[NF] INFPs, what do INFJs do that drives you nuts?

[Fidelia]

FWIW skylights, I think that would truly bother me too, particularly if it hadn't been preceded by any attempts at reasoning! Has this happened to you personally? If so, I can only imagine how it must have made you feel!

I missed the original postings but would like to be aware of it if I am inadvertantly doing stuff like this, so if you can give any examples for a point of reference, that would be really helpful to me.

 

[Society]

Then you have a person who needs professional help. 's what I said, right? Look -- lack of self-esteem kind of comes with the territory, unless you've really been privileged in your upbringing. Our process looks weird to outsiders and we don't fit in. It takes a lot to overcome the constant reminders in dealing with the world that you're a square peg in a round hole.

well, what i am visualizing is a bit like a destructive cycle:

• if someone has a deep seeded belief that something is wrong or flawed with them to a degree that they can't cope with on a conscious level, projecting it externally becomes a likely outcome.
• if someone constantly experiences life as a series of realizations from which they can't quite see how they get, a projection can be left unnoticed and indistinguishable from the normal thinking process.
• so as far as the person is concerned, their deepest fears are being reaffirmed by their own experience of their environment all the time, the intensity of the belief gets stronger.

now, you talked about self esteem due to alienation. beyond alienation being a consistent trend in modern culture, and the facts introverts in general feel out of place in the extrovert dominated western culture, and introverts are less likely to know other people who think like they do by simple virtue of less likely to know as many people, i think i have heard every single N type attest to feeling like they don't fit the mold, ENTPs have being called "aliens" so often it's a running joke. i do see why this can be more extreme in INFJs - you are the least likely of all types to know anyone who thinks the same way you do - and with Fe engaging you, you are more likely to be constantly aware of it. that can increase the vulnerability to more advanced self esteem issues, since every time life kicks you you are being kicked when your down by default, but in itself, not be the cause of it. remember, the key for that cycle is not being able to face the negative belief about yourself consciously.

so the question becomes: what allows some INFJs to cope with it consciously while others fall?

 

[Tiltyred]

Someone at some point recognizing us for who we are and showing us how to use what we've got.

And some people are just constitutionally better equipped, physically better equipped, to deal with things, even among INFJs. Some smarter, some with more innate confidence, etc., you get my drift. I come with a lot of fight in me and more stamina than some, which is fortunate because no one in my life until my 6th grade teacher was able to see my gifts and I was strongly discouraged from doing anything MY way. I didn't come into my own until I got completely away from my parents and the school system. I had to spend years unlearning, and learning to distinguish, and sorting out the mess. Not all of us went through such a difficult process, but -- encouragement and education, basically, plus some innate desire to prevail, I suppose.

 

[Southern Kross]

You know, it's only from a couple of other threads like this that I've realized that my thought process isn't as totally obvious as I think it is. I felt like all the way through I had stated exactly those points, and so when OA wasn't responding with anything that would ease that tension and other people were attempting to conciliate by urging us to ignore her tone and consider if we couldn't see bits of truth in her words at least, I was frustrated. I felt that I was being up front and also trying to be cooperative and now, not only was there no effective communication, but I was also being inaccurately interpreted by people around me as just being defensive when it wasn't that at all.

No, your list of points weren't entirely obvious. I mean they were noticeable in a sense but their importance to you seemed to get lost. I consider that list a rather Te style explanation. You're saying: "I tried this and it didn't work. So than I tried that and it still didn't work. I don't get what you want from me". This really clicks with me. I can see how the whole thing fits together, rather than looking at the series of reactions to individual pieces of information. We can get lost in analysing and evaluating those specific details (Ji), that we don't see the big picture of what you're feeling (Je).

I get why it would be annoying to be told to to look past the tone and listen to her points. I suppose that could sound like being told to forgive her faults, while being accused of all sorts of failings yourself. On top of that it would feel a lot like the onus is on you to understand regardless of how unpleasant her method of communication is. It's sad that people would feel like that about what I was saying, because I never intended that. I (perhaps naively) believe that clarification and encouraging the right perspective will eliminate a lot of problems - but sometimes people just need to have their problem recognised.

The other thing I was going to say was, just because your list of examples wasn't commented on, it doesn't mean it wasn't noticed. I have this bad habit (perhaps it is a INFP issue in general) where I read a text message from someone and say to myself "oh, right!" and then don't text back. If I pretty much agree and that nothing needs to be addressed I don't feel the need or desire to respond. Of course, to others all they're seeing is empty phone - it's a one-sided conversation. It happens here on the forum too. I might read a whole thread in depth but only make a small comment or two, and sometimes say nothing at all. If I don't think I have anything useful to say or aren't inspired to respond to something in particular, I keep my mouth shut. Also I tend to respond more to the negative (which is such Fi tendency). If I disagree, it's then I want to step in and say something. And I'm going to be so much more passionate about disagreeing too, which I suppose can mean I sound very negative. Even then, often I plain lose interest if it's too much of a battle, especially if it's going nowhere - it becomes too draining and stressful, so I leave the conversation. As much as INFPs seem to have a reputation for being tyrannical about their beliefs, we tire of defending ourselves pretty quickly.

What might have happened is OA only responded to the things that drew her attention (eg. things she disagreed with or where she wanted to defend herself) and failed to demonstrate her agreement on other points. You needed to hear a response to a range of things, as well as some Fe words of affirmation to show her reactions weren't all negative. You need the full spectrum of response or else you're going to assume that the words you hear reflects the overall opinion. I think you or someone else said earlier "If I hear one bad thing, I'm going to assume there's 10 more bad things behind it". The thing is with INFPs if we say one bad thing, it probably only means one bad thing in a whole range of good things. We have to remember to voice those as well when giving criticism. I'm a little better at it because I'm a social-first (like [MENTION=5999]PeaceBaby[/MENTION]) but I still mess up in this regard too.

Z Buck's last post in this thread explains it for me. You can't fudge facts and then say you are being objective, even if you quote outside people etc. If you are venting, I will ignore the facts given and concentrate on validating you so you can get on with the problem solving part. For me, it just seems so counter intuitive to spend a lot of time on the "How did that make you feel". I think that is because if it were me I'd give someone a look like , say "It made me feel like crap" and then "Can we get back to what happened and what it means. How can I avoid finding myself in this situation in the future, or do you have any additional info I'm missing that could help me feel better about this whole thing" Discussing those kinds of things is what provides comfort to me. I assume right off the bad that those feelings you have are valid, but that they'll also change once the situation improves in some way.

This makes me smile because it's so Ni - you need the motivations and feelings to be wrapped up and tied in a bow. You have to understand that with Ne even we might not entirely know what we're getting at. Often we're just saying a bunch of stuff that comes to mind on a subject, seeing what conclusions might come to light. In OA's case it was probably one part venting, one part expression of confusion, one part exploring her own feelings, one part searching for answers, one part desire to hear counter-arguments etc etc. You kept searching for a single position on the matter and a single end goal. But in reality it might just have been the case of: "This is what I've noticed and it really bothers me. Let's talk about it and see where it takes us". You want the parameters to be set at the beginning but when Ne is in brainstorming/exploration mode it never considers parameters. In fact, it can be plain annoying when in Ne mode to have someone stopping us and obsessing over having everything nutted out. It's like those arguments you get between Te and Ti, where the Te user is explaining something in a general fashion and the Ti-user keeps interrupting and asking for each point to be clarified. The Te-user gets pissed off and yells, "Just wait until the end! Once we've outlined the gist of it, then we can work out all the specifics!". But of course the Ti user needs the specifics in order to see the gist of it.

I don't think you needed to spend a lot of time on the, "how did it make you feel". Sorry, I only meant to offer general pieces of advice if that's the specific question you need answered. An INFP probably wouldn't say your, "Can we get back to..." sort of statement. We say, "Here's what I think. Discuss". It's an invitation to address the points we made and for you to offer similar and alternative experiences. I suppose you and I need to come up with a way of the INFJ requesting some parameters without it sounding like stonewalling and nitpicking, and for the INFPs to get across that sometimes they're just saying stuff that comes to mind without expectations, demands or judgements attached.

The problem here, is that I felt like I was doing all of those things. I kind of took it as an unvarnished and personally tinged account, but a valid one nevertheless. Willingness to engage in discussion without being directive and pointing out stuff right away to me is validating the other person's feeling. Should I be asking about their emotional state now? I know this seems like a dumb question, but it honestly would feel so wrong if someone did that to me, that I can't guess what the response would be. It's sort of like George on Seinfeld discovering that the key to his success was to do everything exactly opposite of what he would naturally be inclined to doing. I thought I was being helpful by stating where my thinking diverged from hers and asking her how I could be more helpful in my response.

Like I said, I totally saw that you were making the effort. If I may be forward and make an observation: I think the problem is that when INFJs make the effort to engage and it doesn't work out, you feel resentful and unappreciated. This then negatively feeds how you interpret what else is said, because resentment and frustration only makes you see more judgements and negativity than perhaps exists. It's like when your attempts to adapt yourself and connect with someone fail, it is seen as a direct attack on you by the other person. They didn't recognise what you were doing or accurately feel the effects of it, and you throw your hands up an wonder "why did I even bother?". I guess it's that cause and effect thing: you believed that the cause (your intention) was apt to get the right result, but it didn't happen, and the only explanation to you for this seems to be that people deliberately refused to adhere to it. It's like you extended your hand and it was slapped away. The thing you have to realise is, people (and by that I mean all types) in most cases aren't intentionally misunderstanding your attempts or refusing your kindness; they just inadvertently fail to recognise it and your need for them to reciprocate it. You also have to realise that if you are kind enough to extend your hand, you mustn't expect expressions of gratitude. Gratitude is certainly a wonderful thing and often it's only right that people should offer it, but it is not your place to demand it (implicitly or explicitly). If you offer kindness, you can't do so with strings attached; others will end up resenting it and you are destined to end up dissatisfied.

I realise that the above is highly personal and I apologise if it is more close to home than you wanted to hear. I don't mean it as a judgement or that you should feel the need to defend yourself. I genuinely hope it helps clear up some things.

Also useful. I've noticed that this is a common way you communicate. I think I tend to think more in overall patterns over time, so often I can't think of an example when people ask me this. Therefore I don't think to ask them for one

Oh, you do do this, but perhaps it's not obvious to you. It's very much, "I share. You share". The INFP idea behind it is, if we each talk about our individual feelings/experience there isn't a judgement placed on one another, even if they differ dramatically - if it's just my feeling/experience, it doesn't invalidate yours.

Never thought of this. I'm not sure how to do it in practical terms, but it is a direction to head and sparks some thinking. Obviously my way has not been working, so I need all the help I can get!

It's basically what I wrote above. OA says "this is what INFJs do in my experience", and you say, "Sometimes when I'm actually doing ______, unfortunately INFPs seem to interpret as ____" or "well I suppose I do that sometimes but my reasoning behind it is _______" - that sort of thing. Again you did attempt this, but other issues prevented you from feeling satisfied by her responses (eg. the resentment and frustration, not voicing your confusion).

So again, it's trying to simulate the feelings etc so that you can effectively try to recreate his experience and experience it personally in your head as much as is possible?

Yes. To continue with the hypothetical above: clarifying the issues might make OA feel she understands it better, and consequently feel less resentment and that she knows how to deal with it. I suppose, it's about helping empathy along by putting things in a light she can understand. She hasn't been able to find an explanation that stirs it in her, so she needs you to offer alternative ones that reframe things. It's a Ne call for input to help re-position the Fi conclusion.

 

[Southern Kross]

So, if I had continued to insist that I had only been joking, feeling like I wasn't being given the benefit of the doubt about my motives when I stated up front that I was joking, ignoring that people had told me that I had done something inappropriate to them because I felt they were just being too closed off to listen, and other INFJs came into the thread to also explain that I had only been joking, then any INFP who had been offended and hurt by my post would have taken all of that at face value and not been hurt or offended anymore? They would see that I was just pushing back and defending my inner POV? Or, would the more realistic scenario have been that I would have been called out over and over again on my insensitivity and lack of remorse (as I think I should have been if I had continued to ignore that I had hurt some people's feelings)?

Woah, OK. Many implications in that. Now my brain hurts.

[goes away for a while to ponder]

OK, give me some leeway here because Ne takes a while to work through these things.

So I suppose what you're basically arguing is:

Person A's intentions are good
Person A's communicating method is bad (or not effective)
Person B feels hurt
Person B's reaction is bad (or simply negative in nature)
Person A should apologise

I could agree with that. I also see the point you're making: that I've effectively been arguing both sides of that. I don't deny that, although somehow I see them as slightly different too. I'm not sure how yet, but bear with me. How about another situation:

I am having a political discussion about Israel with Jewish friends and acquaintances (I myself am not Jewish, but have an even handed view of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict). I make some somewhat passionate statements about how badly Israeli soldiers behave in the West Bank. One guy strongly objects and tells me it's not true. I adamantly insist it is true as I have read a number of accounts that verify that. He accuses me of being anti-semetic. My other friends object and defend me and my opinions.

In this sense the misinterpretation is (IMO) is the fault of that other guy. I can't be expected to effectively communicate that I'm not anti-semetic while arguing my opinions on Israel. I feel that he should be the one to apologise because I found his accusation to be hurtful. Of course, I can't prove to you that I'm not anti-semetic, and I certainly know situations where that accusation is valid (see the recent discussion on Israel)...

Now I'm not saying that either your hypothetical or mine accurately represents our situation (I have to think more on that), or that I mean to attribute blame to anyone here. I can't say definitively yet what in general defines the differences of the two hypotheticals and specifically what determines whom is to blame for the miscommunication: the speaker or the listener. I just know I don't believe that the burden always lies with the speaker to communicate their point well - some duty lies with the listener to give them the benefit of the doubt.

More on being manipulated: I have seen this recently in a very small way. I'm in a group on another forum where it's about color. One person was convinced she was using color to its best advantage. The rest of the group felt she was not. There was no convincing her with argument; she was convinced her case was special. So someone finally had the idea of appealing to her reasonableness: would you just experiment with what we suggest and show the results for comment, for 10 days? And she agreed, and did it. And learned that the group was right, her eye was off. So she was manipulated in a way -- in that it had to be nonverbal -- her right brain had to be engaged, because left-brain verbalizing, analyzing, arguing was not hitting her switch where the light could go on. Perhaps it's some of this..

This is what I meant about needing the right frame of reference to understand. Perspective is everything.

Because I think until that very evident aspect of still carrying a personal wound/angst/hurt against a Type in general is removed, infj's will have a hard time believing or trusting in the persons' claim that it's just 'theoretical', as the bias is extremely evident in the posts. AND I think infj's will put on battle armor (I will, at least), or at the very least be extremely wary, if the wounded person is attempting to have an objective discussion about a Type, when it's clear they can't, really, when they already have their own ideas of that Type and what they think of it.

I think it's also something that since I (we?) pick up on, it can also for the other person end up creating a self-fulfilling prophecy, in a sense... i.e. the other person is hurt and starts thinking certain things about a Type in general, then when they encounter a new person of the type they're still hurt about or have issues with (broaden this to ANY trait one is wounded over), they're already thinking certain things of that type, the new person of that type will very likely will pick up on it, then will be wary, the person who's still hurt finds further proof, rinse and repeat.

Ah I see.

Is it that down to the INFJ distrust (for the lack of a better word) of emotions and how you don't like them getting in the muddle. In other words, if it sounds like venting (ie. about emotions), you'll support that; and if it sounds like it's about logical discussion, you'll engage in that; but if it appears to be a mix of the two, it sets off warning signals. You then want the person to verify that it either fits in one category or the other so you know the right approach to take. If that doesn't happen, things go downhill fast...

Is this on the right track?

If so, no wonder we're having issues. INFPs don't really need to make a hard and fast distinction between logic and emotions. They believe that the two can work effectively together, under the right circumstances.

EDIT: this made me go back and read what [MENTION=7111]fidelia[/MENTION] wrote earlier, and it puts it in a new light. She actually said pretty much just that but it didn't fully sink in at the time.

Perspective, perspective!

 

[PuddleRiver]

When I saw her post, it was utterly unsurprising to me... it induced an internal eye roll, to be totally honest, because I was like, here we go again, yet another post about her issues with infj's. And yes, prior to this thread I was already tired of reading about the negative experiences and the jabs (which I've noticed off and on for months, if not a year or two).

So yes, truthfully my hackles will be raised in this situation, right from the get-go, as there's such a clear personal thing the other person's trying to heal or address, without it just being pure theory and understanding/discussion/detachment. (As you describe in greater detail...) So I then feel placed in the position of being asked to somehow heal the other person / 'fix' their perception, and all of this hullabaloo occurs, bringing tons of people into it, asking people to be super vulnerable, all to heal that persons' wounds.

As for how it 'should' have been addressed from my perspective? (and this goes for any individual person on the forum who has personal wounds that have morphed into issues with an entire Type, as it's certainly not unique to OA) Take away any veneer of it being theoretical and objective, splashing across an entire type, and instead open a blog-type-thread stating you have wounds and would like input from infj's (or whatever type) to understand them or understand why you may run into bumps with that type.

Because I think until that very evident aspect of still carrying a personal wound/angst/hurt against a Type in general is removed, infj's will have a hard time believing or trusting in the persons' claim that it's just 'theoretical', as the bias is extremely evident in the posts. AND I think infj's will put on battle armor (I will, at least), or at the very least be extremely wary, if the wounded person is attempting to have an objective discussion about a Type, when it's clear they can't, really, when they already have their own ideas of that Type and what they think of it.

I think it's also something that since I (we?) pick up on, it can also for the other person end up creating a self-fulfilling prophecy, in a sense... i.e. the other person is hurt and starts thinking certain things about a Type in general, then when they encounter a new person of the type they're still hurt about or have issues with (broaden this to ANY trait one is wounded over), they're already thinking certain things of that type, the new person of that type will very likely will pick up on it, then will be wary, the person who's still hurt finds further proof, rinse and repeat.

Yes, this.

 

[Eilonwy]

I'm going through some difficult stuff irl, so I'm just not up to this thread any more. I'm not begging out of answering [MENTION=5871]Southern Kross[/MENTION], I am just emotionally worn out.

I would like everyone to consider this:
both sides want respect
both sides want their feelings heard and validated
both sides want their responses to be taken as sincere and not to be assumed to be a liar from the get-go
both sides get frustrated when they don't get what they want
both sides get frustrated when they don't feel heard
both sides get defensive after several rounds of miscommunication

I think you can safely substitute "both sides" with "most humans". Maybe instead of endlessly trying to explain ourselves to each other, we could try communicating a bit more simply. When you don't feel heard, say "I don't feel that you're hearing me". When you feel a question or statement was hurtful, say "this statement hurt my feelings because..." You don't have to pour out your heart and soul and feel vulnerable, just state the effect and why, so that there's some information to work with. If something's not adding up, then say "I think there's some miscommunication going on". Find a common language. Keep it simple. I think most of the people involved in this thread are decent people who are really trying to figure this out, so why don't we all give each other the benefit of the doubt for the first few rounds and not immediately jump to the conclusion that the other person is delusional?

I don't know about other types, but for me, examples help. Maybe in INFP speak that should be "stories" help. I know that language isn't always precise. But everyone maybe needs to quit being so hung up on specific words being used and try to see the spirit behind the words. Or ask for clarification. Or say "This is what this means to me". ALL OF US HAVE BLIND SPOTS. Try to not denigrate people for their blind spots, even though it drives you nuts, because you may get back what you gave and you may not like it when it's aimed at you. Or go vent about it in a blog. Is it better to tell someone they're stupid, or to figure out the way to teach them?

By the way, I'm just as fallible and ignorant as everyone else because it took this whole ugly mess of a thread to clarify the above for me. I'm not above making mistakes, being petty, getting defensive, saying the wrong thing out of frustration or anger, being hurtful, or whatever. But I don't think it's very nice of anybody who doesn't even know me to expect me to be vulnerable on demand for hurts that someone else has caused them. I will take full responsibility for the hurt I've caused. If I've said or done something that's hurt you, tell me. I may still stand by the point I was trying to make, but I don't want to hurt people's feelings in the process. Saying you're sorry for hurting someone's feelings doesn't mean that the point you were trying to make isn't valid. It means you were sorry that you hurt someone's feelings. But maybe you should reconsider your point, too, to see if it's still valid.


ETA: I think not joining in a discussion is a valid option and no one/no group should be accused of anything for not joining in.

 

[Eilonwy]

Woah, OK. Many implications in that. Now my brain hurts.

I apologize for not answering your whole post. Maybe I'll get back to it, but, as I said in my post above, I have stuff irl that I'm dealing with right now. I did want to say that this disconnect in communication between the groups is why the INFJs have been saying that it has SEEMED that it was okay with the INFPs for for OA to act a certain way and say certain things in a certain tone of voice, but it didn't SEEM to be okay for the INFJs to act the same way or say the same things in the same tone of voice. In other words, it SEEMED to be okay for OA to hurt our feelings, but not for us to hurt hers, and not for us to even say that it was possible that she might have hurt our feelings. I don't know, because I don't know enough about the differences between us to be sure, but my guess is that you are taking each interaction on it's own, while we are comparing interactions and distilling them down to their similarities and differences? I really don't like to speak for everyone on either side, but it seemed to be the best way to illustrate the point.



I haven't been able to give a lot of thought to the whole INFP/INFJ feelings vs. ideas thing, but just so everyone knows, I have feelings that can be hurt, too. So if you assume that because I type as INFJ that you are not hurting my feelings by using a particular tone of voice or whatever, because typology says that I'm more attached to my ideas, then you are assuming wrong. It might be best to start off thinking of each other as PEOPLE first and TYPES last.


ETA: Your Israeli example, and what I've seen said several times in this thread about INFJs, assumes that the person arguing against you is in denial that there are people who act badly, but it has been said over and over by several INFJs that they agree that "there are soldiers who have acted badly in the West Bank" but they are also saying "I may be Israeli and a soldier, but I am not one of those soldiers acting badly. If I were in the same situation, I either don't know how I'd act or I think I would act in a better manner." Are all INFPS exactly alike? Will all of you treat me exactly the same way? Do you all share the exact same faults? If I have a problem with one of you, should I go to any of you that are available and yell at that person to make it better? I can do that if that's how it works, but I bet you wouldn't like it any more than the INFJs have liked it.


Another way of looking at it: In your Israeli example, are you also accusing the one guy who objected to your West Bank statement of BEING one of those soldiers acting badly? Are you telling him that he has to own up to behaving just like those soldiers in the West Bank are behaving?

 

[Eilonwy]

P.S. Hopefully, my last two posts don't come across as too abrupt. I'm in a hurry this morning and I don't know if that is affecting my tone.

 

[Society]

But I don't think it's very nice of anybody who doesn't even know me to expect me to be vulnerable on demand for hurts that someone else has caused them. I will take full responsibility for the hurt I've caused.

that is an interesting framing, to which you are not the first, and i think illustrates the difference between Ni and Ne on multiply layers.

1. causality.
from your perspective, the cause is a linear projection:
people where hurt by things other people do, and 'expected' you to be vulnerable because of that.

from my perspective, the mutual benefit seemed obvious: the capacity to experience remorse summarized all the entries made against INFJs and was the most viable ground to disprove them.

it's not that "helping" was my goal - i am not trying to frame it that way and i've being honest about my reasons, but i thought the INFJs on the defensive would have an interest in participating because of it. i can have an invested interest in it for my reasons, and you can have invested interest in disproving the claims made about you. neither interest subtracts from the mutual benefit. for me, whether people have chosen to be vulnerable to disprove the claims or whether they did so out of empathy and kindness, or - what in my mind was most likely - a little of both, only matters in telling me about them and future interactions, but doesn't in itself take away from the results.

in other words, the fact i traded apples for oranges doesn't mean the other person didn't give me oranges. one framing doesn't cancel out another by virtue of being a different frame, it's merely that through internal contradictions between the frames clarification can be given to what something means or implies - the larger frame might not mean he didn't give me oranges, but it does mean i can't truthfully claim that he stole the apples from me.


2. the extent of vulnerability.
i think there's a difference in how i judged the extent of vulnerability. i did feel very exposed when posting my own example of remorse, but while people where framing it as "asking for blood" or - this one i've gotten else where in regards to this - "open heart surgery", not to mention the few (thankfully rare) examples of people reverting to a claim of not being the sort of people who'd have anything to be remorseful for, i honestly just wanted to scream, "are you kidding me? we are all adults here. we have all lived long enough to have being wrong and to find out we did wrong by others. we all have those scars.".

the thing is, while the shame of the unintended consequences and hurt to others is probably equal, i didn't estimate the extent of personal meaning being wrong can hold in itself, since Ne-Ji means you are endlessly saying "wrong" to yourself, discarding your notions and filtering them out. you develop a pretty tough skin for being wrong, and its nearly impossible for me to imagine not having it, so i may have drastically underestimated how deep the scar would go without it.

3. the expectation
the expressed belief that if one doesn't choose to give examples of their own remorse, they would be "implying that they can't". this again implies a linear trajectory of meaning, wherein one thing can only mean one thing. for me it could mean any number of things, anywhere from "i don't want to talk about it" to "i could but i'd rather use my free time to watch tv and eat pizza". even "hey dude, you've being really cutthroat with a few of my friends, i don't feel comfortable being exposed to you" was highly plausible in my mind. i don't see how or why that one specific trajectory of meaning or "guilt-by-omission" would be standing above the rest.

that's why from my perspective, it seems we're all consenting participants in the conversation. i didn't see how anyone is being forced into anything...

and i still don't understand that sentiment to be honest:
right now, i could be playing chess. by not doing so, i am stating i am a bad chess player?
right now, i could be cooking. by not doing so, i am somehow stating i can't cook?
right now, i could be coding. by not doing so, it means i am terrible at my profession?

i just don't see it. i mean, i can see why Ni might chose to focus on one trajectory of meaning, but i have no idea why so many INFJs here have chosen that specific one.

 

[Eilonwy]

[MENTION=5871]Southern Kross[/MENTION], in the interest of clarity, I forgot to say that the Israeli argument as stated in your post makes perfect sense to me. It's the part I added and asked about that has been the point of contention, in my view (that since I'm Israeli and a soldier, I am also as bad as the West Bank soldiers). Perhaps what I see in the posts, you don't see, which is fine. In that case, what would be appreciated is the acknowledgement that we aren't seeing the same things, possibly trying to work out where the problem is, and that both sides are sincerely trying and not just being difficult to be difficult. If the same stuff keeps getting repeated over and over, by different people, that says that there is a message there that is being missed and it should be taken seriously and not dismissed. This applies to honest efforts, because I realize that there are people who just like to jerk chains.

By the way, it took me this long to get to this point, too. Some of this has been rolling around in my head, but I didn't know how to express it or what point I was trying to make until now.

[MENTION=15291]Mane[/MENTION], I don't have time to delve into your post right now, but I'm not ignoring it.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

I did want to say that this disconnect in communication between the groups is why the INFJs have been saying that it has SEEMED that it was okay with the INFPs for for OA to act a certain way and say certain things in a certain tone of voice, but it didn't SEEM to be okay for the INFJs to act the same way or say the same things in the same tone of voice. In other words, it SEEMED to be okay for OA to hurt our feelings, but not for us to hurt hers, and not for us to even say that it was possible that she might have hurt our feelings. I don't know, because I don't know enough about the differences between us to be sure, but my guess is that you are taking each interaction on it's own, while we are comparing interactions and distilling them down to their similarities and differences? I really don't like to speak for everyone on either side, but it seemed to be the best way to illustrate the point.

This is the point I was trying to make earlier. This is something Ni does internally- we compare contexts first, then apply our own judgment (which is *why* the processing is so slow), whereas Ne does this work aloud- focusing instead on applying introverted judgment to the isolated and immediate context and then bouncing the product of that off others. It can come across (at times) as hypocritical, like they are trying to propose some half-assed, self-serving resolution because putting forth raw theories without attempting to put it in context first is foreign to us; we *see* someone presenting raw batter and ‘trying to pass it off as cake’ because it’s so hard to imagine not ‘cooking’ things before saying them aloud.

I’m not quite sure how to reconcile this. I think on our end, at least part of this reconciliation means trying to remember that what looks like *playing stupid* (or ‘trying to enforce a really self-serving, short-sighted pov’) is actually just ‘presenting raw batter where we would be presenting finished cake’. Getting offended by it is, I believe, projecting a tendency to prioritize doing that work internally (I suspect seeing Fe’ers as ‘believing we are RIGHT’ is similarly about projecting a tendency to prioritize introverted judgment about an immediate/isolated context….and expecting us to be able to share brand new judgment immediately- which we can’t do because it isn’t our priority to investigate new judgment immediately.....eta: and the truth is rather that we've just put judgment completely on hold). So we can try to keep this in mind, but it really doesn’t make it any less taxing to be pummeled by someone needing to work through raw Pe aloud (especially overzealous Pe’ers).


/might be making things up (TM Kalach)


eta: The thing is though, some Pe'ers really are just trying to relentlessly enforce a self-serving, short-sighted pov as 'the whole truth'.....just like some Je'ers really do believe they are RIGHT. How do people of the opposing team learn to tell the difference? I can generally tell with Je'ers- the difference between someone being slow on the uptake and someone being completely resistant to new information.....but with Pe, I have a hard time knowing.

eta 2: Incidentally, this^^ is like a Cliff Notes (of another Cliff Notes) of the thread [MENTION=6275]the state i am in[/MENTION] started about Pe a week or so ago, I'm pretty sure.

 

[Tiltyred]

*wishes for a Like button*

 

[PeaceBaby]

[MENTION=5723]Tiltyred[/MENTION]: can I ask you a question?

In the post you made in response to my "owie" post, I told you in my reply I felt hurt, but I didn't really share the extent of that, and I'm still having some strong emotions about it.

Did you intend to hurt me with your words, hurt my feelings? For some reason, I really need to know. It sure felt like you took aim and shot me right through.

So, if you don't mind and it's not too much trouble, can tell me what you were thinking and feeling when you replied? Maybe it would help me process this. Either way, I still hit the reset button and I'm good with that. I just need some more info to work through my emotions on the matter.

Thanks.

 

[cascadeco]

Ah I see.

Is it that down to the INFJ distrust (for the lack of a better word) of emotions and how you don't like them getting in the muddle. In other words, if it sounds like venting (ie. about emotions), you'll support that; and if it sounds like it's about logical discussion, you'll engage in that; but if it appears to be a mix of the two, it sets off warning signals. You then want the person to verify that it either fits in one category or the other so you know the right approach to take. If that doesn't happen, things go downhill fast...

Is this on the right track?

Well, yes, I think that's definitely some of it.

Maybe in the end it's a lot of it, and you're just using different words to convey the same idea. It's really more about a 'mismatch' in intention from my pov.. maybe it's the same as Z Buck's and fidelia's 'mixed signals' phrase used throughout this thread; like, it's frustrating to be told by a person that they're wanting to discuss theoreticals (thus bringing in a supposedly all-encompassing List), when that isn't really the case and they can't be neutral or fully able to discuss theory objectively because if they were neutral/objective they wouldn't have such a strong angst or complex with an entire type in the first place. I realize though that OA never claimed to be neutral/objective, but yeah, to echo some others there was a lot of bias already built up from past experiences. Same for Mane.

So any Ne-thoughts thrown out there are going to have a strong bias towards the already preconceived notions that they have. It's difficult on the receiving end to just take that and still continue to be 'objective' and logical, while also learning later on that part of their aim is very selfish in nature, in wanting to shift their own perceptions. The result is many of the things you're trying to discuss aren't even being framed in a purely logical light, they're very layered with emotion and that bias resulting from hurt as well, so it's a very bizarre situation to be placed in, to be discussing theory, whilst in the process also being prompted to 'prove', and so on, to heal someones' own wounds.

Anyway, I am sure I have been guilty of components of the above sometimes; I'm just trying to explain.

And as Z Buck just posted, a lot does have to do with Ni vs Ne, J vs P, etc.

If so, no wonder we're having issues. INFPs don't really need to make a hard and fast distinction between logic and emotions. They believe that the two can work effectively together, under the right circumstances.

Yeah, that may be a lot of it.

EDIT: this made me go back and read what [MENTION=7111]fidelia[/MENTION] wrote earlier, and it puts it in a new light. She actually said pretty much just that but it didn't fully sink in at the time.

Perspective, perspective!

Oh man, no worries...I'm sure there are things that totally haven't sunk in for me, or cases where I'm thinking I understand something but really don't.

 

[Tiltyred]

PeaceBaby, sugarpie, I did not intend to hurt your feelings, and I'm sorry if I did.

[MENTION=5723]Tiltyred[/MENTION]: can I ask you a question?

In the post you made in response to my "owie" post, I told you in my reply I felt hurt, but I didn't really share the extent of that, and I'm still having some strong emotions about it.

Did you intend to hurt me with your words, hurt my feelings? For some reason, I really need to know. It sure felt like you took aim and shot me right through.

So, if you don't mind and it's not too much trouble, can tell me what you were thinking and feeling when you replied? Maybe it would help me process this. Either way, I still hit the reset button and I'm good with that. I just need some more info to work through my emotions on the matter.

Thanks.

 

[sorenx7]

The Waste Land

T. S. Eliot
Abstract

Nam Sibyllam quidem Cumis ego ipse oculis meis vidi in ampulla pendere, et cum illi pueri dicerent: Sibylla ti theleis; respondebat illa: apothanein thelo.

[I have seen with my own eyes the Sibyl hanging in a jar, and when the boys asked her “What do you want?” She answered, “I want to die.”]


The effect of this thread on me and probably many others by this point.

 

[cascadeco]

The Waste Land

T. S. Eliot
Abstract

Nam Sibyllam quidem Cumis ego ipse oculis meis vidi in ampulla pendere, et cum illi pueri dicerent: Sibylla ti theleis; respondebat illa: apothanein thelo.

[I have seen with my own eyes the Sibyl hanging in a jar, and when the boys asked her “What do you want?” She answered, “I want to die.”]


The effect of this thread on me and probably many others by this point.

Indeed. I'm sure you're happy to be contributing to it. Your posts are just as dead-horse as everyone elses'.

 

[Southern Kross]

I apologize for not answering your whole post. Maybe I'll get back to it, but, as I said in my post above, I have stuff irl that I'm dealing with right now. I did want to say that this disconnect in communication between the groups is why the INFJs have been saying that it has SEEMED that it was okay with the INFPs for for OA to act a certain way and say certain things in a certain tone of voice, but it didn't SEEM to be okay for the INFJs to act the same way or say the same things in the same tone of voice. In other words, it SEEMED to be okay for OA to hurt our feelings, but not for us to hurt hers, and not for us to even say that it was possible that she might have hurt our feelings.

Valid points

I don't know, because I don't know enough about the differences between us to be sure, but my guess is that you are taking each interaction on it's own, while we are comparing interactions and distilling them down to their similarities and differences? I really don't like to speak for everyone on either side, but it seemed to be the best way to illustrate the point.

You are right that I compare and contrast and then look for patterns in points of distinction. Your example, didn't help distill it down - it opened up new possibilities which is great and I thank you for it.

I haven't been able to give a lot of thought to the whole INFP/INFJ feelings vs. ideas thing, but just so everyone knows, I have feelings that can be hurt, too. So if you assume that because I type as INFJ that you are not hurting my feelings by using a particular tone of voice or whatever, because typology says that I'm more attached to my ideas, then you are assuming wrong. It might be best to start off thinking of each other as PEOPLE first and TYPES last.

And this is totally what I do IRL. Fi in particular values the individual. I just like talking about patterns in people here because it can help guide me in how I read individuals. When I mentioned the Feelings vs. Ideas issue it was merely a generalisation and isn't meant to reflect all people, in all situations, at all times. I never meant to imply INFJs aren't hurt when their feelings are devalued.

ETA: Your Israeli example, and what I've seen said several times in this thread about INFJs, assumes that the person arguing against you is in denial that there are people who act badly, but it has been said over and over by several INFJs that they agree that "there are soldiers who have acted badly in the West Bank" but they are also saying "I may be Israeli and a soldier, but I am not one of those soldiers acting badly. If I were in the same situation, I either don't know how I'd act or I think I would act in a better manner." Are all INFPS exactly alike? Will all of you treat me exactly the same way? Do you all share the exact same faults? If I have a problem with one of you, should I go to any of you that are available and yell at that person to make it better? I can do that if that's how it works, but I bet you wouldn't like it any more than the INFJs have liked it.

Another way of looking at it: In your Israeli example, are you also accusing the one guy who objected to your West Bank statement of BEING one of those soldiers acting badly? Are you telling him that he has to own up to behaving just like those soldiers in the West Bank are behaving?

I'm not quite sure how to reply to this.

I've written several different answers and I've deleted each of them. I feel uncertain about what I think about this.

Southern Kross, in the interest of clarity, I forgot to say that the Israeli argument as stated in your post makes perfect sense to me. It's the part I added and asked about that has been the point of contention, in my view (that since I'm Israeli and a soldier, I am also as bad as the West Bank soldiers). Perhaps what I see in the posts, you don't see, which is fine. In that case, what would be appreciated is the acknowledgement that we aren't seeing the same things, possibly trying to work out where the problem is, and that both sides are sincerely trying and not just being difficult to be difficult. If the same stuff keeps getting repeated over and over, by different people, that says that there is a message there that is being missed and it should be taken seriously and not dismissed. This applies to honest efforts, because I realize that there are people who just like to jerk chains.

By the way, it took me this long to get to this point, too. Some of this has been rolling around in my head, but I didn't know how to express it or what point I was trying to make until now.

Forgive me if I haven't made this clear, but I do see both sides and I totally realise that we're seeing different things. I never assumed you or any of the other INFJs were just trying to be difficult either. Please understand that when I defend OA, I seek to explain not necessarily to excuse or even justify (in this case I believe it is not for me to do that). When I see an argument where people are at cross-purposes, I feel compelled to try and explain why that tension is occurring in the hopes of uncrossing those wires, without necessarily a judgement over whom is to blame for that. I realise that the can sound invalidating and dismissive to you, because I didn't express my recognition of your hurt well enough, and I apologise for that. I imagined that you understood my purpose and that we were having a friendly conversation about the issue. I didn't know that that would seem like I was continuing to dig at an open wound. If I keep at the issue, I only meant that as a post-mortem, analysing what possibly went wrong - not to continue any arguments or to deny that you have a may have a point (which I whole-heartedly believe you do).

You have to understand that with Ne, multiple, seemingly contradictory, beliefs and intentions can be held at once. I'm OK with doing that and don't see that as problematic, but I sometimes forget that people will always want to place me in one camp or another (again, see the thread on Israel).

 

[Z Buck McFate]

I realize though that OA never claimed to be neutral/objective, but yeah, to echo some others there was a lot of bias already built up from past experiences. Same for Mane.

Yeah, it's kinda weird, she did flat out admit it was partly venting almost right away. Yet there was still very much something about the approach (and trying to present things 'objectively'?) that made the INFJ white noise-ometer go crazy. I've been back through the beginning of the thread out of curiosity and still can't really pinpoint it. [But boy howdy, it's still there.]



Though I did find this:

(Was already in the middle of thrashing and flailing and punching the air yelling obscenities and gets Bologna right in the jaw)

...has anyone seen or heard from Bologna? Someone should maybe make sure he's not lying unconscious somewhere.