User Tag List

First 1757656667686977 Last

Results 661 to 670 of 941

  1. #661
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Kross View Post
    I don't know about this collective responsibility thing.
    I don't think it's "collective responsibility," but rather the search for a universal principle.
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.

  2. #662
    Society
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fidelia View Post
    Therefore, if one offends, it is not another's job to apologize.
    i got it! i think... maybe, ok, bear with me:

    you are seen:
    A - - - - -> C

    i am seen:
    A -> B -> C
    ____B + C -> D

    your mind is jumping from A to C, so you don't see D because you don't see B.

    it's like when me and my exwife would play chess:
    • often, she'd come up with a move which was so brilliant it bewildered both of us, neither of us understood why it works, it would almost be like the Pythagorean theorem, at least in our respective levels of intelligence, neither of us had the ability to explain nor disprove it, and yet the bewilderment took nothing from the fact that it was brilliant (which would in turn impress me and lead to sex).
    • on my end, i would constantly try new moves not knowing if they'd work, and some of those things moves stemmed from a hypothesis for why a few of those brilliant move worked, and extrapolating another move in a different situation from it. in those times, i was expecting her to be onto me and figure out what i am doing, and yet she'd be clueless - she'd call me out on my expectation from my facial expressions but couldn't figure it out, since she didn't know why her brilliant move worked to began with (and explaining it would in turn impress her and lead to sex).

    here we have the same pattern (minus the sex ):

    you are seen:
    "someone else did something wrong" + (Ni jump) -> "i need to apologize(?! $#%!)"

    what i am seen is:
    "someone else did something wrong" -> "someone else lacked the elements which elegantly seem to match the elements within the capacity to apologize such as seen that they did something wrong" (Ti) + "that someone shares certain traits with you"(Ne) + "the story matches with a lot of other stories of people having those traits" (Si) -> if you can apologize for things you did (not things they did) -> i can know that those traits do not directly negate the possibility of said element.

    the NPs here have being yelling to you "we just wants B+C to gain D", and you've being going back to look at it and seen "what are you talking about? it's just A->C! i don't see any B!"

  3. #663
    Undisciplined Starry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    5,625

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    Towards the beginning of this thread, Starry mentioned something to me about a kind of therapy where representatives of some group (e.g. racial) sit in on a group therapy for people who have been hurt by that group, and they sort of ‘absorb’ (or something) the anger without taking it personally. They give the individuals a chance to work through the anger with the ‘type’ of person who hurt them, since getting the actual person isn’t available. While I can’t remember what it’s called, I’m pretty sure I remember reading about this myself and reading that it’s actually pretty effective. So I do know what PB is talking about with this proxy business.

    The problem here is that simply imposing that role on people- out of the blue, and especially on strangers- without clearly designating the role of ‘someone who absorbs the anger of other party’ and getting informed consent from that ‘absorbing’ party prior to the person trying to work this stuff out…..that’s just messed up. That’s just blindly throwing aggression into the world. And since the third party doesn’t realize the point, any ‘healing’ from having someone absorb that contempt isn’t likely to happen…..because of course people aren’t going to just *know* to take responsibility for something they didn’t do. I’m even inclined to argue it’s not healthy to *automatically* take responsibility for anger and contempt caused by someone else. (eta: ) <- That's the kind of thing that enables co-dependent and abusive relationships. People with healthy boundaries don't put up with that shit.
    Still don't remember the name of this therapy in spite of the fact I was a participant in it for a work related thing. And you are right...there is some 'anger absorbing'...or maybe 'anger absorbing and diffusing' that does sorta need to be tolerated by the 'proxy group'. But the 'injured group' wasn't even remotely approaching their issues in the way I have observed in this thread - not even close. The 'injured group' was definitely coming from a place of 'I have been hurt to the point that I know I am no longer seeing things clearly and I need help overcoming what has now become my own set of prejudices.' <--Again, that is very far removed from what I have seen in this thread and others.

  4. #664
    can't handcuff the wind Z Buck McFate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    3,683

    Default

    ^I've messaged a psychologist friend and a licensed psychotherapist friend about this, asking if it rings any bells. The psychologist friend mentioned transgenerational trauma, which is when the trauma of a parent is so severe it's passed on to children- so it applies to, say, families affected by the holocaust. The other friend said it didn't sound familiar at all. And google seaches have yielded a whole lotta nothing.

    While I could swear reading something about it myself at some point, it's hard to find anything. (And it's possible what I'm vaguely remembering is the transgenerational trauma anyway.)


    eta: I can see how this is trying to find a 'universal principle'. But there's a distinction between someone who is genuinely traumatized by another person because that second party imposes unreasonable and cruel behavior (and so the person is a 'victim' in a bona fide sense- not just in their own perception, but has had to deal with what would be considered 'cruelty' by most standards) and someone who makes themself out to be a victim because they couldn't get the second party to think or believe what they want. Where I sense the former is going on, then I do feel something like remorse according to that 'universal principle' and I do feel an obligation as a human being to help out another human being in emotional pain- simply because I can. But it's hard to suss out the former from the latter online, and where I pick up the latter might actually have been the case (which becomes evident in the way they interact with others- it's not a fool proof way of knowing, but it's a pretty good indicator) then I feel no remorse for them. On the contrary, because of my own baggage from dealing with people who are a 'victim' of not being able to make me think or believe what they want, I actually feel a little bit of contempt instead.

    And @Southern Kross, you've made a lot of good posts- which I'm hoping to still respond to, but I want to apologize if I don't get back to all the questions you've asked. (This thread is moving too fast for my slow self.)
    Reality is a collective hunch. -Lily Tomlin

    5w4 sx/sp Johari / Nohari

  5. #665
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    A few things:

    1. on INFPs having to reach out externally first if they want to engage an INFJ

    @PeaceBaby, I don't think needing to alter our external presentation of language is the same as having to sanitize our communication. We can still share; we just have to share things in a different format. Goodwill must be solidified first, and then negativity can be addressed. There are countless external factors that already impact the way we express ourselves: our native language, our regional dialect, our parents' speech, the relationship with the person we are speaking to, why we are speaking, our environment, our physical state, and so many more. To use the INFJ external format is just another element, not a singular confining cage, because it's about how you say it, not what you say. No content has been forbidden. I do understand that it's probably easier to deal with this if N is dominant, because the overarching concept is more important than the expression of feeling. Still, I think we have to remember that we have to alter our external behavior to meet Js, but NFJs have to alter their internal responses to meet us - and that's equally uncomfortable for them. Just because we don't "see" their change on the outside doesn't mean it's not happening or it's not painful. That, plus sometimes it's just worth it to momentarily sacrifice equality/freedom of expression for the greater gain down the line... who are we to be so demanding that the world meet us where we are all the time? If you gain NFJ trust, eventually down the line you will be able to express yourself freely - perhaps freely and with more understanding and more attention to you than with any other type. I think this also has at least a little to do with the heavy time-orientation of Ni as a whole. Just like Ne gets more comfortable given more conceptual space to gather information in, Ni gets more comfortable given more conceptual time to gather information over.

    2. on "white noise"

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate
    Is it.....hard for Fi'ers to imagine getting stifled by 'white noise' without necessarily doubting someone else's intentions
    Yes, it is hard. Generally white noise is an effect of realizing that someone's intentions might be bad. But it's what SK was getting at, that Right sometimes doesn't have much to do with intention. In the case of OA's list, what's the deepest problem with that post? In my eyes, it's the idea that INFJs think themselves better than everyone else - because even if some might, the principle of anyone being better than anyone else is wrong. So what we need to do is make it eminently clear that everyone is equal. That's what I see as my goal, and that means arguing against that list and anyone of any type who disagrees. I can endure the emotional blah of her post because I have a more important Fi-driven mission at hand. Plus, the informational parts are interesting enough to Ne that I don't mind sifting through negativity - I sift all the time anyway. I imagine dom Ni uses Fe to help cue in where the most "valuable" information is found, since you guys are so much more particular about quality of informational sources. So I'm guessing in this case, Fe pretty much screamed, get out of here, nothing worth it. Which, I have to say, is true in some ways - it's not valuable as Ti info, not open to Fe sympathy, and not useful for Ni conceptual honing, anyway. But it's good food for Fi empathy, interesting to Ne gathering, and Te loves that it has bullets! In any case, subsequent INFJ disinterest in informational exchange read as suspicious because it's confusing why anyone wouldn't want to consider OA's opinion as valid and worth empathy, and her ideas worth exploring, especially when it was presented in such a clear format. The clincher in this case was that it seemed to prove OA's point.

    3. on collective responsibility

    Quote Originally Posted by fidelia
    I think Fi takes a more collective responsibility for things than Fe [...]I just don't have that kind of relationship to most people that would make me feel comfortable expressing culpability for something that feels very separate from me.
    I think there's also a very deep element of recognition of being of the same Si/Fi "essence" as the one who did the wronging, and as such one is likely to be prolonging the hurt by the static aspects of oneself that are the same as those within the one who did the wronging, and, moreover, one is part of the people doing that thing by definition alone. Before I entered the thread, I felt a degree of responsibility because NFP is part of my identity and if there are NFPs accusing INFJs of being [whatever], then that reflects on myself, as well.

    4. on healing and context

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate
    The problem here is that simply imposing that role on people- out of the blue, and especially on strangers- without clearly designating the role of ‘someone who absorbs the anger of other party’ and getting informed consent from that ‘absorbing’ party prior to the person trying to work this stuff out…..that’s just messed up.
    Well, and normally that's true, but then also this is a thread asking what INFJs do that annoys INFPs so INFJs can better understand it in a subforum for NF issues in a forum where people apply typology to resolving real-world issues. I hate to keep coming back to that, but it really changes things for my viewpoint. To me it seems like an INFJ sort of offered that role from the get-go.

  6. #666
    can't handcuff the wind Z Buck McFate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    3,683

    Default

    Okay, so it seems it is a rather big source of misunderstanding here- when NFPs get ‘white noise’, it invariably is because someone else’s intentions might stink….so they can’t help but project that into what INFJs are calling ‘white noise’ (which really has significantly less to do with suspecting someone else’s intentions, and is primarily about things not stacking up logistically)? What I’m getting here is that it just doesn’t seem possible to you guys to truly get ‘white noise’ to the point of distress without some negative judgment of someone’s intentions.

    …that actually clears up a whole lotta something that isn’t being heard in this thread, and why you guys keep seeing negative judgment of OA where there isn't any.


    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    Well, and normally that's true, but then also this is a thread asking what INFJs do that annoys INFPs so INFJs can better understand it in a subforum for NF issues in a forum where people apply typology to resolving real-world issues. I hate to keep coming back to that, but it really changes things for my viewpoint. To me it seems like an INFJ sort of offered that role from the get-go.
    Well, if I agreed that this was still that same topic, and didn’t instead believe this thread has morphed into something entirely different than what the op wanted (and I too hate to keep coming back to that, but it really does change things from my viewpoint too) then I guess I could loosely see how the op was- in itself- a sort of ‘consent’ to participate. Key word: loosely. The more extreme version of 'needing a proxy to resolve one's own issues' isn't quite the role that was offered.
    Reality is a collective hunch. -Lily Tomlin

    5w4 sx/sp Johari / Nohari

  7. #667
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    What I’m getting here is that it just doesn’t seem possible to you guys to truly get ‘white noise’ to the point of distress without some negative judgment of someone’s intentions.
    At least for myself, I can safely say that is true.

    …that actually clears up a whole lotta something that isn’t being heard in this thread, and why you guys keep seeing negative judgment of OA where there isn't any.
    Yes definitely!


    Well, if I agreed that this was still that same topic, and didn’t instead believe this thread has morphed into something entirely different than what the op wanted (and I too hate to keep coming back to that, but it really does change things from my viewpoint too) then I guess I could loosely see how the op was- in itself- a sort of ‘consent’ to participate. Key word: loosely. The more extreme version of 'needing a proxy to resolve one's own issues' isn't quite the role that was offered.
    Well no, I agree with that. And I'm only talking about OA's post and the first few pages of responses, not anything that came later.

    It's just, I don't really think there was any intention of making INFJs reluctant counselors or scapegoats. It's just that INFJs might understand and be able to explain NFP impressions of INFJs because you are, after all, INFJs. I feel like the only responsibility being assigned is that, in decent conversation, if someone asks a question, it's the other's responsibility to at least acknowledge it. That, and I think OA's post was an overblown example of how a Fi/Ne user could accidentally interpret an invitation inside as permission to come in, plop on the couch, turn on the TV, watch a football game, etc. We're just not as cautious with information, and so that OP seems more welcoming in terms of idea presentation than it evidently was. It seemed like "the FJ rules are relaxed here". Maybe not so much.

    Also I suppose what I am getting at is that for a Fi/Ne user, it is fundamental to acknowledge personal perspective and address idea content, and the lack of those two things from INFJs were a large source of misunderstanding for us that put us on the defensive. I assume for NiFe the importance must be in identifying important ideas and encouraging harmony? Neither of which that post did? It feels quite blind to be a Fi user around Fe sometimes. To continue my silly metaphor, it would be like plopping on the couch, and then the host won't sit with you, but instead talks about how you might want to see this movie showing down the street in 10 minutes, or take your car out for a spin, or go to the grocery store - even though she just invited you over and let you in. It's all very confusing, because you might realize that you overstepped your bounds, but you're not really always sure how. Or what you can do to fix it. I mean, maybe you were totally covered in dirt, but you were invited. You should have known better, but you had a pressing need to use the bathroom or something. All silly, but do you see what I mean?

    As for the rest of the thread, the two reasons I kept coming back to the OP were: 1) I think it plays a large part in explaining why OA posted what she posted, and (2) there were still unanswered questions from it that I wanted to probe. I think I am done with both of those now, unless OA decides to rehash her list.

  8. #668
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    No content has been forbidden.
    Are you sure about that?

    And thanks for your thoughts; "sanitize" was just a quick shorthand for your paragraph. Albeit a word that does have some negative connotation from my perspective, but not intended towards INFJ's. The word "craft" comes to mind as a better option. "Crafting" our approach.

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    It's just, I don't really think there was any intention of making INFJs reluctant counselors or scapegoats. It's just that INFJs might understand and be able to explain NFP impressions of INFJs because you are, after all, INFJs. I feel like the only responsibility being assigned is that, in decent conversation, if someone asks a question, it's the other's responsibility to at least acknowledge it. That, and I think OA's post was an overblown example of how a Fi/Ne user could accidentally interpret an invitation inside as permission to come in, plop on the couch, turn on the TV, watch a football game, etc. We're just not as cautious with information, and so that OP seems more welcoming in terms of idea presentation than it evidently was. It seemed like "the FJ rules are relaxed here". Maybe not so much.
    Agreed. esp @bold.

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    Okay, so it seems it is a rather big source of misunderstanding here- when NFPs get ‘white noise’, it invariably is because someone else’s intentions might stink….so they can’t help but project that into what INFJs are calling ‘white noise’ (which really has significantly less to do with suspecting someone else’s intentions, and is primarily about things not stacking up logistically)? What I’m getting here is that it just doesn’t seem possible to you guys to truly get ‘white noise’ to the point of distress without some negative judgment of someone’s intentions.
    I've read that about 5 times now and I still am not sure I agree with it. I get an "alarm bell" if I doubt intention, but does it make "white noise" for me? If we say "white noise" is simply a message, logistical or emotional, that befuddles a clear thought process, what makes "white noise" for me is a misread on my intentions, or when I doubt that what I've said has been received in the manner it was intended. Not so much your intentions ... We're getting into semantics that are messing me up ... it's not about us judging others intentions?

    Maybe I am not understanding your para correctly either. If my reply seems way out in left field, would you be able to rephrase that a bit differently?

    I'm tempted to say that Fi as a judging process is looking at how things stack up logistically as well. Using some sort of different criteria that I can't define atm.

    …that actually clears up a whole lotta something that isn’t being heard in this thread, and why you guys keep seeing negative judgment of OA where there isn't any.
    I would hesitate to say that's a universally felt opinion amongst all the INFJ's who were involved in this thread somewhere along the way.

    But, I agree, it's probably true that we see the rejection of OA's expression as more of a rejection of OA herself.

    The more extreme version of 'needing a proxy to resolve one's own issues' isn't quite the role that was offered.
    Agreed. Sorry I indulged in the Ne habit of putting a word into play without fully fleshing out what I meant by it. I am still thinking on it too; it's a tangent that I hesitate to explore within the context of this thread due to the potential for substantial debate, especially if my first post on the topic is framed inadequately and comes out less than well-worded and structured.

    Although what's one more derail, eh?
    "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. #669
    Away with the fairies Southern Kross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 so/sp
    Posts
    2,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    I don't think it's "collective responsibility," but rather the search for a universal principle.
    Something along those lines. I think it goes even beyond principle (although it might feel like that to a INTJ), because it's more than just right and wrong. @skylights mentioned the word Essence and I think this fits better. It's about a sense of Truth that must be adhered to. It feels like it's our duty to look beyond the veils of deception before us now and try to get a little closer to that Essence. It could be the Essence of the problem between people (why a conversation is going wrong), or the Essence of what a person is about (why they do the things they do). It can also take on many other forms, like the Essence of a good spaghetti sauce, but as we are talking about people, I won't get into that.

    This is why the NFPs go on explain-athons when things go wrong. We're trying to bring people (and ourselves, indirectly) closer to that Essence we feel, because we think that if we do, it will reveal itself to others and the misunderstandings will clear up. If we don't think you're getting it, we explain some more. And on and on it goes...

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    eta: I can see how this is trying to find a 'universal principle'. But there's a distinction between someone who is genuinely traumatized by another person because that second party imposes unreasonable and cruel behavior (and so the person is a 'victim' in a bona fide sense- not just in their own perception, but has had to deal with what would be considered 'cruelty' by most standards) and someone who makes themself out to be a victim because they couldn't get the second party to think or believe what they want. Where I sense the former is going on, then I do feel something like remorse according to that 'universal principle' and I do feel an obligation as a human being to help out another human being in emotional pain- simply because I can. But it's hard to suss out the former from the latter online, and where I pick up the latter might actually have been the case (which becomes evident in the way they interact with others- it's not a fool proof way of knowing, but it's a pretty good indicator) then I feel no remorse for them. On the contrary, because of my own baggage from dealing with people who are a 'victim' of not being able to make me think or believe what they want, I actually feel a little bit of contempt instead.
    I see. Yes it is difficult. The problem from a NFP perspective is that we don't really think in those terms, either in how we read someone else or how we present ourselves.

    In OA's case it could totally be both : ie. she is both a victim and someone simply making herself out to be. The NFP thinks, "People get a bit dramatic when they're angry or hurt, so sometimes they might inadvertently misrepresent the situation or talk in hyperbole. That's no reason for me to completely disregard what they're saying" - this comes back to what I was saying about emotions being merely signs and not throwing the baby out with the bathwater. We then try to mine what we can from what is said, to find nuggets of truth (ie. search for the essence), without worrying too much about the 'veils' (ie. the anger, pain, and possible misrepresentation). To us finding those nuggets is a sign that there is value in what that person is saying. That is verification to us that she is, at least in part, not making it all up and falsely making herself the victim; that she isn't entirely blinded by a ridiculously bad interpretation of the events involved or by some personal vendetta against INFJs.

    The added problem to the situation is that OA is also a NFP. When NFPs relax too much (like when we're in the forum, talking to sympathetic ears), we allow ourselves to talk more in 'veils' because we think this group of people will be more adept at mining that underlying Truth; that Truth that perhaps even we cannot get to with all the noise going on inside our head.

    I can see now that the INFJs need those parameters set in order to even start analysing what is said - and I think we (both INFJs and INFPs) need to find a way to address this need without slowing down the process too much.

    I also want to say as an aside, that NFPs can get pretty tetchy when we don't find nuggets of Truth beneath the 'veils'. I'm thinking back to @Orobas's thread about a conversation she had with her boyfriend's mother or MIL (not sure which). The Fe users (who were mostly INFJs I think) said that the mother was just venting, but the NFPs got pretty annoyed by the logical flaws in the MIL's words and how grossly judgemental and unfair she seemed to be. In such circumstances, we become rather contemptuous and pretty much write-off everything that person has to say on the matter.

    And one final thing, thank you for saying you feel contempt in such circumstances. I think that is part of what we NFPs sensed, but couldn't really put into words. This is partly what I meant about mixed messages - saying you're willing to engage on one hand, and then appearing a little contemptuous on the other. This is also why I said it felt like the INFJs were biting their lips early on in the thread; we sensed latent hostility behind the attempts to engage. @OrangeAppled (perhaps having experienced this before) reacted more strongly too it and became more hostile in response. Whereas, others like PB and myself (not having any particular wounds to be reopened) tried to clear up the Essence of problems as we sensed it. I suppose (again, Ne sometimes takes a while to work out what even it's entirely on about) we wanted you to see past the ('veil' of) negativity of OA's post and how she might have some good points regardless, and then that ('veil' of) contempt would disappear and a useful conversation would eventuate. @PeaceBaby and @skylights do you agree?

    BTW all of this is totally non-judgy, in case that's not clear. I really hope it doesn't sound condescending either.

    And Southern Kross, you've made a lot of good posts- which I'm hoping to still respond to, but I want to apologize if I don't get back to all the questions you've asked. (This thread is moving too fast for my slow self.)
    You're too busy to answer me... @fidelia has all these tales of wifi problems and that's why she can't reply to me. I'm starting to take it personally

    INFP 4w5 so/sp

    I've dreamt in my life dreams that have stayed with me ever after, and changed my ideas;
    they've gone through and through me, like wine through water, and altered the colour of my mind.

    - Emily Bronte

  10. #670
    Iron Maiden fidelia's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1w2 so/sx
    Posts
    11,106

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post

    It's just, I don't really think there was any intention of making INFJs reluctant counselors or scapegoats. It's just that INFJs might understand and be able to explain NFP impressions of INFJs because you are, after all, INFJs. That makes sense, except for the tone, which gave me a different impression. Maybe again it's the whole extraverted functions seem much more final sounding than they are intended to introverted functions.I feel like the only responsibility being assigned is that, in decent conversation, if someone asks a question, it's the other's responsibility to at least acknowledge it. That, and I think OA's post was an overblown example of how a Fi/Ne user could accidentally interpret an invitation inside as permission to come in, plop on the couch, turn on the TV, watch a football game, etc. We're just not as cautious with information, and so that OP seems more welcoming in terms of idea presentation than it evidently was. It seemed like "the FJ rules are relaxed here". Maybe not so much.That also makes sense. I'm wondering, how do you then invite discussion, but without the assumption that it means anything goes. I mean, I'm sure it is just as uncomfortable to be in the opposite position, wondering what you did wrong. I really am open like that to maybe 1 or at the most 2 people in my life, so it's not personally driven, but I've found that Fi users are much more all or nothing and it can feel very rejecting when other people don't respond in a similar manner.

    Also I suppose what I am getting at is that for a Fi/Ne user, it is fundamental to acknowledge personal perspective and address idea content, and the lack of those two things from INFJs were a large source of misunderstanding for us that put us on the defensive.

    I think we want that too, but in the opposite areas. I'll have to chew on that more to explain better.

    I assume for NiFe the importance must be in identifying important ideas and encouraging harmony?

    I don't think Fe expects harmony at any cost. Instead, I tend to want to know that everyone is thinking of how their words/attitudes/actions could impact their audience, imagining how each separate person will be affected and how they will in turn react. Does that end up in an overall productive or unproductive outcome? (I can see where there are flaws with this and ideally I think both parties would end up somewhere in the middle between the two extremes of individual expression and group consideration.)

    I think it means starting from the same "side" and then explaining where our thinking diverges and how it looks from the other perspective. Agreeing on the definition of what we are discussing and what you want resolved (what outcome you're ultimately shooting for) so that we can successfully give it to you. Keeping the personal element out of it by acknowledging the efforts being made to comply.

    Otherwise it feels like a teacher with their mark book out, but I have no idea what subject or what marking system they are using and what significance those marks will have in the future (are they SATs? are they meant to inform the teacher's own practice? are they to check for understanding? are they marks for a report card? are they my transcript to get into the career of my choice?). And then when I offer something, the person says, "Wrong subject" "Not good enough" or wants me to study harder because so and so got a bad mark, etc etc.

    I think I can see better now that you guys really hate to define what you want before you have even had a chance to explore what information is out there to consider, and that is totally valid. I do the same with Ni. It's just confusing at first, when it comes out in a different context.


    Neither of which that post did? The negative emotion felt directed at us personally.

    It feels quite blind to be a Fi user around Fe sometimes. To continue my silly metaphor, it would be like plopping on the couch, and then the host won't sit with you, but instead talks about how you might want to see this movie showing down the street in 10 minutes, or take your car out for a spin, or go to the grocery store - even though she just invited you over and let you in. It's all very confusing, because you might realize that you overstepped your bounds, but you're not really always sure how. Or what you can do to fix it. I mean, maybe you were totally covered in dirt, but you were invited. You should have known better, but you had a pressing need to use the bathroom or something. All silly, but do you see what I mean? Yeah, that makes sense. I guess it's probably because we are so hypersensitive to those kinds of boundaries (much like you guys are considerably more aware of not stepping on people's personal experiences/feelings/emotions/perspectives that it is hard to believe you don't know why we feel that way.

    As for the rest of the thread, the two reasons I kept coming back to the OP were: 1) I think it plays a large part in explaining why OA posted what she posted, and (2) there were still unanswered questions from it that I wanted to probe. I think I am done with both of those now, unless OA decides to rehash her list.
    I really appreciate you taking time to do this. Just as you find it useful to go through stuff and gather the little details together to form the bigger picture, sometimes I need someone to help me gather up the useful points to take away. If you had to distill it down, could you give me the bigger picture (ie a list!) of what I as an INFJ could take away to make things go more successfully next time before you exit?

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