User Tag List

First 715161718192767 Last

Results 161 to 170 of 941

  1. #161
    Vulnerability Eilonwy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4 sp/so
    Posts
    6,176

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    Ironically and interestingly, you've chosen some symbols that many of us INFP's find kind of hurtful to apply to us as a group. They are usually employed in a mocking or derogatory fashion, after all, serving to invalidate our opinions.

    Pudding included.

    I'm sincerely sorry.

    I did realize that the Special Snowflake has negative connotations, but thought that used in a joking manner it would be funny to all concerned. I didn't realize that pudding had the same connotations. I guess it would be like a white person trying to joke about the N word with African Americans? Not a good idea.
    Johari / Nohari

    “That we are capable only of being what we are remains our unforgivable sin.” ― Gene Wolfe

    reminder to self: "That YOU that you are so proud of is a story woven together by your interpreter module to account for as much of your behavior as it can incorporate, and it denies or rationalizes the rest." "Who's in Charge? Free Will and the Science of the Brain" by Michael S. Gazzaniga

  2. #162
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eilonwy View Post
    I'm sincerely sorry.

    I did realize that the Special Snowflake has negative connotations, but thought that used in a joking manner it would be funny to all concerned. I didn't realize that pudding had the same connotations. I guess it would be like a white person trying to joke about the N word with African Americans? Not a good idea.
    No worries ...

    Pudding is ok though.

    And thanks.
    "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

  3. #163
    darkened dreams labyrinthine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    isfp
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    Maybe the whole crux of it is to me, everything is subjective. Everything.

    There is nothing concretely objective. Now, I know you need to create an objective truth. I even feel a need to myself, even with that distant Te. But it strikes me that there are just a bunch of opinions, and not much more than that.

    I am aware that my opinion is just one drop of water in an ocean of voices. I don't expect it to be received or interpreted as an objective truth. However, it is my truth and as such, I afford it a measure of respect for what it is.
    It is true that the human mind can demonstrate under examination that it is not capable of processing in a purely objective manner. The question about subjectivity is whether or not everything is equally subjective.

    If one goes with the view that everything is not only subjective, but equally so, then what does it mean for a person to have a psychotic break with reality? What does it mean when someone sees people and/or creatures that are not demonstrably there? Have you ever watched "A Beautiful Mind"? It is a movie right on point with this question. Brilliant mathematician John Nash had a mental illness in which he formed relationships with imaginary individuals and had a complex conspiracy based theory making random connections. Over the years he subjugated his illness to his reasoning powers and it lessened. Did he move towards objectivity and a sense of external reality or is it all equally a figment of his mind?

    I would set forth that while the human mind is not capable of achieving pure objectivity, it is not capable of comprehending external reality for exactly what it is, there is still an external, objective reality out there with which we interact. Not all propositions are equally correct being validated only by perception and experience. No matter how convinced one is that a block of rat poison is a brownie, if one eats it perhaps the mind could distort the experience of it so that it tasted like warm, wonderful chocolate, but it would destroy the body nonetheless. A friend of mine said she spent her youth with a group who believed that the mind created reality and anything you desired could eventually come to be, and she spoke of her tendency to believe them, but commented off-handedly that there were all dead now.

    So there is an internal system that creates our subjective perception and there is an external world out there that is what it is regardless of our comprehension of it. While we can never fully see it for what it actually is, we also cannot separate ourselves from its consequences. In this way there is a continuum of subjectivity, there are degrees of it. If we are conscientious about this concept of truth, then we are seekers of understanding better both the internal subjective and the external objective aspects of reality. If someone speaks from experience in ways that we can determine depart either from the truth of another person's experience, or the truth that can be measured and verified in the external world, there can be reason to point it out and at least suggest the benefits of recalibrating to a better sense of these "truths". The benefit is that we better know what we are interacting with in the world, can make better choices, and have more control over how we wish to interact with reality.
    Step into my metaphysical room of mirrors.
    Fear of reality creates myopic morality
    So I guess it means there is trouble until the robins come
    (from Blue Velvet)

  4. #164
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fia View Post
    So what you are saying is that directing anger, accusation, and requiring apology from a proxy is a legitimate way to process anger and hurt?...

    *backs away slowly* Seriously, it's okay. I don't need to know where the bodies are buried. I'm going to leave now...

    Yes because that segment equates with the mindset of a serial killer. *rolls eyes* I honestly would not hurt a fly, I would probably pull a muscle just swinging a punch!

    I made no claim to it being legitimate or not. I do not condone it nor recommend it however I acknowledge it as a phenomena that occurs (the temptation occurs which you can choose not to act upon) and I also acknowledge that it provides some remedy to the pain that was caused. Myself, I much rather to save my criticism for the perpetrator themselves because they will ultimately be none the wiser that any of this had occurred if you go down the proxy route.

  5. #165
    darkened dreams labyrinthine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    isfp
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Standuble View Post
    Yes because that segment equates with the mindset of a serial killer. *rolls eyes* I honestly would not hurt a fly, I would probably pull a muscle just swinging a punch!

    I made no claim to it being legitimate or not. I do not condone it nor recommend it however I acknowledge it as a phenomena that occurs (the temptation occurs which you can choose not to act upon) and I also acknowledge that it provides some remedy to the pain that was caused. Myself, I much rather to save my criticism for the perpetrator themselves because they will ultimately be none the wiser that any of this had occurred if you go down the proxy route.
    I thought it was too absurd to be taken seriously, and you were already joking around.


    We've got to let go of this Us. vs. Them shit. no joke there.

    As a disclaimer, while I felt a mild-moderate level of frustration at the original list of "flaws" and so forth, I feel zero anger at any poster or the thread. I think at least some others are also not angry or upset?
    Step into my metaphysical room of mirrors.
    Fear of reality creates myopic morality
    So I guess it means there is trouble until the robins come
    (from Blue Velvet)

  6. #166
    Senior Member the state i am in's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    infj
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    intentions are very important to us because being with them helps us organize our contribution. it helps me encircle a space around us for collaboration. it helps me bound my perceptions by the unique conditions of a shared intentionality that is not just my own. by helping me predict a 3rd person perspective to view our interaction. as an sx type, for me that means the constituents are less social roles grounded in social context and more aspects of desire that i recognize and can resonate with.

    intentions are always a kind of guess because they happen before actuality catches up. reason comes after, altho some types behave slowly and deliberately (like e1s) to try to exhaustively check the reason beforehand.

    Fe itself is a responsive, extroverted function. it is a way of being present. without this, we struggle to be present, as Se development comes much later and requires more compulsory practice. as a Je type of presence, we do engage in a kind of error correction process. this can be very annoying when it is compulsive and unreflexive. my infp friend describes his entj mom as "his worst critic." he makes something, and she starts explaining what's wrong with it. it's her emotionally ineffective way of showing interest and investment, to try to create efficiency of implementation. her way of adding something, of responding. as an Fe type, e do this differently. we mirror your affectations. what happens to your intentions, your gestures, the mood and tone, happens to us. the affectations that you use to tell a story (and those that e4s are so good at hiding from us and transforming into a kind of controlled aesthetic). we experience the affectations of others for our understanding more than our own internal changes that allow us to register emotions from within. we do pay attention to the affectations of others, the way we know how they feel. but we have a different pathway to do so that is less self-aware and more self-conscious. we embody the meaning of the response rather than the story. what would it feel like to have meant that rather than what would it feel like to have had that happen to me. our primaryjob isn't to test the truth as much as it is to arrange/balance it. we are more adapted to blending 3rd person perspectives than we are at owning 1st and 2nd ones. sometimes we get treated like we just respond to the sign as an automaton, or how np types negatively project upon their sj shadows. but we don't really work like that to begin with. there's always a third person perspective that mediates what we see in our kind of inner vision.

    i think one aspect of this thread that is problematic for both types is that we can say "that's just my opinion," but doing so denies the T reality that can't fully be separated from what we are doing. the Te guessing game about how we need to be "fixed" because we are wrong in the opinion of another is, well, problematic. this happens in esotericwench threads quite frequently (and this is not an attempt to disparage, just an observation that will hopefully provide a shared example). let's help you solve the problem that we don't really understand, assume is wrong because it doesn't align with what's best for us, and define on our own terms without really devising tests to determine the facts of the situation (Ti). and if we, the infjs, try to resist the facticity of the description, it gets to be seen as merely a way of not listening to the Fi type. who wants us to simply be with their experience and empathize, but who at times pushes passive aggressive meanings and presuppositions, in the way that all people and all types do, into the process. so it's not just empathize but also apologize. and i think there's a sense among infps that we are more likely to defend infj as a category that is not even real than we are to be willing to truly empathize with the experience of another as it is. and we do protect our identifications very strongly. and that can also produce a unique kind of bias, just like assuming that experience is sufficient to know what anything is or whether it is good or bad, when those explanations of experience are infinitely reductionistic and assuming that lines of consequence are true when they can only be true within a set of conditions for both framing and representing their constituents (describing experience requires languages to do so). Fi blame is often misguided or misappropriated by a story that doesn't quite fit especially when it tries to specifically articulate why a consequence happened. it doesn't get a privileged claim to truth. it gets a privileged claim to the embodied truth that is centered upon (but not strictly residing within) that particular heart center as the seat of an experiencer who has had things happen to it. this is the source of the unique brand of Fi empathy that teaches people how to practice radical acceptance. and it IS kind of awesome when it's at its best.

    my entp brother got really upset with me once for this. he felt like i was taking sides in my natural tendency to find balance. i just didn't see how to balance validating his claims (the meaning he put onto his experience) vs validating his experience. at the time, i felt like, well, is it not even more fucking presumptuous to do all the counseling moves that make you basically feel like you're just patronizing the other person? now i just realize they want you to envision the story with them, and stay with their experience, and help anchor the meaning so they know how to organize their response (also an so type). i still don't fully see what Fi types want from you when they would like empathy. it doesn't seem to be share my affectations, or emotional reactions. i don't know if it's asking for Te or what?

    i do know that a major issue for all F types is practicing neutral description. it is a necessity to avoid blaming and overgeneralizations that lead to a lack of reflexivity about the meanings and the moods that work against discernment when we become too fixated and lose sight of key parts of ourselves. my blind spot is clearly describing the events as particularly as possible. i like learning evidence tests from legal discourse to help curb the uncritical "hearsay" of Fe. so much is a negotiation between whether we can start from the big picture or whether we have to start from the beginning of the story. this is a conflict that exists in all mental activities, in everywhere and in all things. this is the tension within ourselves that escalates into war when it refuses to be reconciled in mid-life, in the apex of the ongoing negotiation between beginning and ending.

    i also think it is perfectly fair to get concerned about the way Je works. it is conservative in nature (as an isolated part of a larger process). unlike Pe, it does not focus on the kind of personal responsibility that is rooted in being present and as responsive as possible to a moment that exists in its definition largely outside of you. it instead focuses on a kind of categorical imperative, a way of identifying with the mirrors, the meaningful symbols, that we use to refer to ourselves. to become conscious that we are that from a perspective outside of our own. that bind us together and create the boundaries of what we are, our iridescence. what it's like to wear those, to build a constellation of identity. we try to take a great deal of responsibility for how we represent things, because these representations are a part of how we become self-conscious and know ourselves in ways that are socially sharable and confer status and social indexing for our identities. we test them against each other a great deal in strange and novel ways, trying to become self-conscious of ourselves in those formations. Fi types test experiential narratives. they focus less on connecting to the values around them as much as using their values to navigate a space without impinging on others values. we mirror the values around us, searching for ways to interpret them that would allow us to share an intention. we try to protect the cultural lenses that allow us to see what we are from getting too smudged and distorted or being deliberately manipulated for ill intentions. the problem is that the world is always changing too, and we have to be ready to give them up as well, realizing that the truth can never just come from one person or perspective lens but is more of a process that is ongoing and without decisive end, that we are only just beginning.

  7. #167
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fia View Post
    I thought it was too absurd to be taken seriously, and you were already joking around.


    We've got to let go of this Us. vs. Them shit. no joke there.

    As a disclaimer, while I felt a mild-moderate level of frustration at the original list of "flaws" and so forth, I feel zero anger at any poster or the thread. I think at least some others are also not angry or upset?
    Lol, I'm not angry or upset in the slightest nor have I been at any point in this entire thread. If anything I'm in a good mood which brings out my desire to troll. My writing style only comes across as angry or upset at times. I blame inferior Te rearing its head or maybe I'm just twisted. Who knows?

    Would you believe me if I said there is no Us vs. Them in my mind? One of the few people in this world I look up to is an INFJ. In fact I dislike the INFPs on the whole more than the INFJs. However I was expressing legitimate criticisms of INFJs that I had, just as OA was doing with that list.

  8. #168
    Sugar Hiccup OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    7,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fia View Post
    Vicki Jo, whom I don't necessarily trust intellectually, but who is supposedly an expert, describes the INFP as the most judgmental type. When I heard that it annoyed me because I refused to believe it possible, but the prevalence of these threads brings that comment back to mind and makes me wonder why she came to that conclusion. I read a lot more criticisms of others than self in these thread.
    The fact that she basically has an entire web site devoted to this kind of commentary just exposes her hypocrisy there. I'd be open to discussing this idea of being "judgmental" in another thread though. I often find Ji gets explained through Je eyes & then is gravely misunderstood. Pe exploration is often viewed as a judgment from Je types too, because it has action (such as my original post in here; not final judgments, but concepts to explore based on patterns I've detected). However, I know the misunderstanding runs both ways, and some criticisms of Ji are accurate. A thread on that would be much more productive because we'd actually discuss it though!

    My only complaint against the INFP is against the specific individuals who make unreasonable criticisms of others. I realize they may feel like they are banging their head against a wall to have their inner world understood, but when expressing criticism, it is not the wall such a person is banging their head against - it is another person's head. That is why people say, Ouch. Sorry you are frustrated, but it's time to stop doing that. Go find an actual wall.
    Concerning the criticism I've made, I would call it attempting to understand other people (not necessarily in this thread, but the individuals who inspired such criticisms) who are hitting their head against a wall, because they are the ones who suffer the most ill effects of those behaviors. They're messing their own lives up. What I see is a connection between these more serious issues and everyday issues in the typical INFJ - issues which are part of the very DEFINITION of the type.

    I tried to find your comment again where you said that you thought listing a quote of criticisms would place distance and make the discussion more theoretical. The problem is that the list is not necessarily credible. It is just another person's impressions based also on the internet memes associated with INFJ. If one refuses the psychic demigod meme, there could also be reason to reject some of the negative memes. The list is problematic and not because it is negative, but because it actually describes some specific personality disorders. If someone has those traits they are not necessarily INFJ, they have one of the attachment disorders. The percentage of people with those disorders is higher than the percentage of INFJs in the world. Confirmation bias can cause people to label anyone with that disorder as an INFJ. I am brutally aware of my flaws, but have zero intention of sharing them here because I don't find the thread all that honest or about learning. That's not my impression of it, and of course I'm not saying that it isn't a sincere learning environment for some.
    I listed my criticisms PAIRED with DIRECT quotes about the Ni ego from the very individuals who created and/or shaped this theory. If Jung is not credible to you in such a discussion, then who is? I see patterns of behavior IRL and see how these connect to the theory. A person can fit a general pattern without exhibiting the same behavior or in the same degree. I think PeaceBaby explains that well below. I see little acknowledgement of the actual quotes from Jung & Van Der Hoop on Ni in this thread though, which is interesting.

    I don't think you want to accept my stated motive or see the purpose in my approach, so we will just spin our wheels. From the get-go, you questioned my sincerity, & you continue to do so, so there is very little I can say to you anymore.

    I'm still trying to learn how to resolve conflict with Fi-doms I love, and so far just submitting and apologizing and trying to remain positive has been successful. There have also been two arguments in my life with a Fi person that I went ahead and let myself go, get angry and just say whatever without filter and that worked better than I expected. I'm trying something a little like that here, but with some reassurances because I know there is little or no social trust established.
    I don't find that a resolution of conflict, because the source of the conflict likely still exists. You've just bought yourself time & smoothed ruffled feathers.
    I find with IxFJs (much more so than ExFJs, interestingly), that I can feel like a bull in a china shop, because I prefer to just call out the elephant in the room so we can move on from it. Their way leads to "buying time", just putting off the issue or ignoring it, but it will not just "go away" permanently. In INFJs especially, this looks like covering the ears & eyes, blocking out that which is unpleasant so as to stay positive (about themselves, mainly). But their view gets narrower & narrower & narrower & farther from reality that way. I can only abide by such dishonesty for so long.

    So I feel like a conflict cannot be resolved if you (in general, not YOU) won't acknowledge it exists to begin with, and I see avoidance of discussing personal contributions to such conflicts (ie. personality flaws) as a way of dodging responsibility and avoiding getting to the root of problems because it would involve change on your part. While I don't see all of the points I made about INFJ flaws in all INFJs or even most here, I do see common threads in "smaller" tendencies. If I was asking for any acknowledgment, it was, "Do you see this thread? DO you see where it can lead to?". I admit when people cannot or will not see themselves in the negatives of their type, then I suspect a dishonesty or arrogance of sorts. Just as when a person only sees the negative, it goes past honesty & true humility into poor self-esteem & morbid self-pity (the more common Fi issue).

    Let it be stated again that I did not create this thread, but was responding to a request from an INFJ. The context continues to make me feel justified. I find the cries of "unfair" childish; perhaps you shouldn't have entered a thread with this title, then.

    Quote Originally Posted by peacebaby
    See, that's where it falls apart. That's not what the INFP's here are saying. They're saying what I said above ... can you recognize him in the spectrum, in the INFJ box? And, if you can recognize him, and simply say, "Ya, it happens" it would appear less defensive than dismissing the whole post as irrelevant or taking it personally. (And, saying that, I KNOW it's difficult when it feels you're being painted with these broad brush-strokes that inaccurately portray you as an individual.)
    Yes, thank you. An individual of any type may fall apart spectacularly, but there certainly are themes in how the demise plays out. I think it's useful to acknowledge what tendencies in a type have the capacity to grow into such serious flaws as those I listed.

    I think we're asking for Pe access though, and that's the breakdown. I continue to think this is a Pe/Pi conflict and NOT Fe/Fi. We're asking for things to be viewed outside the self, as a part of a pattern that constitutes reality, and we're getting "Se denial" in return. I don't mean denial of flaws in the list I made, but denial of seeing the connections I'm making, and how and why.

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    Standuble and Peacebaby- I will get back to responding, but for now I saw this and it seems to encapsulate exactly what bothers me about OA's list:
    I've explained my intent and approach so many times now that it's silly to see it dismissed this way again, and it's also insulting to me as it basically says I'm a liar. Again, if someone cannot accept my sincerity and chooses to invalidate my whole argument because they don't like the way it was presented, then the discussion will not develop. I don't believe at this point that any approach would have made a difference though.

    I feel my post riled people up because there was some unpleasant truth in it (I'm not saying it is a clear reflection of all INFJs). If it was utter nonsense with no foundation in reality, then I think it would've gotten a very different response. What I see latched onto is the part of it is that is most subjective - the delivery. The quotes from Jung are not noted...I was thinking the connection I made between them & my criticisms would be discussed, but that's a Pe approach, specifically Ne. Not to say I haven't seen a few try to do that in here, but it's mostly been a stubbornness to avoid seeing the points in the "correct" context. And there again I see Pe/Pi conflict - Pi puts it into the context which suits them (ie. Ni focuses on the "wrong" question), which looks like denial or avoidance to Pe.
    Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

    INFP | 4w5 sp/sx | RLUEI - Primary Inquisitive | Tritype is tripe

  9. #169
    Senior Member the state i am in's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    infj
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    The fact that she basically has an entire web site devoted to this kind of commentary just exposes her hypocrisy there. I'd be open to discussing this idea of being "judgmental" in another thread though. I often find Ji gets explained through Je eyes & then is gravely misunderstood. Pe exploration is often viewed as a judgment from Je types too, because it has action (such as my original post in here; not final judgments, but concepts to explore based on patterns I've detected). However, I know the misunderstanding runs both ways, and some criticisms of Ji are accurate. A thread on that would be much more productive because we'd actually discuss it though!
    it is a judgment once it's communicated as "evidence" that controls what can be considered the truth. it's a way of controlling an interaction. there's no such thing as "exploration" apart from judgment. there is only couching that judgment in "self-evident facts" that can be observed by direct perception. this works best with newtonian physics and not complex socio-symbolic behavior. or in law to establish an event happened. but not to explain the meaning of an event. literary criticism is much more complicated.


    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    Concerning the criticism I've made, I would call it attempting to understand other people (not necessarily in this thread, but the individuals who inspired such criticisms) who are hitting their head against a wall, because they are the ones who suffer the most ill effects of those behaviors. They're messing their own lives up. What I see is a connection between these more serious issues and everyday issues in the typical INFJ - issues which are part of the very DEFINITION of the type.

    I listed my criticisms PAIRED with DIRECT quotes about the Ni ego from the very individuals who created and/or shaped this theory. If Jung is not credible to you in such a discussion, then who is? I see patterns of behavior IRL and see how these connect to the theory. A person can fit a general pattern without exhibiting the same behavior or in the same degree. I think PeaceBaby explains that well below. I see little acknowledgement of the actual quotes from Jung & Van Der Hoop on Ni in this thread though, which is interesting.
    it's not that interesting to me. i appreciate that you want "credible" evidence, facts that you can use to control how we describe what is "actual." but as i've said, that's only useful to prove something happened. it's not really useful to prove that something means something else. with that, you can only falsify things that it is unlikely to mean. or express what it meant for you (which ranges based on well-being from a great Fi skill to a common Fi generalization error that happens especially when the Fi user gets angry).


    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    So I feel like a conflict cannot be resolved if you (in general, not YOU) won't acknowledge it exists to begin with, and I see avoidance of discussing personal contributions to such conflicts (ie. personality flaws) as a way of dodging responsibility and avoiding getting to the root of problems because it would involve change on your part. While I don't see all of the points I made about INFJ flaws in all INFJs or even most here, I do see common threads in "smaller" tendencies. If I was asking for any acknowledgment, it was, "Do you see this thread? DO you see where it can lead to?". I admit when people cannot or will not see themselves in the negatives of their type, then I suspect a dishonesty or arrogance of sorts. Just as when a person only sees the negative, it goes past honesty & true humility into poor self-esteem & morbid self-pity (the more common Fi issue).
    or depressive e4 issue? an ability to wallow in self-pity does not produce authenticity. it produces an ability to relate to other's wallowing in self-pity and to understand the pitfalls that come from building a storehouse of negative thoughts and bad habits to cope with the emotional sinking that depressive types know so well. the intention to me feels like bringing others down to your level. i think i do this too sometimes because i feel like i alone see the contradictions that others should have to deal with too. and there's truth to that, just as there's also truth to the fact that i expect others to understand me before i'm willing to do the work to understand them. and that this is a bad habit of mine that at times digs my own grave.

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    Let it be stated again that I did not create this thread, but was responding to a request from an INFJ. The context continues to make me feel justified. I find the cries of "unfair" childish; perhaps you shouldn't have entered a thread with this title, then.
    this is something that bothers me. true, you may say, you are childish, or you may say, i find your behavior childish. the latter is not better if you still use a pejorative identity marker that is obviously supposed to be a negative representation. in this case, you are saying others are immature and suggesting that you alone are mature. and they are immature because they do not agree with you. they are emotional like a child and issue "cries" that are not as rational as you presume to be, when you keep your emotions at bay (by sticking to "the facts" that you deem "the facts"). why you see yourself as employing mature emotional communication strategies is simply beyond me. you are affecting them as well but deny your role in doing so. how is this any different? it only works for you because you presume to have access to "reality" that makes you right be default of being the one who is right. this is circular in its own way. and you just want to use typology to justify it rather than using it to clarify the larger pattern that exists outside of you as well.


    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    I think we're asking for Pe access though, and that's the breakdown. I continue to think this is a Pe/Pi conflict and NOT Fe/Fi. We're asking for things to be viewed outside the self, as a part of a pattern that constitutes reality, and we're getting "Se denial" in return. I don't mean denial of flaws in the list I made, but denial of seeing the connections I'm making, and how and why.
    Pe is tricky. ultimately everyone's responsibility is defining what is actual for them. you can't use someone else's Pe. Pe cannot be communicated without Je. it can only be performed. enacted. actualized. as it gets communicated, it loses its sense that it is yours. the truth is organized by what emerges. and you are denying that.


    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    I've explained my intent and approach so many times now that it's silly to see it dismissed this way again, and it's also insulting to me as it basically says I'm a liar. Again, if someone cannot accept my sincerity and chooses to invalidate my whole argument because they don't like the way it was presented, then the discussion will not develop. I don't believe at this point that any approach would have made a difference though.
    your argument is that infjs inferior Se at times is hugely problematic for them and leads to mistakes in judgment regarding the emotions of others? that not attending to the story of where others are coming from leads to poor guesses at times?

    or that you've met infjs (including 3w4s, who i believe are enfjs), who exhibit especially negative e3 issues that you do not like so all infjs should realize that they are condemned to be completely full of shit unless they take Pe types word for it that they are wrong much of the time? i mean, what's a concrete situation that you see this happening in?

    because MY Pe types tell me that i need to learn to trust myself to determine what is real. and that they're glad to support me when i ask for story help, but that i need to keep trying to become more present on my own, to take responsibility for myself to deem what is real and what is not, so that i can relate to the interiors of others with my own sense of actuality, my own experiential truth. (rather than just submitting to theirs...)

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    I feel my post riled people up because there was some unpleasant truth in it (I'm not saying it is a clear reflection of all INFJs). If it was utter nonsense with no foundation in reality, then I think it would've gotten a very different response. What I see latched onto is the part of it is that is most subjective - the delivery. The quotes from Jung are not noted...I was thinking the connection I made between them & my criticisms would be discussed, but that's a Pe approach, specifically Ne. Not to say I haven't seen a few try to do that in here, but it's mostly been a stubbornness to avoid seeing the points in the "correct" context. And there again I see Pe/Pi conflict - Pi puts it into the context which suits them (ie. Ni focuses on the "wrong" question), which looks like denial or avoidance to Pe.
    but it sure feels like you're just trying to railroad others. if you know you're right, why do you need their confirmation? why do you have to have them see it your way if you won't see it theirs? you're still assuming that Pe IS reality and that Pi is illusory, secondary, and ultimately full of shit. the fact is we are negotiating what the "correct" context is. when you assume that you inherently have it because you believe your "type" is blessed with a greater connection to reality. when your focus on what can better be labeled "actuality" is only to say that you focus on a different scale of perception that is like a hand moving from a distance to right in front of your face. but you miss context because of this near-sightedness as well. this is why it must be negotiated.

    furthermore, and this is my reading of what is happening, you create a split that is logically untenable. you perpetuate the j/p bias because you don't grasp the diversity of Je, instead reducing it to a caricature of what it is. Ji focuses on the directly observable. this often results in missing out in the unity that binds things together. especially as you cross over from one scale to another and make logical type errors as a result of domains that are irreducible to each other because the paradigms are simply incommensurable and cannot be bridged by direct observation without also observing the observer.

    i don't know how to explain this to you further, but Je functioning is a necessary aspect of all intelligent systems. Je is the recursive language system that binds organizations together across different orders of experience. its usage develops the communicational conditions for perception to be shared and engineered into complex constructions. not just between people, but in the very creation of (self-)consciousness in all forms. you may think this is a secondary point. but you are missing the Je context. even as many infjs readily admit their inferior Se and even provide examples of when it works against them. why this is not enough for you is very strange to try to comprehend.

  10. #170
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    Will
    Posts
    5,927

    Default

    Holy pissnuggets, people who posted in this thread really poured their souls into their posts.

Similar Threads

  1. [ENFP] ENFPs, what do ENFPs do that drives you nuts?
    By Esoteric Wench in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-05-2013, 10:25 AM
  2. Am I a INTP or a INFP?What do you think?
    By Tish211 in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-04-2011, 09:33 PM
  3. [MBTItm] INFPs: What do you admire about ISFJs?
    By Afkan in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 08-13-2010, 07:40 PM
  4. [INFP] INFPs: What do you look for in friends?
    By DigitalMethod in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 10-08-2008, 11:48 AM
  5. Josh Groban: INFJ? INFP?? What do you think?
    By BookLady in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-03-2008, 09:11 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
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO