User Tag List

First 816171819202868 Last

Results 171 to 180 of 941

  1. #171
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,153

    Default

    A recommencement of hostilities. I am weeping with joy behind this expressionless mask. I'm not involved in this but since when does war hunger for etiquette? However this response is also relevant only to the quoted material and pays not heed to the rest of the conversation spread across the thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by the state i am in View Post
    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.
    I have a question and its a bit of a tangent: Your explanation for judgment and perception was sound in my opinion but I was unsure exactly how literary criticism is a different board game? My understanding of perception and judgment (in the MBTI definition) has always been that the line between the two is the existence of interpretation of incoming data, once a infintesimally small movement is made towards interpretation judgment has been performed and this can theoretically ascend to the maximum amount which is the total amount of data perceived. Why then would literary criticism be any different at its base form? Determining implied meanings is just another form of interpretation of perceived data just like the interpretation of the perceived structure of the text. Perhaps I'm missing something there, could you advise?

    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).
    I disagree that you can prove anything, you can only disprove assertions and claims though I understand in the bigger context this was not what you were implying at all. However you are incorrect about Fi here. Fi does not make generalizations errors of any kind as its a system designed for the subtle interpretation of the values and desires of the unconscious self. It's nuanced and highly precise. It's the inferior Te that makes these generalization errors, at best the Fi merely encourages it to do something. I would call you a noob at this point considering you make the assertion that it is Je that it responsible for communication! Ad hominem attack moment....*drum roll*....silly INFJ. INFJ, misunderstanding Fi since the beginning of time.

    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.
    Wallowing in self-pity itself does not produce authenticity but the articulation of that self-pity and feelings which the judgment has been able to interpret through introspection of perceived data is. Of course that amount of authenticity is limited to the extent of what was discovered and the extent of the judging function's observation and that within the best of its knowledge it is being accurate. I'm willing to bet you are incorrect about being alone in seeing the contradictions others have to deal with. Ignorance and arrogance (do I have to use the silly INFJ line again?) For one, your Ji is tertiary which is Jungian terms the last time I checked is that "you don't know shit about yourself." Perhaps you do, perhaps you don't but I have no way of determining a way how to quantify and communicate those calculations. Why should you expect others to understand you first when you don't even know who you are? With no way of interpreting your inner self effectively, how do you expect others to reach a point where you can conclude that they understand you?

    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.
    This whole section is just silly. You're making assumptions on the motives of others. This is what makes me mock INFJs almost as much as paranoia.

    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.
    Is Pi any different? Have you ever completely implemented the entirety of the Pi with your Je? The "truth" becomes determined by what you are able to convert and nothing else.

    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...)
    I think the problem here at its core is that Se-inf's are just delusional and paranoid. Your own experiential truth is derived from lack of observation and from patterns which are removed from reality due to their subjective nature and uninterested in confirming whether they should continue to exist. A recipe for a Dale Gribble cake! Pe has a vested interest in the outside world without your own you would be essentially fucked. Every time you dismiss a Pe user you potentially kick yourselves in the balls and tighten the strap on the tin foil hat.

    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.
    OA hit the nail on the head here to be honest. Ni I have been told makes more fuck ups than INFJs would ever like to admit. All perception is contained within the universe after all, all that is must be contained within its principles and laws. Yet how many times does Ni come to conclusions which just aren't correct which are removed from how the universe works? I've seen Ni users make false assumptions on the motives of others based on their perception which simply cannot be realised or achieved (e.g. someone is sleeping with Ni user's wife even though they are 5000 miles away at the moment the incident supposedly took place.) Why should such perceptions be treated than anything other than garbage to be thrown away? It's not always far-sight but pure non-sight by the sounds of things.

    Secondly, Je is not any better at noticing the unity between two objects than Ji is. It just does it differently. The nuance and subtlety of logic/personal values of Ti and Fi are so precise and so fine they observe everything about the inner concept or idea and that includes how its countless pieces and parts come together into a state of unity. Like I said before, it would probably be best if you assume you do not understand Ji from now on as you clearly do not. However you are correct about Je, but then that's not exactly hard to deduce. Both observe and both are diverse, dare I say equally so.

  2. #172
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RaptorWizard View Post
    Holy pissnuggets, people who posted in this thread really poured their souls into their posts.
    This is war after all. We are committing to total war to annihilate the enemy. It does not matter whether this is a battle which is pointless and a victory meaningless we will win! It's the feeler way.

  3. #173
    Glycerine
    Guest

    Default

    Person 1: *makes some general assertions"
    Person 2: No, you are interpreting it wrong. *Makes some clarifications trying to unmuddle it it from their own perspective*
    Person 1: You're obviously not willing to listen to the truth because we know it better than you and you're in denial
    Person 2: Well, you clearly don't know what you are talking about and here's why... I am much more complex than that.
    Person 1: You are clearly delusional because you can't accept my truth.
    Person 2: What are you talking about?
    Person 1: Wow, you're such a moron.

    *white noise*

    The War on Pointless Typology.

  4. #174
    can't handcuff the wind Z Buck McFate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    3,683

    Default

    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.
    Yeah, it goes something like this: you post a list, no one posts exactly what you’re looking for (if you’re not looking for someone to specifically say “yes, I do exactly what you say, it’s exactly like you say it is”- then it’s a mystery to pretty much all of us) and when we ask precisely what your goal is in posting it you say something along the lines of “I’m looking for INFJ feedback about why this happens and what can be done about it” – and no one responds because no one can really relate well enough to the behaviors you posted to be able to answer you. So the topic fades. Then something/someone brings it back up, you post your list again and again no one gives you the specific answer you’re looking for because no one relates well enough. In between these fantastic episodes you make passive aggressive comments here and there about how “no INFJs will cop up to the behaviors”. These comments that suggest the only reason we’re not giving you the very specific response you’re looking for is because we are not self aware enough- it’s not that there’s something questionable about how common the stuff in your list actually is (because you quoted Jung, and someone else, and so therefore everyone should take it seriously and realize it has nothing to do with your own butthurt but it’s as objective as any science fact), you seem completely and utterly unwilling to accept that we might know what we’re talking about (which is basically calling us liars…).


    Basically- you don’t like the feedback you get, so then you accuse us of being the ones who cover our ears and “la la la la I can’t hear you la la”?


    Maybe it’s just a gross misunderstanding, but flat out answer this: when INFJs here at typo c deny seeing ourselves in that list you post, are you suggesting this is because we aren’t self aware enough to see it? You keep giving answers that are exactly vague enough to skirt around this, yet you keep implying it’s your opinion (at least that how it seems). So are you insisting it’s there, these tendencies you list- in us, the INFJs here- and that we just aren’t ‘owning up’ to it? If not- then why do you keep saying ‘the INFJs here won’t cop up to it’?

    eta: Nevermind, I've gone back through and read the responses to other people and it seems this was already addressed. Somewhat.

    Quote Originally Posted by the state i am in View Post
    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.
    Exactly, all of this.


    final eta:
    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    It strikes me that the same thing is happening here, in this thread, interestingly.

    OA gave her list, and directly after that, fid made her list.

    And the "edge" in OA's post set off INFJ alarm bells to either refute her list, question her motives or dig at what she's trying to prove here. One could even say, to discredit her list.

    I want to say that in the case of OA it’s different because she has alluded to the lack of response from INFJs as having some meaning in itself (in the sense of positing an intention/motivation) which I believe many of us feel misrepresents our viewpoint. It’s not reasonably available to request lack of response, attribute some negative characteristic to a lack of response and then again disparage the act of responding. I realize you are not the one who has disparaged lack of response- I’m just pointing out that it plays a role here.

    [And I think I’m done here. I'll leave it at agreeing very much with fia's post below.]
    Last edited by Z Buck McFate; 12-27-2012 at 07:59 PM.
    Reality is a collective hunch. -Lily Tomlin

    5w4 sx/sp Johari / Nohari

  5. #175
    royal member Rasofy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,932

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Glycerine View Post
    Person 1: *makes some general assertions"
    Person 2: No, you are interpreting it wrong. *Makes some clarifications trying to unmuddle it it from their own perspective*
    Person 1: You're obviously not willing to listen to the truth because we know it better than you and you're in denial
    Person 2: Well, you clearly don't know what you are talking about and here's why... I am much more complex than that.
    Person 1: You are clearly delusional because you can't accept my truth.
    Person 2: What are you talking about?
    Person 1: Wow, you're such a moron.

    *white noise*

    The War on Pointless Typology.

  6. #176
    Senior Member _eric_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp/so
    Socionics
    ENFj
    Posts
    288

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by the state i am in View Post
    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?
    Maybe one reason I identify with so little of this negative stuff is that 3 is by far one of my lowest scores? (along with 7 and 8) All three always get around 20% or lower in tests.

    And what's all this Pe/Pi Je/Ji stuff? Can someone link me to or type up a quick summary for me?

    Honestly there is just so much stuff being written out here that I wouldn't even know what to reply to, assuming I even could lol.

  7. #177
    darkened dreams labyrinthine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    isfp
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RaptorWizard View Post
    Holy pissnuggets, people who posted in this thread really poured their souls into their posts.
    I'm wondering if one big thing INFJ and INFP have in common is significant sensitivity to existential isolation - the feeling that one is not, or even cannot, be understood accompanied by a desire for complete comprehension of another. I think it makes sense because both types have a lot of empathy and have deep understanding of other people, but both types can see the vast complexity of a person. Both types have some desire to connect and yet are introverted.

    The defensiveness of INFJ appears based on seeing the initial approach as incapable of evolving towards true understanding. All the pushback is to keep the type from being misunderstood.
    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)

  8. #178
    morose bourgeoisie
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    3,859

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fia View Post
    I'm wondering if one big thing INFJ and INFP have in common is significant sensitivity to existential isolation - the feeling that one is not, or even cannot, be understood accompanied by a desire for complete comprehension of another. I think it makes sense because both types have a lot of empathy and have deep understanding of other people, but both types can see the vast complexity of a person. Both types have some desire to connect and yet are introverted.

    The defensiveness of INFJ appears based on seeing the initial approach as incapable of evolving towards true understanding. All the pushback is to keep the type from being misunderstood.
    +1. Good on ye. Bringing peeps together...

  9. #179
    Society
    Guest

    Default

    and the answer to the unasked question is: remorse.

  10. #180
    darkened dreams labyrinthine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    isfp
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stanton Moore View Post
    +1. Good on ye. Bringing peeps together...
    Sometime I may re-read this thread to think on it a bit more. One thing I *think* is true of both INF types is quite rigorous self-analysis and criticism combined with intensely private personal needs. I have read the posts of the INFJs in this thread and know some personally long enough to know that it is typical of this crowd to be rigorously self-critical and self-analytical. Externally some may interpret the public push-back as not desiring self-analysis, but in my impression it has to do more with issues of privacy and approach.

    I'm wondering if INFPs typically discuss self-criticism publicly. That is not what I would expect of Fi-dom. The Fi-doms I'm close to, I would not venture to criticize because I think they are perfectly capable of doing that for themselves. There is also the issue of whether one is discussing and criticizing self, or if they are criticizing someone else, or if someone is criticizing them and they are defending who they are. Each of these three scenarios are fundamentally different.

    I think very much like the psychologist Carl Rogers who sees each individual as the expert of their own lives. He taught empathy and unconditional positive regard which revolutionized counseling and education with client-centered and student-centered education. While it is true that it is possible for another person to point out my flaws, I've found it quite hit and miss with people often accusing me of contradictory things. I see other people's criticisms as possibly having more to do with their own self and experiences with people in general and less to do with me - especially if they do not know me well.

    Going with MBTI theory, the INFJ internalizes negativity from their environment and can even become physically ill when exposed to high conflict environments. The issue with Fe-empathy is that you do not only share the joy and sadness of others, but also their guilt and confusion. I have been in a few negative environments in which certain negative criticisms and attitudes were directed at me long enough that I had to begin fighting internally not to accept these images as my identity.

    I personally dislike all the "Hate an XXXX? Tell us why" sorts of threads. I don't see them as productive, but as a means to reinforce fears and prejudicial thinking. I prefer Carl Rogers Humanistic Psychology approach in which you take time to ask people directed questions to help them see and organize their own minds, values, flaws, and strengths. They already know. I don't. What I describe here is using a scalpel instead of a sledgehammer to perform the "surgery" of self-analysis and criticism.

    Edit: And an interesting point is that I have not been able to tell if Carl Rogers is an INFP or an INFJ, but I think the approach he uses would be appreciated and effective for both types.
    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)

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