• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

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

Eilonwy

Vulnerability
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
7,051
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Ironically and interestingly, you've chosen some symbols that many of us INFP's find kind of hurtful to apply to us as a group. They are usually employed in a mocking or derogatory fashion, after all, serving to invalidate our opinions.

Pudding included.

:)

I'm sincerely sorry.

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

PeaceBaby

reborn
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
5,950
MBTI Type
N/A
Enneagram
N/A
I'm sincerely sorry.

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

No worries ... :)

Pudding is ok though. ;)

And thanks.
 

Siúil a Rúin

when the colors fade
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
14,037
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
496
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Maybe the whole crux of it is to me, everything is subjective. Everything.

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

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

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

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

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

Standuble

New member
Joined
Aug 23, 2011
Messages
1,149
So what you are saying is that directing anger, accusation, and requiring apology from a proxy is a legitimate way to process anger and hurt?...

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

:run:

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

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

Siúil a Rúin

when the colors fade
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
14,037
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
496
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Yes because that segment equates with the mindset of a serial killer. *rolls eyes* I honestly would not hurt a fly, I would probably pull a muscle just swinging a punch!

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


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

As a disclaimer, while I felt a mild-moderate level of frustration at the original list of "flaws" and so forth, I feel zero anger at any poster or the thread. I think at least some others are also not angry or upset?
 

the state i am in

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,475
MBTI Type
infj
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
intentions are very important to us because being with them helps us organize our contribution. it helps me encircle a space around us for collaboration. it helps me bound my perceptions by the unique conditions of a shared intentionality that is not just my own. by helping me predict a 3rd person perspective to view our interaction. as an sx type, for me that means the constituents are less social roles grounded in social context and more aspects of desire that i recognize and can resonate with.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Standuble

New member
Joined
Aug 23, 2011
Messages
1,149
I thought it was too absurd to be taken seriously, and you were already joking around.


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

As a disclaimer, while I felt a mild-moderate level of frustration at the original list of "flaws" and so forth, I feel zero anger at any poster or the thread. I think at least some others are also not angry or upset?

Lol, I'm not angry or upset in the slightest nor have I been at any point in this entire thread. If anything I'm in a good mood which brings out my desire to troll. My writing style only comes across as angry or upset at times. I blame inferior Te rearing its head or maybe I'm just twisted. Who knows?

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

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Vicki Jo, whom I don't necessarily trust intellectually, but who is supposedly an expert, describes the INFP as the most judgmental type. When I heard that it annoyed me because I refused to believe it possible, but the prevalence of these threads brings that comment back to mind and makes me wonder why she came to that conclusion. I read a lot more criticisms of others than self in these thread.

The fact that she basically has an entire web site devoted to this kind of commentary just exposes her hypocrisy there. I'd be open to discussing this idea of being "judgmental" in another thread though. I often find Ji gets explained through Je eyes & then is gravely misunderstood. Pe exploration is often viewed as a judgment from Je types too, because it has action (such as my original post in here; not final judgments, but concepts to explore based on patterns I've detected). However, I know the misunderstanding runs both ways, and some criticisms of Ji are accurate. A thread on that would be much more productive because we'd actually discuss it though!

My only complaint against the INFP is against the specific individuals who make unreasonable criticisms of others. I realize they may feel like they are banging their head against a wall to have their inner world understood, but when expressing criticism, it is not the wall such a person is banging their head against - it is another person's head. That is why people say, Ouch. Sorry you are frustrated, but it's time to stop doing that. Go find an actual wall.

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

I tried to find your comment again where you said that you thought listing a quote of criticisms would place distance and make the discussion more theoretical. The problem is that the list is not necessarily credible. It is just another person's impressions based also on the internet memes associated with INFJ. If one refuses the psychic demigod meme, there could also be reason to reject some of the negative memes. The list is problematic and not because it is negative, but because it actually describes some specific personality disorders. If someone has those traits they are not necessarily INFJ, they have one of the attachment disorders. The percentage of people with those disorders is higher than the percentage of INFJs in the world. Confirmation bias can cause people to label anyone with that disorder as an INFJ. I am brutally aware of my flaws, but have zero intention of sharing them here because I don't find the thread all that honest or about learning. That's not my impression of it, and of course I'm not saying that it isn't a sincere learning environment for some.

I listed my criticisms PAIRED with DIRECT quotes about the Ni ego from the very individuals who created and/or shaped this theory. If Jung is not credible to you in such a discussion, then who is? I see patterns of behavior IRL and see how these connect to the theory. A person can fit a general pattern without exhibiting the same behavior or in the same degree. I think PeaceBaby explains that well below. I see little acknowledgement of the actual quotes from Jung & Van Der Hoop on Ni in this thread though, which is interesting.

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

I'm still trying to learn how to resolve conflict with Fi-doms I love, and so far just submitting and apologizing and trying to remain positive has been successful. There have also been two arguments in my life with a Fi person that I went ahead and let myself go, get angry and just say whatever without filter and that worked better than I expected. I'm trying something a little like that here, but with some reassurances because I know there is little or no social trust established.

I don't find that a resolution of conflict, because the source of the conflict likely still exists. You've just bought yourself time & smoothed ruffled feathers.
I find with IxFJs (much more so than ExFJs, interestingly), that I can feel like a bull in a china shop, because I prefer to just call out the elephant in the room so we can move on from it. Their way leads to "buying time", just putting off the issue or ignoring it, but it will not just "go away" permanently. In INFJs especially, this looks like covering the ears & eyes, blocking out that which is unpleasant so as to stay positive (about themselves, mainly). But their view gets narrower & narrower & narrower & farther from reality that way. I can only abide by such dishonesty for so long.

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

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

peacebaby said:
See, that's where it falls apart. That's not what the INFP's here are saying. They're saying what I said above ... can you recognize him in the spectrum, in the INFJ box? And, if you can recognize him, and simply say, "Ya, it happens" it would appear less defensive than dismissing the whole post as irrelevant or taking it personally. (And, saying that, I KNOW it's difficult when it feels you're being painted with these broad brush-strokes that inaccurately portray you as an individual.)

Yes, thank you. An individual of any type may fall apart spectacularly, but there certainly are themes in how the demise plays out. I think it's useful to acknowledge what tendencies in a type have the capacity to grow into such serious flaws as those I listed.

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

Standuble and Peacebaby- I will get back to responding, but for now I saw this and it seems to encapsulate exactly what bothers me about OA's list:

I've explained my intent and approach so many times now that it's silly to see it dismissed this way again, and it's also insulting to me as it basically says I'm a liar. Again, if someone cannot accept my sincerity and chooses to invalidate my whole argument because they don't like the way it was presented, then the discussion will not develop. I don't believe at this point that any approach would have made a difference though.

I feel my post riled people up because there was some unpleasant truth in it (I'm not saying it is a clear reflection of all INFJs). If it was utter nonsense with no foundation in reality, then I think it would've gotten a very different response. What I see latched onto is the part of it is that is most subjective - the delivery. The quotes from Jung are not noted...I was thinking the connection I made between them & my criticisms would be discussed, but that's a Pe approach, specifically Ne. Not to say I haven't seen a few try to do that in here, but it's mostly been a stubbornness to avoid seeing the points in the "correct" context. And there again I see Pe/Pi conflict - Pi puts it into the context which suits them (ie. Ni focuses on the "wrong" question), which looks like denial or avoidance to Pe.
 

the state i am in

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,475
MBTI Type
infj
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
The fact that she basically has an entire web site devoted to this kind of commentary just exposes her hypocrisy there. I'd be open to discussing this idea of being "judgmental" in another thread though. I often find Ji gets explained through Je eyes & then is gravely misunderstood. Pe exploration is often viewed as a judgment from Je types too, because it has action (such as my original post in here; not final judgments, but concepts to explore based on patterns I've detected). However, I know the misunderstanding runs both ways, and some criticisms of Ji are accurate. A thread on that would be much more productive because we'd actually discuss it though!

it is a judgment once it's communicated as "evidence" that controls what can be considered the truth. it's a way of controlling an interaction. there's no such thing as "exploration" apart from judgment. there is only couching that judgment in "self-evident facts" that can be observed by direct perception. this works best with newtonian physics and not complex socio-symbolic behavior. or in law to establish an event happened. but not to explain the meaning of an event. literary criticism is much more complicated.


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

I listed my criticisms PAIRED with DIRECT quotes about the Ni ego from the very individuals who created and/or shaped this theory. If Jung is not credible to you in such a discussion, then who is? I see patterns of behavior IRL and see how these connect to the theory. A person can fit a general pattern without exhibiting the same behavior or in the same degree. I think PeaceBaby explains that well below. I see little acknowledgement of the actual quotes from Jung & Van Der Hoop on Ni in this thread though, which is interesting.

it's not that interesting to me. i appreciate that you want "credible" evidence, facts that you can use to control how we describe what is "actual." but as i've said, that's only useful to prove something happened. it's not really useful to prove that something means something else. with that, you can only falsify things that it is unlikely to mean. or express what it meant for you (which ranges based on well-being from a great Fi skill to a common Fi generalization error that happens especially when the Fi user gets angry).


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

or depressive e4 issue? an ability to wallow in self-pity does not produce authenticity. it produces an ability to relate to other's wallowing in self-pity and to understand the pitfalls that come from building a storehouse of negative thoughts and bad habits to cope with the emotional sinking that depressive types know so well. the intention to me feels like bringing others down to your level. i think i do this too sometimes because i feel like i alone see the contradictions that others should have to deal with too. and there's truth to that, just as there's also truth to the fact that i expect others to understand me before i'm willing to do the work to understand them. and that this is a bad habit of mine that at times digs my own grave.

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

this is something that bothers me. true, you may say, you are childish, or you may say, i find your behavior childish. the latter is not better if you still use a pejorative identity marker that is obviously supposed to be a negative representation. in this case, you are saying others are immature and suggesting that you alone are mature. and they are immature because they do not agree with you. they are emotional like a child and issue "cries" that are not as rational as you presume to be, when you keep your emotions at bay (by sticking to "the facts" that you deem "the facts"). why you see yourself as employing mature emotional communication strategies is simply beyond me. you are affecting them as well but deny your role in doing so. how is this any different? it only works for you because you presume to have access to "reality" that makes you right be default of being the one who is right. this is circular in its own way. and you just want to use typology to justify it rather than using it to clarify the larger pattern that exists outside of you as well.


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

Pe is tricky. ultimately everyone's responsibility is defining what is actual for them. you can't use someone else's Pe. Pe cannot be communicated without Je. it can only be performed. enacted. actualized. as it gets communicated, it loses its sense that it is yours. the truth is organized by what emerges. and you are denying that.


I've explained my intent and approach so many times now that it's silly to see it dismissed this way again, and it's also insulting to me as it basically says I'm a liar. Again, if someone cannot accept my sincerity and chooses to invalidate my whole argument because they don't like the way it was presented, then the discussion will not develop. I don't believe at this point that any approach would have made a difference though.

your argument is that infjs inferior Se at times is hugely problematic for them and leads to mistakes in judgment regarding the emotions of others? that not attending to the story of where others are coming from leads to poor guesses at times?

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

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

I feel my post riled people up because there was some unpleasant truth in it (I'm not saying it is a clear reflection of all INFJs). If it was utter nonsense with no foundation in reality, then I think it would've gotten a very different response. What I see latched onto is the part of it is that is most subjective - the delivery. The quotes from Jung are not noted...I was thinking the connection I made between them & my criticisms would be discussed, but that's a Pe approach, specifically Ne. Not to say I haven't seen a few try to do that in here, but it's mostly been a stubbornness to avoid seeing the points in the "correct" context. And there again I see Pe/Pi conflict - Pi puts it into the context which suits them (ie. Ni focuses on the "wrong" question), which looks like denial or avoidance to Pe.

but it sure feels like you're just trying to railroad others. if you know you're right, why do you need their confirmation? why do you have to have them see it your way if you won't see it theirs? you're still assuming that Pe IS reality and that Pi is illusory, secondary, and ultimately full of shit. the fact is we are negotiating what the "correct" context is. when you assume that you inherently have it because you believe your "type" is blessed with a greater connection to reality. when your focus on what can better be labeled "actuality" is only to say that you focus on a different scale of perception that is like a hand moving from a distance to right in front of your face. but you miss context because of this near-sightedness as well. this is why it must be negotiated.

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

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

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Holy pissnuggets, people who posted in this thread really poured their souls into their posts.
 

Standuble

New member
Joined
Aug 23, 2011
Messages
1,149
A recommencement of hostilities. I am weeping with joy behind this expressionless mask. I'm not involved in this but since when does war hunger for etiquette? However this response is also relevant only to the quoted material and pays not heed to the rest of the conversation spread across the thread.

it is a judgment once it's communicated as "evidence" that controls what can be considered the truth. it's a way of controlling an interaction. there's no such thing as "exploration" apart from judgment. there is only couching that judgment in "self-evident facts" that can be observed by direct perception. this works best with newtonian physics and not complex socio-symbolic behavior. or in law to establish an event happened. but not to explain the meaning of an event. literary criticism is much more complicated.

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

it's not that interesting to me. i appreciate that you want "credible" evidence, facts that you can use to control how we describe what is "actual." but as i've said, that's only useful to prove something happened. it's not really useful to prove that something means something else. with that, you can only falsify things that it is unlikely to mean. or express what it meant for you (which ranges based on well-being from a great Fi skill to a common Fi generalization error that happens especially when the Fi user gets angry).

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

or depressive e4 issue? an ability to wallow in self-pity does not produce authenticity. it produces an ability to relate to other's wallowing in self-pity and to understand the pitfalls that come from building a storehouse of negative thoughts and bad habits to cope with the emotional sinking that depressive types know so well. the intention to me feels like bringing others down to your level. i think i do this too sometimes because i feel like i alone see the contradictions that others should have to deal with too. and there's truth to that, just as there's also truth to the fact that i expect others to understand me before i'm willing to do the work to understand them. and that this is a bad habit of mine that at times digs my own grave.

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

this is something that bothers me. true, you may say, you are childish, or you may say, i find your behavior childish. the latter is not better if you still use a pejorative identity marker that is obviously supposed to be a negative representation. in this case, you are saying others are immature and suggesting that you alone are mature. and they are immature because they do not agree with you. they are emotional like a child and issue "cries" that are not as rational as you presume to be, when you keep your emotions at bay (by sticking to "the facts" that you deem "the facts"). why you see yourself as employing mature emotional communication strategies is simply beyond me. you are affecting them as well but deny your role in doing so. how is this any different? it only works for you because you presume to have access to "reality" that makes you right be default of being the one who is right. this is circular in its own way. and you just want to use typology to justify it rather than using it to clarify the larger pattern that exists outside of you as well.

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

Pe is tricky. ultimately everyone's responsibility is defining what is actual for them. you can't use someone else's Pe. Pe cannot be communicated without Je. it can only be performed. enacted. actualized. as it gets communicated, it loses its sense that it is yours. the truth is organized by what emerges. and you are denying that.

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

your argument is that infjs inferior Se at times is hugely problematic for them and leads to mistakes in judgment regarding the emotions of others? that not attending to the story of where others are coming from leads to poor guesses at times?

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

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

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

but it sure feels like you're just trying to railroad others. if you know you're right, why do you need their confirmation? why do you have to have them see it your way if you won't see it theirs? you're still assuming that Pe IS reality and that Pi is illusory, secondary, and ultimately full of shit. the fact is we are negotiating what the "correct" context is. when you assume that you inherently have it because you believe your "type" is blessed with a greater connection to reality. when your focus on what can better be labeled "actuality" is only to say that you focus on a different scale of perception that is like a hand moving from a distance to right in front of your face. but you miss context because of this near-sightedness as well. this is why it must be negotiated.

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

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

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

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

Standuble

New member
Joined
Aug 23, 2011
Messages
1,149
Holy pissnuggets, people who posted in this thread really poured their souls into their posts.

This is war after all. We are committing to total war to annihilate the enemy. It does not matter whether this is a battle which is pointless and a victory meaningless we will win! It's the feeler way.
 
G

Glycerine

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

*white noise*

The War on Pointless Typology.
:D
 

Z Buck McFate

Pepperidge Farm remembers.
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
6,048
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I've explained my intent and approach so many times now that it's silly to see it dismissed this way again, and it's also insulting to me as it basically says I'm a liar. Again, if someone cannot accept my sincerity and chooses to invalidate my whole argument because they don't like the way it was presented, then the discussion will not develop. I don't believe at this point that any approach would have made a difference though.

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


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


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

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

but it sure feels like you're just trying to railroad others. if you know you're right, why do you need their confirmation? why do you have to have them see it your way if you won't see it theirs? you're still assuming that Pe IS reality and that Pi is illusory, secondary, and ultimately full of shit. the fact is we are negotiating what the "correct" context is. when you assume that you inherently have it because you believe your "type" is blessed with a greater connection to reality. when your focus on what can better be labeled "actuality" is only to say that you focus on a different scale of perception that is like a hand moving from a distance to right in front of your face. but you miss context because of this near-sightedness as well. this is why it must be negotiated.

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

Exactly, all of this.


final eta:
It strikes me that the same thing is happening here, in this thread, interestingly.

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

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


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

[And I think I’m done here. I'll leave it at agreeing very much with fia's post below.]
 
Last edited:

Rasofy

royal member
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
5,881
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Person 1: *makes some general assertions"
Person 2: No, you are interpreting it wrong. *Makes some clarifications trying to unmuddle it it from their own perspective*
Person 1: You're obviously not willing to listen to the truth because we know it better than you and you're in denial
Person 2: Well, you clearly don't know what you are talking about and here's why... I am much more complex than that.
Person 1: You are clearly delusional because you can't accept my truth.
Person 2: What are you talking about?
Person 1: Wow, you're such a moron.

*white noise*

The War on Pointless Typology.
:D
 

_eric_

New member
Joined
Oct 8, 2012
Messages
285
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
or that you've met infjs (including 3w4s, who i believe are enfjs), who exhibit especially negative e3 issues that you do not like so all infjs should realize that they are condemned to be completely full of shit unless they take Pe types word for it that they are wrong much of the time? i mean, what's a concrete situation that you see this happening in?
Maybe one reason I identify with so little of this negative stuff is that 3 is by far one of my lowest scores? (along with 7 and 8) :shrug: All three always get around 20% or lower in tests.

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

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

Siúil a Rúin

when the colors fade
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
14,037
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
496
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Holy pissnuggets, people who posted in this thread really poured their souls into their posts.
I'm wondering if one big thing INFJ and INFP have in common is significant sensitivity to existential isolation - the feeling that one is not, or even cannot, be understood accompanied by a desire for complete comprehension of another. I think it makes sense because both types have a lot of empathy and have deep understanding of other people, but both types can see the vast complexity of a person. Both types have some desire to connect and yet are introverted.

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

Stanton Moore

morose bourgeoisie
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
3,900
MBTI Type
INFP
I'm wondering if one big thing INFJ and INFP have in common is significant sensitivity to existential isolation - the feeling that one is not, or even cannot, be understood accompanied by a desire for complete comprehension of another. I think it makes sense because both types have a lot of empathy and have deep understanding of other people, but both types can see the vast complexity of a person. Both types have some desire to connect and yet are introverted.

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

+1. Good on ye. Bringing peeps together...
 

Siúil a Rúin

when the colors fade
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
14,037
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
496
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
+1. Good on ye. Bringing peeps together...
Sometime I may re-read this thread to think on it a bit more. One thing I *think* is true of both INF types is quite rigorous self-analysis and criticism combined with intensely private personal needs. I have read the posts of the INFJs in this thread and know some personally long enough to know that it is typical of this crowd to be rigorously self-critical and self-analytical. Externally some may interpret the public push-back as not desiring self-analysis, but in my impression it has to do more with issues of privacy and approach.

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

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

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

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

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