User Tag List

View Poll Results: INFPs: Which type do you think is your ideal romantic match?

Voters
77. You may not vote on this poll
  • ESTJ

    3 3.90%
  • ISTJ

    0 0%
  • ESTP

    5 6.49%
  • ISTP

    3 3.90%
  • ENTJ

    3 3.90%
  • INTJ

    5 6.49%
  • ENTP

    4 5.19%
  • INTP

    12 15.58%
  • ENFJ

    16 20.78%
  • INFJ

    7 9.09%
  • ENFP

    6 7.79%
  • INFP

    8 10.39%
  • ESFJ

    0 0%
  • ISFJ

    2 2.60%
  • ESFP

    3 3.90%
  • ISFP

    0 0%
Page 15 of 26 FirstFirst ... 5131415161725 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 258

Thread: INFPs: Which type do you think is your ideal romantic match?

  1. #141
    Junior Member Array
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    MBTI
    INTP
    Socionics
    INTJ
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Too many years of Fe in a box... yep. Nice summary. You get touchy. It feels like everyone wants this crazy amount of accommodation from you and yet none of them have any clue what's in your head so you don't get that accommodation back. After awhile the whole blowsy race looks like a degenerate and especially vicious wolf pack: just tearing to shreds whatever is weak. I don't think, even on sober analysis, that it's just private perspective either. Everyone has weak points but mine is more public and makes me more socially vulnerable than other ladies, so I have had plenty of chances to find out what society does to the weak. I think I was actually born with a very open, trusting, highly affectionate temperament but that kind of thing cannot survive. Now I'm pretty misanthropic.

    I voted INTP on behalf of my husband, who says ENFJ is a close second to my type. Apparently the ENFJ is sparkly and sexy but my honesty and sincerity are refreshing because he doesn't really like playing those games, either, at least not at home.

  2. #142
    Senior Member Array _eric_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp/so
    Socionics
    ENFj
    Posts
    288

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dieValkyrie View Post
    Heehee, I voted INFJ because the guy I'm currently seeing is INFJ, but I have to say I've never been more compatible with anyone ever nor have I felt such an instant connection and understanding.

    I'm pretty sure my last boyfriend was an INTJ and that was a really terrible match because he saw my sensitivity as a weakness and would often get annoyed if I got too emotional or sentimental. He liked how strongly I felt about him, but anything else I cared about was stupid and trite.

    Dating this new INFJ guy has been amazing though, he's just so loving and understanding and sensitive just like me but much stronger and likes to take care of me. I feel like I can trust and depend upon him.
    That is exactly how it was with the INFP girl I was with for three years. I miss it...

  3. #143
    meh Array Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Standuble View Post
    You're in the NF forum. The first rule is not to immediately expect a good debate the second is not to expect a well informed opponent and the third is not to expect your opponent to not be a self-righteous noob.
    I don't expect any of these things. Still, one lives in hope...of meeting someone like you.

    I've withdrawn the previous idea I mentioned about simulated functions as 1) I knew it was bullshit but was the best theory I had for the phenomena and 2) I had never heard of Nardi and am now studying the work on type's brain activity to supercede said bullshit I previously mentioned.
    And why not, I say. One lot of bullshit is as good as another.

    I do have a question and can apologise if it has already been answered or difficult to answer, it is rooted in my ignorance of Ti's workings. What happens with the Ti when you use Fi? For me Fi likes to make value judgment which essentially involves tipping the scale in one direction simply because I want it to, when weighing pro's and con's it allows me to just stick e.g. +2 to something simply because I want to (e.g. like the sound of it) and not on how it operates/amount efficiency etc. This is placing irrational value and IMO completely audacious. Does this occur for you and when it occurs does your Ti essentially go apeshit? I assume your Ti would stop working for the brief moment Fi is in effect and return a moment later. Does it declare the Fi action as a breach of internal logical consistence, see the internal logic in what Fi did or what? Or does (from what I know of Nardi's work) the apparent lack of overlap in brain areas which the two types use cause there to be no conflict at all?

    Apologies if it is too difficult a question.
    I think you're taking the cognitive function metaphor too literally (much as Nardi does).

    But I will try to answer (in spite of thinking your question somewhat absurd, cos that's just how I roll).

    In my case, I can flip in and out of "pure rationality". I think the main advantage Ts have (and it may be the only one, and it may even be a disadvantage - for the rest of the world) is that we can consider truly vile things that Fs tend to shrink from in horror. At least that's what I've noticed. We can do that because we can detach from the emotional context of a situation with relative ease. We just choose not to feel anything about a particular thing, so that we can think without "interference". We probably do this because our brains are more compartmentalised, and it's just easier for us to focus on one thing at a time. Now, sometimes this leads to great insight, and sometimes it leads to very dark places indeed. And of course, the emotions that we aren't feeling are really going on all the time, just underground where we can't see them or notice their existence. This is how brilliant people like Oppenheimer can create WMDs and not realise that they have become "Death and the Destroyer of Worlds" until after the event (i.e. be kinda dumb). I think "Fness", for want of a better word, acts as a kind of brake on intellectual depravity, if you will. That's because it pays attention to emotional and social context. The incompatibility between these two modes of being, or modes of attention, leads to the development of Tness vs Fness.

    You speak about Fi as if it were a thing of whimsy. I don't see it that way. I experience it in this way: I can look at a situation and know that there is no logical reason to prefer one thing over another, and know that objectively there is no right or wrong in a given situation, and yet feel in my heart what the "right" thing is, and fight tooth and nail for it, while simultaneously knowing that my choice is probably fairly arbitrary and perhaps unjustifiable to anyone else. And not caring about that. That, to me, is Fi (modified by Ti, which deadens the more mystical/spiritual aspects of its worst excesses). It really feels like a decision that takes place in the gut, or in the chest, rather than anywhere cerebral. More instinctual and visceral. Embodied. Rationalizations happen, but they're an afterthought. And it's not a case of Ti "switching off" or "going apeshit" about an "irrational" decision. (Ti doesn't go apeshit and Fi values are not necessarily irrational.) The fact is Ti has a pretty limited range of applications and it really isn't much use where there are no clearly objective criteria to evaluate. As with moral dilemmas, for example. Ti knows its place, it doesn't get involved with things that don't concern it.
    This is why immature INTPs (or stressed out ones) frequently become crippled by indecision, because they are relying on a dominant function that can't do much for them, or else are thrown back onto an inferior one (Fe), which tends to be batshit crazy.
    Which is why it's so important to develop Fi and some kind of emotional intelligence, to compensate for the robotic, clinical, hyper-focussed nature of Ti.


    @Mane. It's really Fi. (Well, what did you expect me to say?)
    Your illustration says nothing about INTP Fi use. It suggest we have inferior Fe, and yes, we know this. The problem most people seem to struggle with is understanding that having inferior Fe does not preclude one from developing Fi, in fact, it's almost a prerequisite...
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  4. #144
    Society
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    @Mane. It's really Fi. (Well, what did you expect me to say?)
    Your illustration says nothing about INTP Fi use. It suggest we have inferior Fe, and yes, we know this. The problem most people seem to struggle with is understanding that having inferior Fe does not preclude one from developing Fi, in fact, it's almost a prerequisite...
    my illustration suggests that frustrations stemming from inferior Fe can take a form and shape that resembles Fi.

    the problem after that depends on how you chose to approach MBTI:
    • if Fi is simply a metaphor for a certain appearance or pattern of a behavior, then as far as the usefulness of function terminology goes - might as well be Fi, since the term wouldn't refer to anything other then the resulting behavior.
    • if we are referring to Fi as something more concrete with it's own substance, a specific combination of mental processes that stem from something on it's own right, then there is room to question whether the Fi-like behavior of INTPs is or isn't Fi.

    it was under the second terminology in which my illustration can suggests it can be the emotional reaction to inferior Fe masquerading as Fi, and i saw an opportunity to explore the matter within those terms (thus unavoidably exploring possible assumptions regarding the causes behind the functions).

    that's being said, i can see why you might prefer the first approach - any form the second terminology takes will unavoidably carry more assumptions about what the functions stem from, and be less probably until the assumptions are somehow proven. in contrast, the first approach is entirely self contained.

  5. #145
    meh Array Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mane View Post
    my illustration suggests that frustrations stemming from inferior Fe can take a form and shape that resembles Fi.
    Your illustration suggests that you don't understand Fi. (I didn't say ENTPs had it..)
    It's not the peevish domain of emos, you know.

    To the rest, it doesn't have to have a fiercely concrete manifestation in order to be a logically sound concept that is easily distinguishable from the petulance with which you are conflating it.

    And appearance and patterns of behaviour are not important when discerning Fi from Fe. Motivation is much more so. Of course, you can't easily measure that. So you'll just have to take my word for it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  6. #146
    Society
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    Your illustration suggests that you don't understand Fi. (I didn't say ENTPs had it..)
    or your claim for having it suggests you don't understand what Fi actually is

  7. #147
    meh Array Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mane View Post
    or your claim for having it suggests you don't understand what Fi actually is
    Explain.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  8. #148
    Senior Member Array
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mane View Post
    or your claim for having it suggests you don't understand what Fi actually is
    Are you saying INTPs can't have it? I found Salome's description of her Fi to excellent, describing the inner mechanics of how it operates in a succint way. I'm convinced she is using authentic Fi as she claims as I relate completely.

  9. #149
    Society
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    Explain.
    i was ilustrating that the claim is pointless - the ignorance can sit on either side of the problem, depending on which of the above described PoV you chose to adhere too.

    you have something that behaves like Fi, and if you choose to view functions as behavioral descriptions only, then it can be said that you have Fi, in which case my illustration would suggest i am ignorant to what Fi is simply because i am suggesting that the "Fi-like" behavior can stem from something else altogether, as in the first philosophy there's no question to what it stems from in the first place, and thus it wouldn't matter, there's no distinction between "Fi" and "Fi-like", since the likeness is the only criteria.

    if you choose to take the (somewhat higher risk and more presumptuous) endeavor of thinking of functions as more then that, a.k.a. a more detailed phenomena then just the surface manifestation which has deeper cognitive origin, then the question of whether something is Fi or Fi-like but with a different origin, then the possibility you have something which acts like Fi but has alternative origins is likely.

    such as the one i suggested, your version of Fi-like-behavior being "Fe in a box", or any other. the first version is more reliable, but the second version is a lot more interesting. for example, in myself i know that Fe+Si, can resemble Fi at times, but when examined deeper its very distinct from Fi, it's about feeling when there's a contrast with what is basically "habits[Si] of thoughtfulness[Fe]" rather then any deep seated moral sense of right and wrong. likewise, Ti+Ne can manifest in ways which resemble Ni without actually being Ni or carrying much of the implications that Ni has. in this manner, the exploration of function theory can become less metaphorical and a lot more meaningful.

  10. #150
    meh Array Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Standuble View Post
    Are you saying INTPs can't have it? I found Salome's description of her Fi to excellent, describing the inner mechanics of how it operates in a succint way. I'm convinced she is using authentic Fi as she claims as I relate completely.
    Thank you.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mane View Post
    i was ilustrating that the claim is pointless - the ignorance can sit on either side of the problem, depending on which of the above described PoV you chose to adhere too.

    you have something that behaves like Fi, and if you choose to view functions as behavioral descriptions only, then it can be said that you have Fi, in which case my illustration would suggest i am ignorant to what Fi is simply because i am suggesting that the "Fi-like" behavior can stem from something else altogether, as in the first philosophy there's no question to what it stems from in the first place, and thus it wouldn't matter, there's no distinction between "Fi" and "Fi-like", since the likeness is the only criteria.
    Didn't you get the part about behaviour not being important?

    if you choose to take the (somewhat higher risk and more presumptuous) endeavor of thinking of functions as more then that, a.k.a. a more detailed phenomena then just the surface manifestation which has deeper cognitive origin, then the question of whether something is Fi or Fi-like but with a different origin, then the possibility you have something which acts like Fi but has alternative origins is likely.
    Why is it likely? If it could be Fi, why insist that it isn't? That's the part I'm not following.

    such as the one i suggested, your version of Fi-like-behavior being "Fe in a box", or any other. the first version is more reliable, but the second version is a lot more interesting.
    I don't find it more interesting, it's just more speculative. In fact, it makes the whole thing pointless, because we can end up redefining every "simple" function as a complex of two other functions, and where's the value in that? Superficially, it might look like a "deep" interpretation, but it's really just a meaningless contortion of the facts to fit some unsubstantiated theory about who MUST have what. Which I find rather disturbing.
    for example, in myself i know that Fe+Si, can resemble Fi at times, but when examined deeper its very distinct from Fi, it's about feeling when there's a contrast with what is basically "habits[Si] of thoughtfulness[Fe]" rather then any deep seated moral sense of right and wrong. likewise, Ti+Ne can manifest in ways which resemble Ni without actually being Ni or carrying much of the implications that Ni has.
    That may be true, in your case. It isn't true in mine.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

Page 15 of 26 FirstFirst ... 5131415161725 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [ENTJ] ENTJs: Which type do you think is your ideal romantic match?
    By Zarathustra in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 09-06-2016, 06:54 PM
  2. [ENFJ] ENFJs: Which type do you think is your ideal romantic match?
    By Zarathustra in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 12-29-2012, 10:17 PM
  3. [INFJ] INFJs: Which type do you think is your ideal romantic match?
    By Zarathustra in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: 10-31-2012, 01:47 PM
  4. [INTJ] INTJs: Which type do you think is your ideal romantic match?
    By Zarathustra in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 08-24-2012, 01:35 PM
  5. [ENFP] ENFPS: Which type do you think is your ideal romantic match?
    By Zarathustra in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 08-15-2012, 12:48 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •