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

[Eilonwy]

good reads... and very confusing, at least for one aspect alone:

can i ask (both INFx's): what's with all the "we" and "us" when referring to.. basically, your own experience within yourself?

Probably it's the same phenomenon that you experience when you take your personal experience with your wife and translate it to applying to all INFJs.

 

[Society]

I would not say that I can speak for all INFJs everywhere

ok that's good, but this isn't a thread about "what do fidelia, Z Buck, Tilty, cascadeco, and fia do that drives you nuts", the context derived of "we" and "us" has a very strong chance of coming off as a reference to all INFJs.

although admittedly I've being nicknaming it "the INFJ SWAT team" in my head for quite awhile now.

Probably it's the same phenomenon that you experience when you take your personal experience with your wife and translate it to applying to all INFJs.

...judging by the other half of that very same post your quoting:

i mean, it seemed like the whole shenanigan and consequential conflicts here started from how other people seen members of your own type as representatives of your type and daring to generalize from one's own experience. why is this now done repetitively by both sides of the debate towards their own respective types?

seems like we're in agreement... in fact it seems like that was exactly the point.

 

[Fidelia]

[MENTION=7842]Z Buck McFate[/MENTION] your post leaves me feeling seriously disillusioned...

I'm really sorry about that...I don't know if this makes it worse or better...

I think what it comes down to is that introverted functions don't do their cooking externally and so when they do make a statement, it is more of a conclusion or checking for final confirmation, rather than an idea being thrown out there. If it is misunderstood as brainstorming, it can feel like the other party is deliberately being dismissive, unkind, or demeaning.

Extraverted functions do their cooking externally, but the statements made along the way are stated in ways that sound final to introverted function ears, even when the intent is inviting more information.

Introverted functions tend to want to streamline information into something manageable. They want the person to do the work internally and present them with something they can work from, while extraverted ones can't draw any conclusions without being able to explore those thoughts aloud.

Both parties offend in this way. In this case, it's with Ne trying ideas on for size and mixing emotional with logical statements (creating a kind of undertow that is distracting). Then there's Fe trying ideas on for size and mixing judgemental and logical statements (which is equally distracting). Both are only trying to make sense of the situation.

The direct nature of both extraverted functions can also mean that their users sometimes leave off the frosting which can make their statements palatable to their introverted function counterparts, believing that they are just saying the same thing in a shorter way.

I think that at least if we've come to understand this, and have examples of what it looks like, there's got to be a way to break through. For me, the complicating factor is that everyone has both introverted and extraverted function, so sometimes it is hard to separate out what is caused by what and the flavours get all mixed together. If it were as simple as just recognizing a particular function and then adjusting one's understanding to get the proper message, I think it would be much easier. However, I can't help but think that despite the length of these kinds of threads and what some would call beating a dead horse, I feel a little closer to coming to an understanding of the situation so that I can at least start working out a solution.

As you can see, INFJs have a hard time boiling it all down to a few succinct points without doing a lot of external exploring first. I wonder if this also adds to the frustration, as it appears that while you are accommodating that need, there was not the same willingness to allow the Ne exploration needed?

I think one of the biggest problems for me in trying to accommodate, is that I don't really know what I think or feel right in the moment, so I have no personal story to contribute without understanding how it could be useful to you or to developing a shared story. The usefulness part helps me to narrow down what it is I'm looking for inside the tons of banker's boxes full of files littered around the landscape of my head. Without that, it feels like being asked to just empty out all of the boxes entirely, with papers fluttering out from all of the files, and as you can imagine, it's quite a job putting it all back later, so I only do it for people I know very well and even then, only when I understand why it is necessary.

I can see it from the other point of view too though, and there may be one file that's just the key to understanding a bunch of your own story, but you can't possibly know what it would be until you come across it. It seems as if we are withholding useful information from you just to be miserable.

I wish I knew what to propose. I haven't come up with anything practical yet, but perhaps you can see something that I can't...

 

[Society]

I have no personal story to contribute without understanding how it could be useful to you or to developing a shared story.

yes, yes you do.. somewhere in there, you have your own little version of the hammer & chisel:

fuck Fi, what about your Ti? do you have no urge to reach out for a core truth, for something more genuine then the sense of self, out into a larger world with all the things we can not see, such as those inside skulls other then our own? right now at the moment of you reading this, i am responsible for this arrangement of letters on your screens, i pressed buttons which caused them to appear in a certain way. i did not make the technology (and trust me - i would have liked too), i did not build the infrastructure, the circumstances where there to began with, but neither determined my choice, because there is an entity which awhile ago (from your perspective) has moved a mouse and pressed keys which resulted in the arrangement of letters you see before you, and i have control over that entity, that entity is me. i might have pressed wronggly and not noticed the typo, or maybe it all went according to plan, but within that larger world outside, the arrangement of letters is still my responsibility, i am the cause of it.
certainly not all my interactions with these keys are intended - awhile ago i spilled coffee on the laptop, and trust that i had no intention to loose hours upon hours of access to my work while the laptop was being repaired - and there's certainly a reason for it, i am terribly clumsy, i have always being clumsy, years of 'practice' throughout my military service demanding intense situational and physical awareness and i am still freaking clumsy, the question of how i didn't blow myself up aside, it's pretty safe to say my clumsiness isn't something i am likely to fundamentally change. also, in my area of work (fittingly - java coding), i need to stay up and alert for hours while working, i have every reason to drink a lot of coffee.
so there you have it, circumstances, unintended consequences, and very good reasons. yet the causality of the consequences is the entity which is me, which i have control over. it is thus my responsibility. just like the arrangement of letters right now on the screen.
i see myself in the event of actions, and identify the entity which is me. i didn't think of placing the coffee cup further away from the laptop before getting up because i didn't account for those unintended consequences. i could have being more thoughtful about my physical arrangement, and i wasn't, thus it is my fault.

i see myself in the events.
i recognize my bad choice.
i placed my belief in my general competence aside to acknowledge i was wrong.

what is so different about that when the consequences is in the experience of others?
why would you need Fi for that?

find that story, take all the information you have about the other's experience (what they are saying), and take your own information about your experience (reasons, causes, etc), and apply to the agents involved to create a bigger story involving everyone's perspective.

now it's rarely going to be instant, Ti is - probably (see question mark in sig) - introverted for a reason, but it's there, in fact you wouldn't have being able to reach some of the conclusions you reached right here if it wasn't.

 

[Eilonwy]

...judging by the other half of that very same post your quoting:

seems like we're in agreement... in fact it seems like that was exactly the point.

Oh, I saw your point. You were trying to point out that the INFJs were being hypocritical for telling you to not generalize your experience with your wife to all INFJs, and yet they were generalizing their own personal experiences to all INFJs. I got it. I even saw it as it was happening.

There is one little thing that makes a difference, though. Experience. So far, what I've seen other INFJs* saying is that they are generalizing based on their experiences with the other INFJs on the forum. For me, if you interact with me enough to actually get to know me, then I might be more willing to listen to what you have to say about my flaws in a general sort of way. I think I might have even said something to that effect in the Doorslamming thread.

That said, you have a valid point. Hopefully, you realize that we all (humans) are hypocritical at times. You, me, everybody. Because otherwise it's annoying to be beaten over the head about a flaw that I have, when you have it too. (That was some irony, since you've been beaten over the head with it, too! And round and round we go again. You! No, you!)



P.S. I know I still owe you a reply to a previous post. Hopefully, I'll be able to get to it by tomorrow.


*And INFPs, too, since they were asked the same question and indicated that they speak for their group out of experience, also.

 

[Society]

That said, you have a valid point. Hopefully, you realize that we all (humans) are hypocritical at times. You, me, everybody. Because otherwise it's annoying to be beaten over the head about a flaw that I have, when you have it too. (That was some irony, since you've been beaten over the head with it, too! And round and round we go again. You! No, you!)

yep, that's exactly what hypocrisy does: beating someone for something you do as well.

..and depending on what actions are done based on said hypocritical assumptions and how hard is the beating, it can go all from annoying to downright psychopathic.

 

[Society]

Why do you care, Mane? Stop butting in!

 

[Tiltyred]

NO. Because you want to talk about your ex-wife. This thread is not about your ex-wife. People are getting somewhere in their talks and you're being distracting. Start a thread about your ex, if you want to, but this is not the place to meddle with the process.

 

[Anew Leaf]

NO. Because you want to talk about your ex-wife. This thread is not about your ex-wife. People are getting somewhere in their talks and you're being distracting. Start a thread about your ex, if you want to, but this is not the place to meddle with the process.

I think he already has... or maybe it's just that every thread he posts in soon turns into one about his ex-wife.

 

[Tiltyred]

It's on the verge of trolling and needs to stop, imo.

 

[Eilonwy]

yep, that's exactly what hypocrisy does: beating someone for something you do as well.

..and depending on what actions are done based on said hypocritical assumptions and how hard is the beating, it can go all from annoying to downright psychopathic.

So, what I see in your reply is that you see that I got the point you were trying to make. However, what I don't see is a clear statement that you also got my point, because there's irony in your reply, too.



In other words: No, you!

For the TypoC masses: Here, have some popcorn while you enjoy the show.

 

[Tiltyred]

Time to put somebody on the Ignore list, looks like. I'm just sayin'.

 

[Society]

So, what I see in your reply is that you see that I got the point you were trying to make. However, what I don't see is a clear statement that you also got my point, because there's irony in your reply, too.

...everybody does a lot of things: have you caught me being called on a hypocrisy and i ignored it dismissed it or - as [MENTION=5723]Tiltyred[/MENTION] is trying to do - decided to look for ways to discredit the argument with ad hominems?

 

[Eilonwy]

...everybody does a lot of things: have you caught me being called on a hypocrisy and i ignored it dismissed it or - as @Tilryard is trying to do - decided to look for ways to discredit the argument with ad hominems?

This says to me that you didn't get my point, so I'm not sure how I can make it in a way that you will get it.

You've indicated to me that I've seen this one point that you were trying to make from your POV, now I'm trying to determine if you've seen it from my POV. Perhaps it needs to percolate a bit. Or perhaps it needs to come from another source.

Either way, I think it's time for me to get off of the merry-go-round.

 

[Society]

This says to me that you didn't get my point, so I'm not sure how I can make it in a way that you will get it.

your saying everyone becomes hypocritical at times, and i agree. just like i have said earlier that everyone does things to be remorseful about, hey, we might add "everybody goes potty" and "everybody sneezes"...

i am pointing out that the critical question is - what do you then do with that information when you find out? do you look for ways to deny it, block it out? or do you adapt to it?

 

[PeaceBaby]

PART 1:

Brainstorming out loud, to see if anything catches:

I've touched on this before, but looking to expand on it. Apologies for Ne'ing out loud, dear Ni'ers:

Ni dom vs Ne aux ... Fi dom vs Fe aux. Both of us have the opposite function of each other's dominant in the auxiliary position, the "problem-solver" position. To me, this means we tend to look at that function as our salvation to a certain extent, and this makes it challenging for us to see the downsides of the function overall. We tend to feel positive when engaging it. We don't see the problems it creates as clearly, because although it is essential for us to lean on that function, the very act of leaning on it means we trust it more.

(And yes, I also see the irony of Ne'ing right here in this post. No need to point it out Mane!)

That said, Fe is there working in the problem-solving role to discern and adjust to the needs of others, even to the point of getting the feelings of others mixed up with one's own. (Note to self: Could it be that OA's grumpy tone was just 'catchy'?) Other characteristics that grow out of Fe are the values of being polite, considerate and socially appropriate in one's behavior. It seems to me that most of what the INFJ's are saying here falls within that catchment area, that they need this protocol of interaction to be established before they can even entertain to engage in a more trust-oriented, two-way relationship.

Additionally, Fe'ers tend to need to feel appreciated. They are sensitive to what others think of them. They are easily hurt within that purview. When someone falls out of the bounds of good behaviour, it's natural to turn to the problem-solver to 'bite back', deploying it with intention and an element of self-protection. It's about ... connecting and disconnecting, it connects warmly and faithfully, and disconnects readily when negativity is encountered.

So, speaking broadly in terms of the N function, Ni-dom sees more readily the "dark side" of Ne in the aux, the problem with chasing the bunny down every rabbit hole, and sees that each hole does not have an equal probability of being worth searching. Ne wastes time, is inefficient and annoying. This ties into Z's metaphor of taking each spaghetti-string-bikini, size 2 to 26, into the dressing room, and how aggravating that is to watch. The problem for INFP's is that if we don't investigate each rabbit hole at least a little bit, we don't have an internal radar built-in to hone in on which has a more likely probability of being useful. We just think using it is useful, because we need to explore, out loud, to see how in the "real world" we can realistically enact our values.

Next, speaking broadly in terms of the F function, Fi-dom sees more readily the "dark side" of Fe in the aux, how it shuts down people before giving them a chance to speak, how it contains elements of what seems to look like bullying and prejudice. How it judges quickly and readily, and the inherent concerns of that. This ties into my metaphor on needing each voice to comprise a part of my knowledge-web, how hearing each voice ensures equality to create a web of strength and utility. The problem for INFJ's, if they don't use Fe at all in the 'negative' position, they risk having their boundaries violated again and again. Using it keeps them safe from those who would exploit the social contract.

More to come ... eta, I just made myself lost lol ... will add more as it arrives? If it arrives? I know I was going somewhere ...

 

[Fidelia]

That's an interesting thought, PB. I certainly hadn't considered that before, but it makes some sense to me. Thanks for pointing that out. If you think of more, I'd find it interesting to see where you're going with it.

 

[Fidelia]

your saying everyone becomes hypocritical at times, and i agree. just like i have said earlier that everyone does things to be remorseful about, hey, we might add "everybody goes potty" and "everybody sneezes"...

i am pointing out that the critical question is - what do you then do with that information when you find out? do you look for ways to deny it, block it out? or do you adapt to it?

Mane, I understand that you are just seeking some relief from your situation so that you can move on. On the other hand, people have already made it plain to you that they are not your ex-wife and what we are discussing is like comparing apples and oranges, even if you believe you see a connection between the two. Continuing on with your current line of questioning is only going to lead to more and more resistance and a firmer belief that your relentless frustratingness clearly demonstrates why your INFJ wife split up from you (whether or not that is really the case).

Nobody is going to say to you, "When someone points out that I'm being hypocritical, I just stick my fingers in my ears and go "La-la-la I can't hear you". Therefore, the line of questioning seems like an attempt to either trap others into displaying their hypocricy, or like you're requesting information from a certain group of people and then discounting any of the answers if they are not those you want to hear. I realize that this may very much not be the case, but it is the reason that continuing on in the same manner is not going to yield much information for you to work with. Your past behaviour has already discredited you somewhat with many of the INFJs here, and it will take some time to build up any kind of confidence in your intent. Perhaps it is also the personal agenda being mixed in the with the logical discussion that makes it appear so.

I think it's already been explained - if someone close to us whom we respect approaches us in a sympathetic manner and points out how we appear to be acting hypocritically, we are most likely to take it very seriously and make efforts to either correct the perception or change our behaviour. If someone we don't know well, and who perhaps doesn't already have credibility in our eyes (and maybe has a personal reason fueling their words) tells us we appear to be acting hypocritically, it will be reacted to much differently. It doesn't mean that I wouldn't reflect on it inside, but I certainly wouldn't be jumping through any hoops to satisfy the person just because they made a certain pronouncement. The more they demand it, the more I'm going to dig my heels in, because it becomes less and less of a detached observation and more and more personally fueled (and therefore in my mind, unreliable piece of information). This is partly because I am in no state to make decent decisions if I do it when I am still feeling emotional. On the few occasions I have, it has turned out badly. Therefore, if I'm getting an emotionally charged message (even if parts of it could potentially be useful), I don't consider it reliable because it is too tainted with personal feeling.

Particularly if I feel you are flat out wrong in assessing the situation, I'll probably say so (and why), which will then be perceived as denial or blocking out what I don't want to hear. Instead, it is a matter of maintaining appropriate boundaries and obtaining information that I think is trustworthy. If I didn't do any screening in terms of whose perspective I sought out to help me navigate, someone with wrong intentions is in a great position to make me do just about anything.

So, to answer your question, yes I would adapt in some situations after having time to think it over, particularly if my behaviour is negatively affecting others. I may not verbalize that I am adapting though (certainly not right in the moment anyway).

In the case of acquaintances or strangers, I probably would appear to be denying or blocking the information, even though I wouldn't perceive it that way myself. I'd see it more like filing it away so that if someone with more credibility (for me) even hinted at same, I would be likely to assume that they were maybe on to something. I would also think it over myself at the time and consider why or why not I believed or didn't believe them to be right.

Either way, you're probably not going to hear me coming to you saying, "Dear internet stranger who is burned with INFJs!!!! I'm just like all the crazy people you mentioned!!!" simply because I do not believe it to be accurate. The situation is entirely different and therefore not equatable, even if the person in your life and me personally have both done hypocritical things.

Edit: Just one note. Don't ever forget about the delayed processing factor. Just because you don't have an immediate response, doesn't mean that you haven't been heard. Also, the more new information you input, the longer you can expect it to take to receive any conclusive results.

 

[uumlau]

your saying everyone becomes hypocritical at times, and i agree. just like i have said earlier that everyone does things to be remorseful about, hey, we might add "everybody goes potty" and "everybody sneezes"...

i am pointing out that the critical question is - what do you then do with that information when you find out? do you look for ways to deny it, block it out? or do you adapt to it?

No, the critical question is, "How much of this behavior is due to the person in your life having serious issues, and how much is due to her being an INFJ?"
There is something to be gained by learning, "Here is how an INFJ with serious issues tends to (mis)behave."
There is something to be gained by learning that certain behaviors are just normal INFJ behaviors.
There is nothing to be gained by implying that other INFJs (whom you hardly know, and certainly don't know in real life) are prone to the same misbehavior.

As for issues of denial, um, most everyone who misbehaves denies it, and everyone accused of misbehavior that hasn't misbehaved will deny it.

 

[PeaceBaby]

PART 2:

So, the way we each use our aux to "problem-solve" sets off each of our uniquely and particularly wired "alarm bells". Ne aux's are looking at every possibility without pre-judging or inherently seeing any problems associated with that exploration; everything is on the table, every idea, every feeling, every judgement. We need Si data, the more the better. Fe aux's are looking at how everything that's said falls into their construct of the social landscape and chooses to accept or reject that information based on what appears pertinent within the broader context and based on their comfort levels with the other members of that group. They need Ti's logic to craft that into a workable framework. At this point, we each appear to need the tertiary function's help. BUT, the Fe aux tends to look like it's blocking the intention of the Ne aux, whilst the Ne aux appears to be breaking the rules of the social sphere. Each of us needs to do what we need to do to solve "people" conundrums, even though we do it in radically different ways. But we never get to a solid use of the tertiary because we get stuck in this dom-aux loop together. I don't get the Si data, you don't get the Ti structure accurately worked out. So how can we solve this for each other, together?

INFJ's - to continue, the factors you need to be able to connect with someone and share are:

1.) Goodwill: A demonstration of goodwill is important to open communication and proceed. (Why am I engaging in discussion; the statement of good intentions.)

2.) Commonalities: An attempt to define shared commonalities is helpful prior to the exploration of diversity. (What do we have in common vs how we are different.)

3.) Behaviour: A pattern of good behaviour enables the INFJ to maintain an openness along the way, as the expressed intention is acted out in words and proven by those actions. (How you treat me is a reflection of how you feel about our interaction together.)

4.) Goal: A statement of the goal enables the INFJ to pull the appropriate data from their file folders. (Why do you need this, how will it help us reach the goal?)

INFJ's - look at my list above, see if I've hit the major factors.

Part 3 comes after I feed my brain with dinner, and a bit more cogitating.