then I wouldn't question you anymore.

  2. #342
    Happy Dancer Array uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,564

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fidelia View Post
    Hmm. If you had stated that information in the original post about that guy, we wouldn't have assumed that you hadn't thought of doing that stuff. (Again, if we were telling it, we'd include every possible detail so as to avoid that sort of thing. I realize that Te users would assume that would be surmised and often find the inclusion of it annoyingly extraneous. Interesting to note the differences).
    My objective was to point out that all that was needed was to verify the facts for oneself. The guy in my example simply refused to. You and OMT, rather than taking that at face value (in the Te way) decided to speculate about all the Fe possibilities why he'd be so stubborn about it, as if I must have short-sheeted his bed or something to deserve such a treatment.

    (And I did mention that it was a four-hour conversation, and you and OMT know me and my style, yet you both assumed I must have been doing something wrong. I guess that tells me what my "reputation" is worth around here ... )

    Sometimes the "motivation" is that some people would rather believe what they believe rather than "waste their time" verifying facts for themselves. Sometimes the "motivation" is that some people actually don't know enough about the subject to carry on a conversation about it.

    In Te-land, you're expected to evaluate what other people say, check facts, and so on.

    Your comparison about the red apple thing though: What if the person had been told by his Mom that he would get a yellow apple? What if he didn't think you would have had reason to see his lunch and were only trying to strengthen your point by saying you had? What if he was sure that his lunch was in a secure place and therefore didn't factor in the possibility of a nefarious apple swapper? What if last he had known, they only had yellow apples available at his house and he didn't realize his Mom had gone shopping. To me, these would be the relevant details that would need to be addressed, or at the very least, the reason why you are sure that the apple is red (how did you get a chance to see it?). Unless of course I already trusted in your competence or you had a history that had always been accurate. Then I wouldn't question you anymore.
    It's a point of fact. I am either correct or not. There is only one way to prove or disprove the point of fact, and that is to check it (look in the lunch box). If one is refusing to look in the lunch box to verify or disprove, that isn't my problem. The apple doesn't become yellow just because they don't look. And they're going to look, eventually, because they have to (just as my coworker eventually had to work it out for himself).

  3. #343
    Senior Member Array cafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    INFj None
    Posts
    9,831

    Default

    I've noticed that some folks start with a default setting of trusting others until they prove themselves untrustworthy.

    That is not my default setting. To me, nearly everyone is an unknown commodity until they are a known commodity and I have no reason to trust them until I get a better feel for what they are like.

    I wonder if that could be part of the problem?
    “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”
    ~ John Rogers

  4. #344
    Happy Dancer Array uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,564

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cafe View Post
    I've noticed that some folks start with a default setting of trusting others until they prove themselves untrustworthy.

    That is not my default setting. To me, nearly everyone is an unknown commodity until they are a known commodity and I have no reason to trust them until I get a better feel for what they are like.

    I wonder if that could be part of the problem?
    I think it makes a difference which particular area you trust/distrust. For "Te" topics, I don't need to trust the other person: I can evaluate their reasoning on my own, and incorporate it into my own based on its intrinsic merits. If someone I don't trust says something that sounds like a good idea, I'll make a note of it. If someone I trust says something that I evaluate as ill-reasoned, I won't adopt it.

    On a personal level (as opposed to intellectual), I'm slow to trust someone as a person. However, I don't make that distrust a reason to treat them coldly or distantly, but instead I try to be warm and kind (sort of, for an INTJ ).

  5. #345
    Senior Member Array cafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    INFj None
    Posts
    9,831

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    I think it makes a difference which particular area you trust/distrust. For "Te" topics, I don't need to trust the other person: I can evaluate their reasoning on my own, and incorporate it into my own based on its intrinsic merits. If someone I don't trust says something that sounds like a good idea, I'll make a note of it. If someone I trust says something that I evaluate as ill-reasoned, I won't adopt it.

    On a personal level (as opposed to intellectual), I'm slow to trust someone as a person. However, I don't make that distrust a reason to treat them coldly or distantly, but instead I try to be warm and kind (sort of, for an INTJ ).
    That makes sense. I operate slightly differently, but not much. Honestly, I trust almost no one, though I trust some more than others. Whether or not I trust someone has little bearing on whether or not I treat them with the courtesy and respect I'd treat nearly any living thing (that doesn't appear to pose an immediate threat).

    If I particular fact seems relevant and applicable but the source is questionable, I wouldn't see the point in quizzing the source multiple times -- a person isn't going to become more reliable simply because I make them repeat themselves a bunch of times. If someone is pushy about their fact and won't let me be non-committal, I might challenge them. Otherwise I just want them to shut up and go away. If I want to fact-check on my own, I will once they are gone. I don't really like conflict and will avoid it when possible.
    “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”
    ~ John Rogers

  6. #346
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    I sure am offering conversation without having read this whole discussion, but, oh well

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    All it takes is pulling out the damn apple and verifying it. If the listener is too lazy to do that, there's not much I can do.

    Instead the effective dialog was:
    "No, it isn't. My Mom put in a yellow apple."
    "Dude, I looked in your lunchbox. It's red. Check it yourself."
    "But I know it's yellow. There's no way it could be red."
    God, this It is the old adage, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." It's so true.

    When the ability to check the facts requires pretty much no effort, there's no excuse not to.

    I suppose there are other times where checking the facts isn't so easy, and so it might not be the best course of action.. but people tend to default toward just plain not wanting to open the lunchbox.


    In any case, when we have a problem to solve, I'll give you my reasoning for something. You can process my reasoning and the information at hand, then draw the conclusion yourself. In fact, you have to draw the conclusion yourself; I can't make you do it.

    I'll also leave your actions and their consequences up to you.

    But my own conclusions could also be terribly, terribly wrong. We'll see when we open the damn box.


    On another note.. if I know that someone has experience in some field where I'm having trouble, I'm more willing to seek their advice and gather information and reasoning from them. I simply don't have the resources to quiz everyone (including "laymen") and test out all of their sets of facts. So, I'll start with more "reputable" people, as they're probably more likely to provide me with good information and to better help me reason through my problem.

    But I'm not gonna ask for your advice and then beat you to death with my own reasoning. That's just an annoying, frustrating waste of time. And if I continually do so.. well, will you ever be eager to help me again? No. You won't.

  7. #347
    thankful Array PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    This really isn't a big deal to me, and I patiently go through everything. What I hear very often, though, is "but it shouldn't work that way," or "that isn't how it's supposed to be," as if that were a rebuttal to my analysis. To which my reply is "I know ... that's why it's broken ... "
    This explains a great deal of issues I have experienced too as a web developer - I work with many NT's and sometimes, I will simply state the FACTS and this is the response I get. It has puzzled me to no end in the past! I always thought of it as establishing my credibility with them, that they simply didn't believe me until I was a known quantity. And after that, I could do anything - based on my past successes alone. This is partially true, but I see there's more to it now.

    (It is always kind of insulting actually ... since FACTS are so readily verifiable by oneself, and why would I lie ... in fact, as a woman and an NF in an NT world, I make damn sure I have my facts straight before I put myself on point!)

    At any rate - an entirely new dimension to consider.

    This is your Ti perspective. Half of the people on the planet don't think this way.
    Indeed.

    They have a right to say, "I don't believe that's true."
    They have a right to say, "I believe what you just said is incorrect."
    They have a right to say, "That's wrong."

    They don't have a right to say, "I think you're lying."
    @bold: exactly. Well-expressed. And that is definitely how it comes across, as though I am making speculative statements or specious arguments, or wish to deceive somehow ... Why would I speak if I did not know what I was talking about?

    The onus for communication is both on speaker and listener. It is the job of the speaker to present information as clearly as possible. It is the job of the listener to listen with an open mind: any preconception, especially any preconception that dismisses the possibility oneself being wrong, is an impediment to communication.
    Well said.

    It was as full of meaning as if I were saying "The apple in your lunchbox is red." All it takes is pulling out the damn apple and verifying it. If the listener is too lazy to do that, there's not much I can do.

    Instead the effective dialog was:
    "No, it isn't. My Mom put in a yellow apple."
    "Dude, I looked in your lunchbox. It's red. Check it yourself."
    "But I know it's yellow. There's no way it could be red."

    This is me. Uumlau. Do you really think I didn't explore every possible avenue I could, over four hours, patiently trying to figure out where the confusion lies and what might address it? Refer to my reply to OMT for more info.
    You have accumulated a great deal of admiration and "reputation points" on this forum uumlau ... and it will take you far. The problem resides however, in the fact that what you say now rests more on that reputation, and not the facts. People will accept what you say based on your reputation ALONE. Instead of using and having their own mind to challenge you and do their own due diligence.

    This is a significant failing of Fe / Ti ... and don't get me wrong, Fe users - Fi / Te has blind spots too, but I am not talking about that right now.

    Quote Originally Posted by fidelia View Post
    Your comparison about the red apple thing though: What if the person had been told by his Mom that he would get a yellow apple? What if he didn't think you would have had reason to see his lunch and were only trying to strengthen your point by saying you had? What if he was sure that his lunch was in a secure place and therefore didn't factor in the possibility of a nefarious apple swapper? What if last he had known, they only had yellow apples available at his house and he didn't realize his Mom had gone shopping. To me, these would be the relevant details that would need to be addressed, or at the very least, the reason why you are sure that the apple is red (how did you get a chance to see it?). Unless of course I already trusted in your competence or you had a history that had always been accurate. Then I wouldn't question you anymore.
    But all the apple boy had to do was look for himself ... isn't the act of just LOOKING the first course of action? I find your response to be very helpful ... and very fascinating. Thank you for sharing the whole train of thought behind the non-belief.

    And @bold: Again, IMO a big error in judgement to allow one's belief to rest on the supposed laurels of experience. We are all human, after all. There is merit in using the experiences of the past to assign probability, but not certainty.
    "Remember always that you not only have the right to be an individual, you have an obligation to be one."
    Eleanor Roosevelt


    "When people see some things as beautiful,
    other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good,
    other things become bad."
    Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

  8. #348
    にゃん Array runvardh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEI
    Posts
    8,559

    Default

    Some Guy: You're lying
    Me: Maybe I am, maybe I'm not, but which reality can you least afford?
    Dreams are best served manifest and tangible.

    INFP, 6w7, IEI

    I accept no responsibility, what so ever, for the fact that I exist; I do, however, accept full responsibility for what I do while I exist.


  9. #349
    darkened dreams Array labyrinthine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Enneagram
    4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    INFp None
    Posts
    6,919

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cafe View Post
    I've noticed that some folks start with a default setting of trusting others until they prove themselves untrustworthy.

    That is not my default setting. To me, nearly everyone is an unknown commodity until they are a known commodity and I have no reason to trust them until I get a better feel for what they are like.

    I wonder if that could be part of the problem?
    This resonates with me also. My default setting is to like a person, but not to trust them. It takes a lot to get me to dislike or trust. I could compare it to the way I feel about many living things including wolves and grizzlies. I see it as a fairly accurate way of viewing others. To encounter any living thing is worthy of amazement and respect, but that doesn't mean they are incapable of harm.
    The first man to raise a fist is the man who's run out of ideas. H.G. WELLS
    The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool. FEYNMAN

    If this is monkey pee, you're on your own.SCULLY

  10. #350
    Senior Member Array cafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    INFj None
    Posts
    9,831

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Annwn View Post
    This resonates with me also. My default setting is to like a person, but not to trust them. It takes a lot to get me to dislike or trust. I could compare it to the way I feel about many living things including wolves and grizzlies. I see it as a fairly accurate way of viewing others. To encounter any living thing is worthy of amazement and respect, but that doesn't mean they are incapable of harm.
    That's a beautiful way to express it.

    And the fact that a creature is capable of harm is not even a good/evil issue with me unless there is obvious malice in their intent. Sometimes it is just behaving according to is nature and I need to not be in its way.
    “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”
    ~ John Rogers

Similar Threads

  1. [ENFP] Common ENFP issues
    By Amargith in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 653
    Last Post: 11-24-2016, 12:16 PM
  2. [INTJ] Common INTJ Issues
    By highlander in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 302
    Last Post: 11-09-2016, 10:42 PM
  3. [ENFJ] Common ENFJ Issues
    By Domino in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 205
    Last Post: 05-08-2016, 03:59 PM
  4. [NF] Common INFP-INFJ Relationship Issues
    By Lenian in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-22-2016, 01:28 PM
  5. [INFJ] UNCOMMON? OR COMMON INFJ ISSUES?!?
    By Lenian in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-31-2011, 05:16 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO