User Tag List

First 2634353637384686 Last

Results 351 to 360 of 941

  1. #351
    Glycerine
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Starry View Post
    ^^I do not believe the above is actually occurring do you?? @PeaceBaby ?

    I mean, I believe OA is interested in the INFJ response to her list (she's asked for it enough times). But an invitation to some sort of collaborative effort? That's laughable. I've only ever seen 'Any INFJs want to cop to this?' Come on now. Here is OA's message in a nutshell:

    1.) INFJs are not Gods they actually kinda suck - here's why
    2.) INFPs are superior
    3.) I'm special

    I'm not saying the list doesn't have what highlander referred to as 'grains of truth'. But we are never going to be able to discuss it if we keep pretending OA is one of the 'excessively humble'. I'm just trying to put an end to the 'white noise' here - that's all.
    I honestly could see much of what OA was saying in a theoretical sense... not that it necessary applied to whole group.

    But the whole "INFJs aren't remorseful... tell us your stories" tangent in this thread was seriously manipulative BS under the facade of true understanding and theoretical hogwash. From what I could see it seemed like a major guilt trip and then asking random strangers to be emotionally vulnerable and open. When the personal gets injected, it stops being impersonal theoretical analysis.

  2. #352
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiltyred View Post
    (comment deleted, on second thought)
    Interesting to see that NJs feel the need to have second thoughts.

    As for the rest of you: Are you sure you're not all Si-doms? Get over this conversation. It's the same few points being repeated repeated continuously or begin hostilities immediately. INFJ's suck, INFPs are superior to INFJ (though that's not saying much at all!) and we are special....though dare I say it's closer to special ed at times. How many INFPs have wondered at one point in their lives whether they may be mentally retarded? I know I have!

    The repetition is trolling my cerebral cortex. So get on with blowing each other away. Let the two mentally deranged N types wipe each other out, there is something seriously wrong with INFJs and sadly INFPs are fucked up too.

  3. #353
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    228

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Starry View Post
    ^^I do not believe the above is actually occurring do you?? @PeaceBaby ?

    I mean, I believe OA is interested in the INFJ response to her list (she's asked for it enough times). But an invitation to some sort of collaborative effort? That's laughable. I've only ever seen 'Any INFJs want to cop to this?' Come on now. Here is OA's message in a nutshell:

    1.) INFJs are not Gods they actually kinda suck - here's why
    2.) INFPs are superior
    3.) I'm special

    I'm not saying the list doesn't have what highlander referred to as 'grains of truth'. But we are never going to be able to discuss it if we keep pretending OA is one of the 'excessively humble'. I'm just trying to put an end to the 'white noise' here - that's all.
    What do you know of humility? Seriously, I have an ENFJ friend who knows a lot about humility, probably a lot more than I do. I know much less about ENFP behavior, though. Are ENFPs known for being humble and in a position to detect whether or not someone is humble? I do, however, see what looks like humility in OA.

  4. #354
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    228

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Standuble View Post
    Interesting to see that NJs feel the need to have second thoughts.

    As for the rest of you: Are you sure you're not all Si-doms? Get over this conversation. It's the same few points being repeated repeated continuously or begin hostilities immediately. INFJ's suck, INFPs are superior to INFJ (though that's not saying much at all!) and we are special....though dare I say it's closer to special ed at times. How many INFPs have wondered at one point in their lives whether they may be mentally retarded? I know I have!

    The repetition is trolling my cerebral cortex. So get on with blowing each other away. Let the two mentally deranged N types wipe each other out, there is something seriously wrong with INFJs and sadly INFPs are fucked up too.
    Sadly, I have to agree with most of this. I'd also add that this thread has become more tedious than reading Hegel and that I was a fool for not leaving when I said I would.

  5. #355
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sorenx7 View Post
    Sadly, I have to agree with most of this. I'd also add that this thread has become more tedious than reading Hegel and that I was a fool for not leaving when I said I would.
    I just leave, get on with my life and return every couple of days and throw a few grenades. More fun that way.

  6. #356
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    ^ what just happened here? Naughty INFP's, off to the corner with you on a time out!



    -----

    There's so much added to the thread I can't take it all in atm. @Z Buck McFate, @fidelia, @cascadeco, @highlander, @Tiltyred - thanks for all that, but it will take me time to process and deliver a cogent response.

    Maybe a response isn't really even needed, just an acknowledgement.

    @ all the INFJ's - I hear what you're saying about what's a helpful approach. Thanks for sharing all of that. Maybe that's really the bottom line. To get the result we INFP's want, we need to play in your sandbox. In choosing not to do so, asking you to our sandbox, we do take on the risk of not being able to play with you at all. So, if we care about that, it's something to keep in mind. And I don't want to throw sand in your eyes. That's not enjoyable for anybody. If you're not having fun with me in my sandbox, it's a strong indication that the message really, truly is in a blind spot for you.

    I'm not saying that to be provocative at all, just pragmatic. To really explore whether we can play together in the Fi playground was a great premise to check out though.

    I do appreciate that to you it's the "white noise" you need to tune out. And I appreciate all the INFJ's who really, really do try to hear, to understand. I know that you are trying, and I know it's because you do care. After all, ultimately I realize that what I need you to do is tantamount to asking you not to be wired the way you are.

    So thanks again for a great thought-provoking, awe-inspiring thread.

    -----

    Quote Originally Posted by Starry View Post
    ^^I do not believe the above is actually occurring do you?? @PeaceBaby ?

    I mean, I believe OA is interested in the INFJ response to her list (she's asked for it enough times). But an invitation to some sort of collaborative effort? That's laughable. I've only ever seen 'Any INFJs want to cop to this?' Come on now. Here is OA's message in a nutshell:

    1.) INFJs are not Gods they actually kinda suck - here's why
    2.) INFPs are superior
    3.) I'm special

    I'm not saying the list doesn't have what highlander referred to as 'grains of truth'. But we are never going to be able to discuss it if we keep pretending OA is one of the 'excessively humble'. I'm just trying to put an end to the 'white noise' here - that's all.
    OA and I do tend to differ in approach - I would say she's more abrasive (and she would say I'm more milquetoast, to use an equally undesirable word). But I can totally relate to her need to be unvarnished, as I share that. I've poked around the edges sharing my "Fi truth" here in the past and it wasn't met with as much success as I would have hoped for either. So, I am not going to condemn her attempt.

    To answer the question, no, she's not "excessively humble" in this thread. She can sound nasty at times. I don't see that "nastiness" directed towards any individuals though. So, I see her saying #1 in thread, yes. But #2 and #3, no.

    I do admire the risks she takes though ... it's not easy.
    "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

  7. #357
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    ^ what just happened here? Naughty INFP's, off to the corner with you on a time out!



    -----

    There's so much added to the thread I can't take it all in atm. @Z Buck McFate, @fidelia, @highlander, @Tiltyred - thanks for all that, but it will take me time to process and deliver a cogent response.

    Maybe a response isn't really even needed, just an acknowledgement.

    @ all the INFJ's - I hear what you're saying about what's a helpful approach. Thanks for sharing all of that. Maybe that's really the bottom line. To get the result we INFP's want, we need to play in your sandbox. In choosing not to do so, asking you to our sandbox, we do take on the risk of not being able to play with you at all. So, if we care about that, it's something to keep in mind. And I don't want to throw sand in your eyes. That's not enjoyable for anybody. If you're not having fun with me in my sandbox, it's a strong indication that the message really, truly is in a blind spot for you.

    I'm not saying that to be provocative at all, just pragmatic. To really explore whether we can play together in the Fi playground was a great premise to check out though.

    I do appreciate that to you it's the "white noise" you need to tune out. And I appreciate all the INFJ's who really, really do try to hear, to understand. I know that you are trying, and I know it's because you do care. After all, ultimately I realize that what I need you to do is tantamount to asking you not to be wired the way you are.

    So thanks again for a great thought-provoking, awe-inspiring thread.

    -----



    OA and I do tend to differ in approach - I would say she's more abrasive (and she would say I'm more milquetoast, to use an equally undesirable word). But I can totally relate to her need to be unvarnished, as I share that. I've poked around the edges sharing my "Fi truth" here in the past and it wasn't met with as much success as I would have hoped for either. So, I am not going to condemn her attempt.

    To answer the question, no, she's not "excessively humble" in this thread. She can sound nasty at times. I don't see that "nastiness" directed towards any individuals though. So, I see her saying #1 in thread, yes. But #2 and #3, no.

    I do admire the risks she takes though ... it's not easy.
    She single handedly took on a legion of INFJ and didn't just live to tell the tale but ended up practically coming out on top. Truly admirable, I wish I had her patience and her technique.

    I have two questions for you: 1) Who defines what is a helpful approach or not? Does it not depend on situation, circumstance and participant? 2) Is playing in the INFJ's sandbox really what INFP's want? It's not what I want, I feel I understand the theory of how NiFe works from pure study and that their individual facets are not my concern. I do empathise with them but to only a degree and no further than that, understanding them on a personal level has no place in my values at all. My message to INFJs: Just make yourselves useful in creating innovative systems which are accurate and implementable in the real world (if you can) and allow others to implement it if they see the need for it. But some of the ideas and action plans I have seen online INFJs suggest have been terrible IMO (one was built fanatically around moral objectivism and many others have echoes of the same outlook.) Seeing patterns which do not have to be true in only the incoming data you take notice of + auxilary Fe understanding of ethical systems + indefinately out of touch in regards not just how the world works but the subtle nuances of an individual's ethics = The INFJ. This is the INFJ's gift to the world and it is a gift I am very likely to find myself returning to the shop.

    Unless you had a different meaning by "playing in a sandbox" than what I determined, I am pretty tired.

  8. #358
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    Thanks for your questions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Standuble View Post
    1) Who defines what is a helpful approach or not? Does it not depend on situation, circumstance and participant?
    Highly subjective. Yes, it does rely on a variety of factors.

    2) Is playing in the INFJ's sandbox really what INFP's want?
    That is the question, isn't it?
    "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

  9. #359
    Senior Member the state i am in's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    infj
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    i think infps have a much stronger sense of core self. and they're more willing to take responsibility for this core self. sometimes. other times, they love being wrong. their way of acting out is to stay with a core self that even they deem illogical, contradictory, and wrong. sometimes they want to flaunt it, feeling like everyone is against them (i have observed this with 4w5 in particular/ 9w1s use denial more). an infp 4w5 friend of mine does this oscillation sometimes. he shifts between being the most accepting person i know and the least accepting. in knowingly, self-consciously absurd ways. i'm sure there's a corollary for nfj (i think most in typological circles would say that it's usually more pronounced with enfj than infj in part because of the increasing F reliance of Fe dom. like how, when i started here, enfjs were absurdly demonized and treated like they were only the worst of their type in nearly all circumstances because people couldn't deal with or accept the blindspots and negative behaviors that would be part of that range of motion. kind of like how we now demonize S, which is more of a way of relating than an inherently valid critique). infjs tend to be annoyingly precious more than they tend to be domineering. they tend to recede from rather than jump into conflict. F doms have more oomph in this regard (although less so for self-preservational types).

    F in general, Fe or Fi, at times loses its continuity and makes strange, abrupt judgments. when we dig in our heels. with Fi, it's i get to be myself no matter the consequences for others. for Fe, it's more whether or not i get to use the expectations (the way we represent things) for my own benefit or not (this notion of the ideas of self that we can attach to and perform and persuade others are the proper representations for what we are within a particular social context). the Fi way can be selfish just like the Fe way can be selfish. they both BEGIN from selfishness. and the only way that changes is development, self-improvement, and realizing the limitations of both methods.

    the way southern kross reads oa is so interesting to me. it makes me think within the infp perspective maybe there is something valid to what oa is trying to do. when from other perspectives (tho certainly not all), when from what i deem a broader view of the place of Fi within the scheme of things, it seems hypocritical and contradictory and very baiting (even if there is a way of empathizing with what she's trying to do, when she's also trying to argue that others are unjust for not recognizing the effects on herself and others when she does not seem to find that balance for her actions within this thread). being baiting, however, is very difficult to avoid for me personally, so i can sympathize to some degree. along with having a sometimes narrow view and attaching to a story that has not grasped the story for others (the so perspective) very clearly. it's at these times that it becomes especially noticeable--that we all have presuppositions consciously recognized or not that we employ when we say anything that usually puts our own ways of constructing things in a kind of privileged position. Pe equating itself with "reality" is one of those things. it just means observability. and it's still littered with unreflexive Je. it always is. as soon as you speak it. just like Je is always littered with unreflexive Pe, with details of experiences that have been squashed and ignored in the process of guessing what things are (the process of preparing a message about something that will be intelligible for others to get the gist in the best way. the rhetoric of it all). meanwhile, it can be fucking irritating for Fi types when Fe starts responding to imaginary juries. because dammit, this has affected ME. whether the jury agrees or not. that she wanted to jump in and get some Te work done to establish this and improve upon it is understandable, but it led to a lot of assumptions that showed a lack of listening as well. this is the F trap we all get stuck in, regardless of the underlying politics of socio-cognitive type. but is a very useful point to make to help infjs see what it's like for an infp, when we make our own brand of the same genre of mistake.

    moreover, the perhaps all-encompassing Pe that we are accused of lacking often doesn't seem to be working extremely well at getting where we are coming from either. it's not observing us very well. and so it's speed at writing explanations doesn't really matter if it doesn't listen to us. because if it is observing us well, and it's just choosing an approach that seems like it's made to fuck with us, what do we do about that? because it's choosing to do something to us against our will. because if it's aware that this feels like an attack to us and chooses to proceed, it's still potentially useful to us but in a way that does not inspire a desire to share or collaborate or HELP each other that is negotiable and straightforward/sincere. that's the weird paradox we feel when we are accused in the way we have been. maybe it is just an issue of miscommunicating the domains in which we think we have observed something worth testing for generalizable validity. making a kind of knowledge claim that is meant to imply a different status than it sounds like on the page to us. but that's why if oa had just told a specific story and allowed us to posit hypothetical explanations loosely based on type, it would have been much less egregious than making a "just the facts" objective impersonal claim that was loaded with presupposition and pejorative judgment about a general category rather than individuals she had concretely experienced (a community rather than an individual or even a specific behavior, when an experience or set of experiences with an individual from a particular perspective is STILL not enough to define the totality of that person). or even, "i've had some issues with these behaviors, do they relate to you as infjs? could you see yourself running into problems with them?" so much different than how she approached it.

  10. #360
    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 PeaceBaby View Post
    @ all the INFJ's - I hear what you're saying about what's a helpful approach. Thanks for sharing all of that. Maybe that's really the bottom line. To get the result we INFP's want, we need to play in your sandbox. In choosing not to do so, asking you to our sandbox, we do take on the risk of not being able to play with you at all. So, if we care about that, it's something to keep in mind. And I don't want to throw sand in your eyes. That's not enjoyable for anybody. If you're not having fun with me in my sandbox, it's a strong indication that the message really, truly is in a blind spot for you.

    I'm not saying that to be provocative at all, just pragmatic. To really explore whether we can play together in the Fi playground was a great premise to check out though.

    I do appreciate that to you it's the "white noise" you need to tune out. And I appreciate all the INFJ's who really, really do try to hear, to understand. I know that you are trying, and I know it's because you do care. After all, ultimately I realize that what I need you to do is tantamount to asking you not to be wired the way you are.
    well, it seems like we're negotiating the pragmatics but also the sense of justice at the same time. we're calling behaviors the "Fi playground" and it's difficult to see why you see this as the Fi way rather than as a negative behavior. this is the crux, right? going back and forth between the cases made against infj or against infp? that we both think the other side has behaved unjustly, and we're deciding whether we can find that acceptable as a "typological difference" or whether we can actually build a consensus that allows us to not only validate the other's perspective but also compromise, to find conditions that we both can find mutually acceptable in a way that feels balanced to both parties.

    what are the rules of the Fi playground? do you agree that oa's description was lacking neutrality and adding negative value judgments while purporting to be "just the facts?" is that required for the Fi playground to be authentic? is it because that's what is already there and it's simply too difficult to sound out the feeling without these presuppositions? is there a timing to this process that we are not respecting? can we find a common language to critique not the experience of the other but the expression of it, not as a way to invalidate it but to simply TEST it, to allow ourselves to see how it stands up? does Fi just not have the generalizable sensitivity that Fe has, just like Fe might miss out on the particular aspects of another person's story, where they're coming from, that makes it unfair to focus on the generalizability issues of their articulation when their experience, empathetically speaking, makes sense and would be presumptuous to judge when it has its own conditions and factors that we haven't even begun to explore when we, even if just passively, control how things are said/enacted?

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    OA and I do tend to differ in approach - I would say she's more abrasive (and she would say I'm more milquetoast, to use an equally undesirable word). But I can totally relate to her need to be unvarnished, as I share that. I've poked around the edges sharing my "Fi truth" here in the past and it wasn't met with as much success as I would have hoped for either. So, I am not going to condemn her attempt.

    I do admire the risks she takes though ... it's not easy.
    what is the admirability of this to you (from an Fi perspective)? going against social norms? against a community's expectations? what is this unvarnished truth that you see? do you see how it is blind in many ways as well? are you trying to communicate to us a particular way in which we are blind that you still feel we do not see? is that communication process itself composed of blindspots that neither of us can see very clearly? does trust not matter in this regard? and is there any reason we shouldn't be able to establish some trust and sense of shared value in what we're trying to do?

    maybe there is, but i don't see it.

    for what it's worth, i ask these questions for the sake of negotiation. i do feel like i found multiple take-away points from oa's sequence of posts. i feel like we've struggled to identify what behaviors are changeable (we can improve upon) and what we identify with us our core selves. which has made finding a sense of apology difficult. hopefully, the desire for it evaporates when we learn to see the other side a bit more clearly. which probably also has to do with balancing our sense of our own value against the good/bad ramifications we have when in relationship with other ways/functions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Standuble View Post
    She single handedly took on a legion of INFJ and didn't just live to tell the tale but ended up practically coming out on top. Truly admirable, I wish I had her patience and her technique.

    I have two questions for you: 1) Who defines what is a helpful approach or not? Does it not depend on situation, circumstance and participant? 2) Is playing in the INFJ's sandbox really what INFP's want?
    is there any sandbox that you find acceptable? what makes a sandbox acceptable to you? with infjs, do you feel judged? untrusting? what defines your actual experience with infjs as you relate to it? i find your posts funny in a kind of ironic, self-conscious showmanship way, but i struggle to see what you actually want. i see this as an e4 issue i relate to, but i just don't know how can anyone do better if you hide the effects that they have upon you. to me much of this feels like an underlying e4 rejection issue that BOTH SIDES have demonstrated in this thread.


    i wonder if adding intjs and perhaps a few more enfps would help provide more context to see how the functional and egoic differentiation really overlap. perhaps we just have such strict notions of rights and responsibilities that we miss how we relate to each other in the big picture. we get caught up in a way of registering value rather than in recognizing what we can contribute to value questions that are beyond what we think they are. or perhaps it's the balancing between the big picture and the immediate details that is exactly the problem.

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